Enterprise to Government Compliance Center Functionality Compariston

[chuckpiot]

@sarah gilbert Chris Hoard recommended that reach out here and seek your wisdom.  I seek a functional comparison chart for the E series (licesenses) to the equivalent G- Government for Compliance Center.  Is there such a comparison available? The challenge is that we have former non-gov IT folks now working in Gov and they are seeking/expecting functionality that was in Enterprise M365, but _appears_ to not be in Gov. We seek a "this is in e, but not in g"  kind of resource. Is there such a thing? Thanks for the help and clarity on this front will greatly improve our M365 adoption!  

[#2]

@chuckpiot I can take a look! Are there any specific features you are looking at? Sometimes there may be work arounds you can use. This document has an overview of platform features in the mean time : https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/office365/servicedescriptions/office-365-platform-service-descripti...

[#3]

@Sarah.Gilbert Thank you! This is very helpful and a great start. I will will review and let you know if I need further guidance. 

Sincerely,

Chuck 

[#4]

@sara.Gilbert  This page makes no mention of the Information Governance and Records Management functionality that is found in E3 and E5. "Advanced Data Governance" is noted, but not Records Management and Information Governance. Does that mean that Records Management and Information Governance do not exist in Government Compliance Center?

Thanks, again!

-Chuck

[#5]

I also have the same frustration. While the link you provided and the O365 Roadmap provide some information to help those of us in the GCC what is missing is a more comprehensive list of features released to GA but not to GCC. A recent example showed up when we engaged Microsoft to do training for us on Teams. Many features they went over were not in GCC. One such was pinning channels. It wasn’t that it was unavailable that was problematic, it was that the omission was not documented anywhere. That training was six months ago and I don’t recall ever seeing it on the roadmap but low and behold last week it just shows up. This is very frustrating and seems to be an unforced error. Clearly MSFT knows what it is leaving out when it releases to GCC why can’t they just document it so we don’t have to continually chase for answers?