ChekitAnaa LLC

Unclaimed Mobile App Development

Services

Mobile App Development IoT App Development UI-UX Design Enterprise App Modernization Cross Platform App Development

Client Rating

5.0/5.0
4 reviews
Quality
5.0
Schedule
5.0
Cost
5.0
Communication
5.0
View All Reviews →

Client Reviews

5.0/5.0 (4 reviews)
Quality
5.0
Schedule
5.0
Cost
5.0
Communication
5.0

Dependable delivery with clear communication throughout

Theo Papadopoulos / Creative Technology Lead - Mythos Media Labs
Verified
May 15, 2026

Project summary: Our project involved replacing legacy workflows with a modern platform while keeping business continuity intact. We prioritized maintainability, adoption, and measurable impact.

From procurement to handoff, this felt like a professional partnership. They met commitments, documented key decisions, and aligned well with our internal QA process. The architecture is cleaner than what we had before, and maintenance is easier. Some backlog items are still pending by choice, but the delivered scope is complete and dependable.

PROS

Strong ownership from engineering leads, quick turnaround on review feedback, stable releases

CONS

Timezone overlap was limited on some days, so urgent clarifications occasionally slipped by 24 hours

5.0
Overall
5.0
Quality
5.0
Schedule
5.0
Cost
5.0
Communication
Project Type CMS Development
Industry Food & Beverage
Project Cost $500,000+
Duration Aug 2025 – Mar 2026

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
We are a mid-sized business in the Food & Beverage space, and I lead this function as Creative Technology Lead. I was responsible for evaluating vendors, aligning stakeholders, and ensuring the project delivered measurable operational gains.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our main challenge was that existing Food & Beverage workflows were fragmented and hard to scale. We needed CMS Development support to reduce manual effort, improve reliability, and give teams clearer visibility into day-to-day operations.
What services did the company provide for your project?
They handled discovery, technical planning, implementation, QA, deployment, and post-launch stabilization for CMS Development. Scope was phased sensibly, and they were clear about what should ship now versus move to a later release.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted a few firms, but this team stood out for their CMS Development experience and the way they discussed Food & Beverage constraints in practical terms. They were transparent about risks and did not overpromise on timelines.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
They understood our requirements well after a structured discovery phase. There were a couple of assumptions we corrected early, but once aligned, execution stayed consistent and traceable against agreed priorities.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Project management was strong: weekly checkpoints, a shared board, and clear ownership on action items. Response times were generally quick, and when blockers appeared, they surfaced them early with concrete mitigation steps.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Most milestones were delivered on time and within the approved budget. We had minor date movement on one integration-heavy stream, but it was communicated in advance and handled without major downstream impact.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Yes. After go-live, we saw better process turnaround times, fewer support escalations, and stronger reporting accuracy. The platform is now a practical part of our daily operations rather than a side tool.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Two things stood out: they were candid about tradeoffs, and they stayed accountable through launch. We also liked that their engineers translated technical decisions into business implications our leadership team could evaluate.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes, especially for teams needing a dependable CMS Development partner in Food & Beverage. They are not the cheapest vendor, but they are organized, transparent, and focused on outcomes that hold up in production.

Strong data engineering with attention to edge cases

Yusuf Rahman / Head of Transformation - CroftBank MEA
Verified
May 15, 2026

Project summary: We engaged them to solve a set of operational bottlenecks that were limiting scale. The brief combined technical delivery with practical process improvements for day-to-day teams.

The engagement was well-run overall. Their team mapped our requirements into a realistic release plan and called out dependencies early, which helped us avoid late surprises. Quality was strong in the core modules, and they handled feedback quickly during UAT. We did need an extra sprint for edge-case behavior around reporting filters, but they owned it and closed it cleanly.

PROS

Strong integration work with third-party systems and proactive monitoring setup

CONS

Knowledge transfer for non-technical users needed one extra session beyond the original plan

5.0
Overall
5.0
Quality
5.0
Schedule
5.0
Cost
5.0
Communication
Project Type Data & Analytics
Industry Food & Beverage
Project Cost $500,000+
Duration Mar 2025 – Jul 2025

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
We are a mid-sized business in the Food & Beverage space, and I lead this function as Head of Transformation. I was responsible for evaluating vendors, aligning stakeholders, and ensuring the project delivered measurable operational gains.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our main challenge was that existing Food & Beverage workflows were fragmented and hard to scale. We needed Data & Analytics support to reduce manual effort, improve reliability, and give teams clearer visibility into day-to-day operations.
What services did the company provide for your project?
They handled discovery, technical planning, implementation, QA, deployment, and post-launch stabilization for Data & Analytics. Scope was phased sensibly, and they were clear about what should ship now versus move to a later release.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted a few firms, but this team stood out for their Data & Analytics experience and the way they discussed Food & Beverage constraints in practical terms. They were transparent about risks and did not overpromise on timelines.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
They understood our requirements well after a structured discovery phase. There were a couple of assumptions we corrected early, but once aligned, execution stayed consistent and traceable against agreed priorities.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Project management was strong: weekly checkpoints, a shared board, and clear ownership on action items. Response times were generally quick, and when blockers appeared, they surfaced them early with concrete mitigation steps.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Most milestones were delivered on time and within the approved budget. We had minor date movement on one integration-heavy stream, but it was communicated in advance and handled without major downstream impact.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Yes. After go-live, we saw better process turnaround times, fewer support escalations, and stronger reporting accuracy. The platform is now a practical part of our daily operations rather than a side tool.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Two things stood out: they were candid about tradeoffs, and they stayed accountable through launch. We also liked that their engineers translated technical decisions into business implications our leadership team could evaluate.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes, especially for teams needing a dependable Data & Analytics partner in Food & Beverage. They are not the cheapest vendor, but they are organized, transparent, and focused on outcomes that hold up in production.

Overall a productive engagement with room for minor polish

Olivia Bennett / Director of Digital Learning - BrightPath Learning
Verified
May 15, 2026

Project summary: This initiative had cross-functional stakeholders and evolving requirements. We looked for a team that could translate business constraints into workable technical decisions.

From procurement to handoff, this felt like a professional partnership. They met commitments, documented key decisions, and aligned well with our internal QA process. The architecture is cleaner than what we had before, and maintenance is easier. Some backlog items are still pending by choice, but the delivered scope is complete and dependable.

PROS

Reliable QA process, predictable milestones, and transparent status reporting

CONS

One third-party integration took longer than expected due to external API constraints

5.0
Overall
5.0
Quality
5.0
Schedule
5.0
Cost
5.0
Communication
Project Type Quality Assurance & Testing
Industry Nonprofit & NGO
Project Cost Less than $10,000
Duration May 2025 – Apr 2026

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
We are a mid-sized business in the Nonprofit & NGO space, and I lead this function as Director of Digital Learning. I was responsible for evaluating vendors, aligning stakeholders, and ensuring the project delivered measurable operational gains.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our main challenge was that existing Nonprofit & NGO workflows were fragmented and hard to scale. We needed Quality Assurance & Testing support to reduce manual effort, improve reliability, and give teams clearer visibility into day-to-day operations.
What services did the company provide for your project?
They handled discovery, technical planning, implementation, QA, deployment, and post-launch stabilization for Quality Assurance & Testing. Scope was phased sensibly, and they were clear about what should ship now versus move to a later release.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted a few firms, but this team stood out for their Quality Assurance & Testing experience and the way they discussed Nonprofit & NGO constraints in practical terms. They were transparent about risks and did not overpromise on timelines.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
They understood our requirements well after a structured discovery phase. There were a couple of assumptions we corrected early, but once aligned, execution stayed consistent and traceable against agreed priorities.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Project management was strong: weekly checkpoints, a shared board, and clear ownership on action items. Response times were generally quick, and when blockers appeared, they surfaced them early with concrete mitigation steps.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Most milestones were delivered on time and within the approved budget. We had minor date movement on one integration-heavy stream, but it was communicated in advance and handled without major downstream impact.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Yes. After go-live, we saw better process turnaround times, fewer support escalations, and stronger reporting accuracy. The platform is now a practical part of our daily operations rather than a side tool.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Two things stood out: they were candid about tradeoffs, and they stayed accountable through launch. We also liked that their engineers translated technical decisions into business implications our leadership team could evaluate.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes, especially for teams needing a dependable Quality Assurance & Testing partner in Nonprofit & NGO. They are not the cheapest vendor, but they are organized, transparent, and focused on outcomes that hold up in production.

Good AR/VR team with practical iteration speed

Jade Wilson / Founder & CEO - HiveForge Startup Studio
Verified
May 15, 2026

Project summary: Our lending product had grown quickly, and manual risk checks were slowing decisions. We asked for a solution that balanced faster approvals with transparent, regulator-friendly logic.

The project started with some ambiguity on our side, and they helped structure it without overcomplicating scope. Their discovery artifacts were clear, and engineering execution was disciplined. Performance improved noticeably after launch, especially for high-traffic workflows. A few UI details required polish post-release, but response time from their support team was good.

PROS

Strong ownership from engineering leads, quick turnaround on review feedback, stable releases

CONS

Some change requests required formal reprioritization, which was correct but slowed quick tweaks

5.0
Overall
5.0
Quality
5.0
Schedule
5.0
Cost
5.0
Communication
Project Type AR/VR Development
Industry Financial Services
Project Cost $500,000+
Duration Jan 2025 – Nov 2025

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
We are a mid-sized business in the Financial Services space, and I lead this function as Founder & CEO. I was responsible for evaluating vendors, aligning stakeholders, and ensuring the project delivered measurable operational gains.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our main challenge was that existing Financial Services workflows were fragmented and hard to scale. We needed AR/VR Development support to reduce manual effort, improve reliability, and give teams clearer visibility into day-to-day operations.
What services did the company provide for your project?
They handled discovery, technical planning, implementation, QA, deployment, and post-launch stabilization for AR/VR Development. Scope was phased sensibly, and they were clear about what should ship now versus move to a later release.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted a few firms, but this team stood out for their AR/VR Development experience and the way they discussed Financial Services constraints in practical terms. They were transparent about risks and did not overpromise on timelines.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
They understood our requirements well after a structured discovery phase. There were a couple of assumptions we corrected early, but once aligned, execution stayed consistent and traceable against agreed priorities.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Project management was strong: weekly checkpoints, a shared board, and clear ownership on action items. Response times were generally quick, and when blockers appeared, they surfaced them early with concrete mitigation steps.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Most milestones were delivered on time and within the approved budget. We had minor date movement on one integration-heavy stream, but it was communicated in advance and handled without major downstream impact.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Yes. After go-live, we saw better process turnaround times, fewer support escalations, and stronger reporting accuracy. The platform is now a practical part of our daily operations rather than a side tool.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Two things stood out: they were candid about tradeoffs, and they stayed accountable through launch. We also liked that their engineers translated technical decisions into business implications our leadership team could evaluate.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes, especially for teams needing a dependable AR/VR Development partner in Financial Services. They are not the cheapest vendor, but they are organized, transparent, and focused on outcomes that hold up in production.

Share this Review

Report Review

You need to be signed in to report a review.

Sign In

Portfolio

No portfolio items yet.

Company Photos

No photos yet.

Frequently Asked Questions

No FAQs yet.

Office Locations

No locations listed.