About TEEPS
Businesses looking for a reliable technology partner often consider TEEPS. Their core services include UI/UX Design and Mobile App Development. With 10 - 49 people on staff, TEEPS can take on projects of varying size. Typical hourly rates run around $150 - $199 / hr/hr, with an average project cost near $50,000. Their home base is Orlando, FL. These details offer a useful starting point when evaluating TEEPS.
Where We Specialize
Industry Expertise
Typical Project Size
TEEPS Reviews
Write a ReviewERP rollout that went live on the agreed date — we know how significant that is
Nathan Prescott / VP of Technology - Ironclad Insurance GroupJan 12, 2026
Project summary: Our trading platform had been extended incrementally for seven years. Latency was degrading, technical debt was compounding, and a clean rebuild was no longer optional.
Six months after go-live our platform is processing three times the transaction volume we specified in the original brief. The architecture choices made during discovery accommodated that growth without remediation work. That is the difference between a team that designs for what you tell them and a team that designs for what you are likely to need. We are in conversation about a Phase 2 engagement and I expect to be using this partnership for several years.
Delivery timeline that proved achievable rather than optimistic, estimation accuracy that reflected real analysis rather than competitive bidding, scope discipline that prevented the feature creep we had experienced before
We underestimated the input required from our subject matter experts during the requirements phase. The team flagged this early but our resource planning did not fully reflect it — our responsibility, not theirs
Questions & Answers
Service desk that outperformed our previous in-house team on every SLA we tracked
Declan Hartley / Chief Digital Officer - Southern Cross TechnologyJan 04, 2026
Project summary: The project had a board-facing delivery date tied to a strategic initiative. We needed a partner who would treat that date as their own, not ours.
Our stakeholder group included board members, clinical leads, compliance officers, and end users — each with different technical literacy and different success criteria. This team navigated that stakeholder landscape as well as any vendor I have seen. They adjusted their communication register depending on the audience without losing the substance. They managed expectations honestly throughout. And they delivered a system that each group can point to as meeting their requirements. That breadth is genuinely uncommon.
Delivery timeline that proved achievable rather than optimistic, estimation accuracy that reflected real analysis rather than competitive bidding, scope discipline that prevented the feature creep we had experienced before
We underestimated the input required from our subject matter experts during the requirements phase. The team flagged this early but our resource planning did not fully reflect it — our responsibility, not theirs