REQ review
Shortlist-ready for PR & Comms, with the caveats below.
A high-confidence technology and public-sector communications partner with 61 Clutch reviews and a broad PR toolkit; the roughly $12,500 monthly starting retainer is the constraint.
Pricing: $12,500 per month Reported — not published by the agency
Public pricing evidence places the starting monthly retainer around $12,500. source ↗
How it scored
Every dimension is scored against this discipline’s published rubric. Open one to see the claim it was scored on, what the rubric measures there and how much it weighs, and where the evidence came from.
How we scored this
We read the agency’s public record first-hand — its site, pricing, case studies and independent reviews — and score what is checkable: what is published, not how it is phrased. There is no keyword counting or sentiment scoring. The label is a judgment on those facts, which is why each dimension shows the fact that decided it, the band it was judged against, and the sources — so you can check the call, and tell us if you think it is wrong. The full method, and who pays, is on how we vet.
Tier-1 earned media outcomesExcellent
Excellent — 5 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 25% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 21 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 12 · Strong 9. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and none scores higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Lands real, named tier-1 earned placements (not syndication or pay-to-play).
Scores high — Verifiable coverage in relevant top-tier outlets scores 4-5.
Scores low — 'Guaranteed placements' and press-release syndication score 1-2 (a red flag).
What we found — Extensive review evidence supports high-quality media execution. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Excellent.
syndication — content syndication: paying to put content in front of a media vendor’s audience in exchange for the contact lists it generates. The leads run colder than inbound and need nurturing.
Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.
Media relationshipsExcellent
Excellent — 5 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 18% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 21 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 15 · Strong 6. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and none scores higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Genuine, current relationships with relevant journalists and outlets in the buyer's beat.
Scores high — Named-beat depth scores 4-5.
Scores low — Generic wire-distribution or cold-pitch-only scores 2.
What we found — Longstanding technology and public-sector PR practice. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Excellent.
Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.
Narrative & messagingStrong
Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 15% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 21 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 14 · Strong 6 · Adequate 1. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and 14 of them score higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Builds a sharp, differentiated story and messaging platform, not boilerplate.
Scores high — Strategic narrative work with examples scores 4-5.
Scores low — Template press releases score 2-3.
What we found — Messaging, thought leadership, and reputation are core capabilities. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Strong.
Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.
Measurement qualityStrong
Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 15% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 21 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 1 · Strong 14 · Adequate 4 · Weak 2. The typical agency here scores Strong, and 1 of them score higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Honest measurement — share of voice, message pull-through, quality of placement, tie to pipeline/reputation — not impressions and potential audience.
Scores high — Outcome-honest reporting scores 4-5.
Scores low — Vanity-reach math is a red flag scoring 1-2.
What we found — Reviews support structured, outcome-oriented delivery, though pipeline methods vary by scope. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Strong.
pipeline — the dollar value of open, qualified deals sales is working. “Pipeline created” ties marketing to money, where lead counts don’t.
Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.
Specialty depthStrong
Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 12% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 21 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 15 · Strong 5 · Adequate 1. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and 15 of them score higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Deep in the buyer's specific PR need (B2B tech, corporate/crisis, consumer, analyst relations) rather than generalist.
Scores low — Named specialty with proof scores 4-5; jack-of-all-trades scores 2-3.
What we found — Deep technology, cybersecurity, and public-sector relevance.
B2B — business-to-business: selling to companies rather than consumers — longer deals, more decision-makers.
Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.
Vertical & stage fitStrong
Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 10% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 21 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 17 · Strong 3 · Adequate 1. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and 17 of them score higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Fit to the buyer's category and stage (startup launch vs scale-up vs enterprise).
Scores low — Named clients matching the buyer score 5; mismatch scores 1-2.
What we found — Best for funded growth companies and established organizations.
Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.
Contract & pricing transparencyWeak
Weak — 2 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 5% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 21 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Strong 1 · Adequate 4 · Weak 6 · Poor 10. The typical agency here scores Weak, and 5 of them score higher than this one.
Scores high — A public retainer anchor and reasonable terms score 4-5.
Scores low — Opaque pricing with long minimum commitments scores 2.
What we found — Public review evidence indicates a starting retainer around $12,500 per month. That is what the low band describes, which is why it scored Weak.
On the record — “Public pricing evidence places the starting monthly retainer around $12,500.” clutch.co ↗
retainer — a fixed monthly fee regardless of hours or output — predictable, but worth tying to a defined scope.
Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.
Stronger here: Otter PR scores Strong on the same dimension.
Verdict
REQ combines a large independent review base with credible PR breadth across media relations, thought leadership, messaging, content, and reputation work. Its technology and government-market experience is particularly useful for complex or regulated narratives.
Public commercial evidence places the starting retainer around $12,500 per month, so the firm is best suited to organizations that can fund a sustained program. Buyers should still define the earned-media targets and business measures, but the available proof makes REQ one of the lower-risk choices in the category.
What you can do next
Koolav can make the introduction and handle the back-and-forth, or you can go straight to the agency.
This agency has not published a paid trial. What a paid trial is.
What we verified
Each claim below was checked against a named source, last on 2026-07-21. Follow any of them and check for yourself — that is the point of publishing them.
- Clutch lists REQ at 4.9/5 from 61 reviews, with 59 shown as verified at the time of vetting. clutch.co ↗
- Public pricing evidence places the starting monthly retainer around $12,500. clutch.co ↗
What other platforms say
Clients consistently praise expertise, responsiveness, and integration with internal teams; premium cost defines the fit.
These are other platforms' numbers, not ours. We report them because they are part of the picture, and we do not average them into our score — our score comes from the published rubric above.
Red flags
- Premium monthly floor
What we could not verify
- Share of fees devoted to senior media strategy
- Standard revenue-attribution method
Sources
Others we evaluated in PR & Comms
Same rubric, same evaluator, same date range — so these are directly comparable to the verdict above.
See all 22 PR & Comms agencies we evaluated →
Think this is wrong?
If anything on this page is wrong or out of date, send us the correction and we will re-read the site.
Evidence moves a verdict. Money never does — no agency pays us for a listing, a placement, or a re-review. Whatever we conclude we publish, including that the verdict stands.