For CROs
Feasibility you can put in the bid — and defend in the review.
Win more bids with cited, auditable feasibility — white-labelled under your brand and built into your bid workflow (dedicated single-tenant deployment on the enterprise roadmap). When a sponsor challenges a number, you point to its public source and the audit record.
White-label, dedicated-cluster, volume API.
The situation
A bid you don’t win shouldn’t still cost you a feasibility cycle.
Feasibility done the old way is fine when you win and a write-off when you don’t. You need a verdict fast enough to build into the bid, and cited well enough to survive a sponsor’s scrutiny.
- When a questionnaire-based feasibility cycle has to be paid for
- Before the award
- The bids that cost you a feasibility cycle either way
- Win or lose
- A cited verdict, in time to build into the bid
- Same day
What happens today
The cost of feasibility lands before the award does.
Every CRO already has a feasibility function. The problem is not capability — it is that the cycle is priced and paced for a bid you have already won.
The cycle outlasts the bid window
A questionnaire goes out to sites, responses trickle back, an analyst reconciles them. By the time the picture is complete the proposal is already committed to numbers someone estimated from memory.
Site surveys measure optimism, not capacity
Sites answer feasibility questionnaires with the enrolment they hope for. Nothing in that loop is checked against what those sites actually delivered on comparable trials.
The number has no source attached
When a sponsor asks where an enrolment rate or a site count came from, the honest answer is an analyst’s spreadsheet. That is a hard position to defend in a bid review.
You carry the cost of the bids you lose
Feasibility is a fixed cost per protocol, incurred whether or not you win. Screening more opportunities means more sunk analyst weeks, so you screen fewer.
What you get instead
Built for how a CRO actually wins and delivers work.
White-label verdicts
Every cited verdict, audit trail, and export carries your brand — not ours. Hand it to a sponsor as your own work product.
Dedicated single-tenant cluster
Run the full data path in an isolated single-tenant cluster on our EU infrastructure — your tenancy, your keys, with the shared control plane never in the auth path. Deployment into your own AWS or Azure account is on the enterprise roadmap.
Portfolio screening
CROs screen portfolios, not single protocols. Submit a whole pipeline of sponsor protocols and rank them by feasibility — verdicts come back the same day, ready for the bid.
Per-program isolation
Each sponsor program is partitioned. Runs, citations, and audit trails stay separated, with a runtime guard that refuses cross-program reads.
Part 11 audit export
One click pulls a tamper-evident, hash-chained audit bundle per study — the evidence your QA team and the sponsor need to trust the number.
Hours, not weeks
A questionnaire-and-analyst feasibility cycle becomes a same-day cited verdict — fast enough to build into the bid, not after you have lost it.
What runs, and who drafts
The scope for this job
A bid is won on delivery risk, so the weight sits on design, cohort and operations. The Rationale and Commercial pillars still run — they are just the sponsor’s argument to make, not yours.
Pillars involved
Bid-defense workflow
Protocol in, defensible verdict in the deck.
Drop in the sponsor protocol
Upload the protocol PDF. The platform reads out the indication, phase, endpoints, and eligibility criteria automatically.
Ground every signal in public data
Probability of success, site density, budget band, and patient reach are computed against ClinicalTrials.gov, AACT, PubMed, FDA, EMA, and dozens of other public sources — each figure cited to its source record.
Defend the number in the bid
Drop the cited verdict into your bid-defense deck under your brand. When the sponsor challenges a site-density or enrollment estimate, point to the citation and the audit record.
What lands on your desk
A bid section that survives the review.
Not a dashboard login you have to teach a sponsor to use — an export you can paste into the proposal under your own brand.
What lands on your desk
White-labelled feasibility section + Part 11 audit bundle
- A go/no-go verdict with a directional probability of success and the assumptions it rests on, stated in the open.
- Country and site shortlist with density against competing trials and investigator track record, each entry linked to its registry record.
- A cohort reality check: eligible-patient reach and how much the eligibility criteria narrow it.
- An operational cost band with the benchmarks it was derived from.
- Every figure hyperlinked to the public record and snapshot date it was read from.
- A hash-chained, tamper-evident audit bundle for the run, exportable for your QA team and the sponsor.
Honest limits
Where this stops
What this does not do for you. Naming it here is cheaper for both of us than finding it in a procurement review.
It is decision-support for trial design and site strategy — not a medical device, and not a substitute for clinical, regulatory, or legal judgment.
Probability of success is directional. It starts from published base rates for the phase and therapeutic area and is adjusted for what the assessment found; it is not a calibrated forecast.
The assessment reads public data. It does not know a site’s current staffing, an unpublished competing trial, or a sponsor’s internal data.
Deployment into your own AWS or Azure account is on the enterprise roadmap; today the isolated option is a dedicated single-tenant cluster on our EU infrastructure.
SOC 2 Type II: audit underway, report not yet issued. The Part 11 audit chain, per-tenant isolation and GDPR posture are implemented today.
Questions
The ones you would ask first
Where does our data live, and who can see it?
In dedicated-cluster mode your data path runs in an isolated single-tenant cluster. The shared control plane is not in your auth path and cannot read tenant data — enforced at the network layer and again at the data-tier client. Deployment into your own cloud account is on the enterprise roadmap.
How are sponsor programs kept separate?
Each program is partitioned by tenant ID, enforced at the query layer and re-checked by a runtime isolation guard that raises on any cross-tenant access. Dedicated single-tenant clusters add a full isolation boundary on top.
Are our protocols used to train a third-party model?
No. Inference runs in a managed EU-region private inference environment; your protocols are used only to produce your verdict — never to train a third-party model, and we never train a model on your data.
What can we hand to a sponsor or auditor?
A per-study, hash-chained audit bundle that records every action, actor, timestamp, payload hash, and reason code — exportable and anchored for tamper-evidence. It is designed against 21 CFR Part 11 and EMA Annex 11 controls.
What is the compliance posture today?
The Part 11 audit chain, HIPAA and GDPR design posture, and per-tenant isolation are implemented. SOC 2 Type II is in progress — see the Trust page for the current, honestly-labelled status of each control.
Put a cited verdict in your next bid.
Book a demo and we’ll run a real protocol through the platform — white-labelled, cited, and on a Part 11 audit trail you can defend in front of a sponsor.