Verified feasibility is becoming table stakes. Waiting is a bid risk.
Counted, verified feasibility is moving from an edge to an expectation. Once a sponsor has seen qualifying patients counted per site, and every site on the list checked and counted once, a survey-based estimate starts to look like a guess. The CROs that switch early win the comparison. The ones that wait end up defending an estimate against a count.
- Table stakes means a capability no longer wins the deal on its own, but missing it can lose the deal.
- Sponsors have lived through enough enrollment misses to question estimates.
- Patient-level real-world data is now widely used, so a counted answer is possible for most protocols.
- Side by side in a bid defense, a count beats an estimate.
- You do not need a new platform to switch. You need the answer for each protocol, in days.
The ideaWhat table stakes means in feasibility
A capability becomes table stakes when buyers stop treating it as a bonus and start treating its absence as a risk. Feasibility is crossing that line. Survey answers, registry totals and past trial counts were once the best anyone had. Now a sponsor can see a different kind of answer: the patients who qualify under the protocol, counted at each site, the sites themselves verified and counted once, and the reasoning behind every rank. Once a sponsor has seen that, an estimate is a harder sell.
The reasonsWhy it is happening now
- Enrollment misses are expensive and familiar. Tufts CSDD found that about 37% of trial sites under-enroll and about 11% never enroll a single patient. Sponsors remember. See the cost of guessing.
- The data exists. Patient-level real-world data is now widely used in trial planning, so “we could not know” is no longer an answer.
- Bid defenses ask harder questions. “How do you know these sites will enroll?” An estimate answers it with a promise. A count answers it with evidence. See the questions sponsors ask.
- Site lists are noisier than they look. Registries list the same site many ways, so big site counts hide duplicates and ghost sites. See why big site counts mislead.
The riskWhy waiting is a bid risk
Bids are judged side by side. When one CRO in the room shows counted patients per site and a verified site list, and another shows survey estimates, the sponsor does not need to be told which is stronger. Every bid you defend on estimates is a bid where a competitor can bring the count you did not. The cost of waiting is not a missed trend. It is the next award.
The switchHow to make the switch without a new platform
Verified feasibility does not need a new system, a data license or a team to run it. It needs the answer for the protocol in front of you, in time for the proposal. Start with the next RFP: write the bid on counted patients, take a verified site list into the bid defense, and keep the evidence ready for the sponsor’s questions. Outside the US the honest answer is a range, not a single count, and a good provider says so. See how we work with CROs.
Verified feasibility, answered
What does table stakes mean in clinical trial feasibility?
It means counted, verified feasibility is moving from a differentiator to an expectation. A feasibility answer without patients counted against the protocol and a checked site list is starting to look like a risk to sponsors, not a starting point.
What is verified feasibility?
Feasibility built on evidence rather than estimates: the patients who qualify under the protocol, counted at each site in the US and given as ranges outside the US, every site on the list verified and counted once, and the reasoning behind each rank.
Are feasibility questionnaires still useful?
Yes, for what only a site can tell you: its interest, staff, capacity and start-up timelines. They are a weak source for patient numbers, because answers are self-reported and often optimistic. Verified feasibility answers the patient question so the questionnaire can focus on the rest.
Does verified feasibility tell you how many patients a site will enroll?
No. It tells you how many patients qualify under the protocol at each site, and which investigators have enrolled trials like yours. How many patients a site enrolls still depends on how the site runs the trial, which is why both halves matter.
How does a CRO start using verified feasibility?
On the next live bid. Book a 20-minute call, share the protocol, and use the counted answer to write the proposal and defend the site list. There is nothing to install and no subscription required.