CRO Proposal Comparison Review
Compare CRO proposals before assumptions become commitments.
Miterion helps biotech sponsors compare CRO proposals, RFP responses, country/site assumptions, recruitment risks and timeline logic before bid defense, vendor selection or scope lock.
Up to 3 proposals · 48–72h review · public registry signals · manual validation · clear data limits
CRO proposals are hard to compare when every vendor uses different assumptions.
One CRO may recommend a broader country mix. Another may propose fewer sites. A third may show a faster timeline or lower cost. On paper, each proposal can look reasonable.
The problem is that the proposals may be based on different assumptions about recruitment pressure, site availability, country feasibility, startup timelines and operational scope.
Miterion helps the sponsor compare these assumptions before vendor selection, bid defense or scope lock.
Different country strategies
Each CRO may recommend a different country mix, making it difficult to know whether the difference is strategic or assumption-driven.
Different site-count logic
Site numbers can look precise, but the underlying recruitment and activation assumptions may not be comparable.
Different timelines and scope
Lower cost or faster delivery may come from hidden scope differences, optimistic startup assumptions or underweighted recruitment competition.
What we compare
A structured comparison of CRO proposals, RFP responses and feasibility assumptions — not a procurement checklist.
Country mix
How each proposal frames geography, country-level trial activity, visible competition and sponsor footprint.
Site count assumptions
How each CRO justifies the proposed site footprint and whether the logic appears directionally supported.
Timeline assumptions
How startup, activation and enrollment timelines differ across proposals and where clarification is needed.
Recruitment competition
Where public registry signals suggest visible pressure for the same patient population.
Scope differences
Where proposals may not be directly comparable because of differences in services, assumptions or exclusions.
Feasibility assumption gaps
Which assumptions are supported, weakly supported or impossible to confirm from public data alone.
What you get
A decision-ready comparison designed to help the sponsor challenge, narrow or clarify CRO proposals before commitment.
Proposal comparison matrix
A structured side-by-side comparison of country mix, site assumptions, timeline logic, visible risks and scope gaps.
Feasibility assumption gap list
A list of weak, unsupported or overly optimistic assumptions across proposals.
Country/site strategy comparison
A focused view of how different CROs frame country and site strategy — and what public signals suggest.
Bid defense questions
Practical questions to send back to each CRO before bid defense, vendor selection or scope lock.
Recommended next steps
Clear decision support: proceed, challenge, clarify, narrow or pause.
What public data can and cannot support
Public registry data is useful for early risk detection, but it does not replace formal site feasibility or direct site outreach.
Public data can help detect:
- visible recruitment competition
- crowded indications
- country-level trial activity
- sponsor presence
- registry inconsistencies
- weak assumptions in proposal narratives
- visible mismatch between public signals and vendor claims
- proposal differences that need vendor clarification
Public data cannot confirm:
- actual site enrollment performance
- investigator availability
- contracted recruitment targets
- coordinator capacity
- contract and budget negotiation timelines
- true site readiness
- real screen-failure risk
- operational execution quality
That is why Miterion does not replace formal feasibility. It gives sponsors an independent comparison layer before proposal assumptions become commitments.
How the comparison is delivered
Send the proposals or decision context
Tell us what you need to compare: CRO proposals, RFP responses, country shortlist, phase, indication and target geography.
We compare assumptions and public signals
Miterion compares proposal logic against visible registry activity, recruitment competition, sponsor footprint and country/site assumptions.
You receive a decision-ready comparison memo
You get a focused memo with a comparison matrix, assumption gaps, CRO-specific questions and recommended next steps before vendor selection or scope lock.
Comparing CRO proposals before vendor selection?
Request an independent comparison before feasibility assumptions become budget, timeline and execution risk.