Stop Just Filling Out Feasibilities — Start Selling Your Site

Why Most Sites Are Losing Before the Selection Ever Happens

Quick caveat:
Many small or embedded sites — especially those operating out of physician offices with research-naïve PIs — spend a lot of time completing feasibilities but are often overlooked due to their limited track records or lack of infrastructure, even when they have access to ideal patient populations.

CROs also frequently throw "pre-award" feasibility surveys over the fence simply to collect site data for their own RFP responses. Feedback is rare, and time is often wasted. And yet, sites keep filling them out, hoping something lands.

We get it. You're trying to stay visible. You're trying to stay relevant. But here’s the hard truth:

If you're not treating each feasibility like a strategic opportunity to position your site, you're doing free admin work — not business development.

The Feasibility Struggles No One Talks About

1. You’re Flying Blind

No feedback. No debrief. You don’t know why you weren’t selected — so you repeat the same answers in the next form, hoping for a different result.

2. Your Responses Look Like Everyone Else’s

“Recruitment methods: EMR, database, outreach.”
“PI experience: Yes, has worked on similar studies.”
That doesn’t make you memorable — it makes you invisible.

3. You’re Not Selling the How

Sponsors don’t just want access to patients — they want to know you can reach, enroll, and retain them. Generic responses don’t show them how you’ll do it.

4. You’re Wasting Time on Unqualified Feasibilities

If you’re filling out every feasibility you get — without knowing the sponsor, the protocol, or your likelihood of being selected — you’re chasing volume over value.

What Better Looks Like

Let’s break it down with practical changes you can make today.

Instead of:
“We use our EMR and database to identify eligible participants.”
Try:

“We query our EMR weekly using protocol-specific ICD-10 codes and filters based on inclusion/exclusion. Our CRC team is trained to pre-screen within 72 hours, and we run recall campaigns to re-engage eligible patients from previous studies.”

Instead of:
“PI has experience in indication.”
Try:

“Our PI has led 3 trials in this indication in the past 5 years, with a combined total of 47 enrolled patients and 96% retention. He/she is actively involved in study visits and engages directly in recruitment oversight.”

Instead of:
“PI is new to research.”
Try:

“While our PI is new to research, we’ve initiated several diagnostic and low-risk observational studies to build clinical trial experience. These quick-turn protocols allow us to generate early performance data, train our team, and establish sponsor trust — all while generating early revenue for the site.”

Sites with research-naïve investigators don’t have to sit on the sidelines. Diagnostic and registry studies are an ideal entry point — giving the PI exposure, building internal workflows, and helping the site prove capability in a lower-risk environment.

Pro tip: Don’t skip optional questions — use them to insert differentiators like:

• Diversity of your patient population

• Community partnerships

• Use of technology for pre-screening

• Startup timelines or enrollment metrics

• Testimonials from past sponsors or CROs

Track This: Your Bid-to-Win Ratio

You can’t improve what you don’t measure. Start tracking:

• Total feasibilities submitted

• Number of responses that led to a qualification call

• Number of awarded studies

If your ratio is low, it’s a red flag — either your submissions aren’t strong enough, or you're responding to the wrong types of studies.

Follow Up — and Build Relationships

Don’t just submit the form. Follow up.

If you have a sponsor or CRO contact — especially a site liaison or feasibility manager — engage with them. This is how you become more than a line in a spreadsheet.

They can:

• Tell you what’s missing from your profile

• Help get your PI and site information properly entered into their database

• Flag your name when the site list is being built

What to send:

• A short email reaffirming interest

• 1–2 protocol-specific strengths

• Ask if your site’s info is up to date in their system

• Offer to connect for 15 minutes to share more

It’s not pestering. It’s partnership.
Relationships turn feasibility responders into preferred sites.

Final Thought: Feasibility ≠ Admin Task. It’s a Sales Touchpoint.

Every feasibility form is a chance to stand out — or blend in. Sites that consistently win studies don’t just submit faster or check more boxes. They:

• Sell their value

• Follow up with intent

• Track what’s working

• Build real relationships

Let’s Make Your Site Stand Out

If you’re tired of ghosted feasibilities and missed study awards, let’s fix it.

🔧 I help sites and networks:

• Create sponsor-facing messaging that actually differentiates

• Build plug-and-play feasibility response templates

• Train site staff on how to follow up and build relationships that lead to more awards

👉 Ready to turn feasibilities into study wins? Let’s talk.
Reach out to me at [email protected]