Financial planning is one of the most critical factors for the sustainability and operational performance of clinical research sites. When key budget categories are underfunded, delays, operational overload, and quality risks quickly accumulate.
This analysis is based on data presented during the SCRS Ambassador Summit LATAM, held on November 17 in Buenos Aires, where preliminary results of the 2025 LATAM Site Landscape Survey—a study conducted by SCRS (Society for Clinical Research Sites)—were shared.
In this blog, you’ll find out which budget categories are the most underfunded, why this happens, and practical strategies to negotiate successfully with sponsors and CROs to secure realistic budgets.
The 6 Most Underfunded Budget Categories According to the 2025 LATAM Landscape Survey
Startup Costs – 50.7% Underfunded
This is the most affected category—and one of the most critical for activating a study.
It includes:
- Document preparation
- Team training
- System setup
- Feasibility assessment
Regulatory complexity in LATAM and the adoption of new technology platforms have increased startup workloads, yet budgets have not been adjusted accordingly.
Screen Failure Reimbursement – 48%
Recruitment remains one of the biggest operational challenges.
However, reimbursement for screen failures does not reflect the actual effort, especially for studies with strict inclusion/exclusion criteria.
This creates significant financial losses for sites.
Recruitment Costs – 45%
Competition between studies and patient saturation increases the cost of identifying, pre-screening, contacting, and scheduling participants.
Despite this, recruitment remains one of the least recognized budget categories by sponsors and CROs.
Overhead and Administrative Costs – 44%
The survey reveals that many sites absorb essential costs that remain underestimated, such as:
- Audits
- Administrative activities
- Infrastructure
- Technology
- Storage
- Quality systems
- Patient safety requirements
Underfunded overhead has a direct impact on a site’s sustainability and margins.
Training – 30.7%
Every study requires multiple hours of training in:
- eSource platforms
- ePRO/eCOA
- Devices
- SOPs and protocol updates
Most of these hours are not included in site budgets, despite their direct impact on the quality of the study.
Monitoring – 17.33%
Although this is the least underfunded category in the ranking, hybrid and remote monitoring models have increased site workload (document organization, visit preparation, digital support), often without budget adjustments.
Why These Categories Remain Underfunded
According to the 2025 LATAM Site Landscape Survey, three main causes explain this persistent gap:
Outdated Fee Structures
Many sponsors rely on historical fee schedules that do not accurately reflect the current Latin American operational context.
Increased Protocol Complexity
More procedures, more documentation, and more technological requirements—but without proportional budget adjustments.
Limited Visibility into Site Operational Burden
Many activities—both administrative and technological—are not perceived as direct costs, even though they require substantial resources.
Practical Strategies for Successful Budget Negotiation
Present Real Operational Data
More than 60% of sites negotiate without internal metrics, according to the survey.
Include in your negotiations:
- Pre-screening time
- Historical screen failure rates
- Training hours
- Personnel costs
Sponsors respond better when cost requests are supported by data.
Justify Each Line Item with Specific Tasks
Instead of a single number, break it down by:
- Activities
- Hours required
- Protocol-driven tasks
Example for training:
- 8 hours of onboarding
- 3 hours of eSource training
- 2 hours of device/ePRO training
This level of detail eliminates objections and increases approval rates.
Use External Benchmarks
Referencing the survey is more effective than saying “other sites charge the same”:
“According to the 2025 LATAM Landscape Survey, this is one of the most underfunded categories in the region.”
This adds credibility and strengthens your negotiation.
Propose Flexible Models
For recruitment and screen failures, consider:
- Scaled reimbursement
- Performance-based fees
- Additional compensation for complex criteria
Flexible structures make approval easier for sponsors.
Leverage Technology to Support Your Cost Justification
Platforms like Trial360 help sites demonstrate:
- Time spent per activity
- Coordinator workload
- Patient interactions
- Study traceability
Digital evidence strengthens any negotiation strategy.
Conclusion: Data-Driven Negotiation Is Key to Reducing Underfunding
The 2025 LATAM Landscape Survey shows that underfunding remains a structural challenge for clinical research sites in the region.
However, sites that negotiate with data, metrics, and detailed justification secure fairer budgets, improve sustainability, and strengthen relationships with sponsors.
If your site is experiencing budget challenges or wants to enhance its negotiation process with sponsors and CROs, Integra IT can help you strengthen workflows, optimize costs, and improve operational efficiency through digital tools like eSource and advanced analytics.
