Every engagement is scoped upfront, quoted at a fixed project fee, and delivered against a clearly defined set of outputs. No hourly meter. No scope creep. No billable-utilisation incentives.
The decision to engage a CDMO, CRO, analytical laboratory, API manufacturer or critical materials provider is one of the most consequential choices in early drug development. A poor selection can cost months, compromise data integrity, or derail a program entirely.
Most early-stage teams lack the operational experience to evaluate what they are being sold. Selection often happens through founder networks, conference conversations, or responding to inbound outreach — rather than a structured, evidence-based comparison of options against program-specific criteria.
Most early-stage biotech companies have no formal procurement function. Materials are sourced informally, vendor relationships are undocumented, and supply risk is invisible until it becomes a crisis. As programs advance and regulatory expectations rise, this gap becomes a significant liability.
Procurement is treated as an administrative afterthought right up to the moment it becomes a regulatory gating item. By then, rebuilding the function under time pressure typically costs two to three times what it would have cost to build deliberately — and the audit trail cannot be reconstructed after the fact.
Single-source dependencies, geopolitical exposure and concentrated supplier bases represent the largest uncontrolled risks in most early biotech supply chains — and the ones most likely to surface in diligence conversations.
Programs are advanced on the assumption that critical materials and services will continue to flow at current prices and lead times. That assumption has been tested repeatedly in recent years — and the teams positioned to respond were the ones who had already mapped their exposure and pre-qualified alternatives.
Every engagement is scoped collaboratively, confirmed in a written proposal, and delivered at a fixed project fee agreed before work begins. This model exists because we believe a strategic partner should be invested in your outcomes — not in maximising billable hours.
A focused, tightly scoped engagement — one supplier type, a shortlist of candidates, or an initial operational gap assessment.
A full-scope project — structured selection processes, multi-supplier builds, or comprehensive risk mapping with prioritisation.
A full operational build — multi-programme portfolios, end-to-end procurement implementation, global risk coverage with scenario modelling.
Fees are quoted in EUR by default; USD available for North American clients. Travel and expenses charged at cost. Final scope and pricing confirmed in the engagement proposal before work begins.