Accelerating clinical trial success with high-performing sites
Parexel's clinical research site networks give sponsors access to 300+ pre-qualified, high-performing sites, reducing activation time by 40% and delivering 4x more patient enrollments than non-alliance sites.
Investigative site selection can make all the difference in clinical research success or failure. At the same time, sites face unprecedented operating challenges, from increasing protocol complexity to resource constraints, protracted budget negotiations and workforce turnover, to contending with myriad new technologies.
At Parexel, we understand the need to strengthen collaboration with investigators and drive new approaches to deliver better trial outcomes. As a core part of our commitment to identify, recognize, and support high-performing clinical research sites, Parexel’s Site Alliance program is designed to create measurable value for your clinical development programs.
By leveraging Parexel’s Site Alliance, you gain access to a curated group of 300+ high-performing sites who meet Parexel’s rigorous quality and performance standards and bring disease specific experience to execute with excellence.
Based on Parexel internal performance data across Alliance Site studies, studies supported by Parexel Alliance Sites experience:
- 40% faster activation to the first critical milestone of First Patient First Visit (FPFV) than non-alliance sites, driven by optimized site selection through Alliance Site profiling and a dedicated Site Alliance representative assigned to each study[
- Nearly 20% faster timelines for study start-up completion than non-alliance sites
- 4x more patient enrollments per site than non-alliance sites, on average
- 18% faster contract cycle timelines through a dedicated contracts lead and expedited execution of clinical study agreements.
Parexel's performance advantage is driven in part by early investigator engagement during protocol design, the foundation of Parexel's KOL engagement model.
Parexel’s Alliance Sites partner with Parexel to co-create solutions to improve research and patient experience. We leverage their expertise and feedback to optimize and support:
- Protocol design
- Patient recruitment
- Technology feasibility
- Increased trial volume
- New models, solutions and systems
- Patient-centered trial design
- Optimize study launch to enable best-in-class delivery to our customers
We continuously look for ways to make study launch activities more efficient. Some examples include:
- Improving upfront planning and forecast accuracy to provide more predictable delivery
- Improving cycle times, quality, and efficiency
- Using our tools and expertise to select the right sites to enroll the right patients
- Optimizing our site alliances and overall site network
- Leverage our SMEs to make study start-up more efficient
Enabling Successful Sites
This thought leadership series focuses on uncovering the root causes of some of the biggest challenges facing investigative sites today.
Getting deeper insights from KOLs
As a service in the early development of protocols, we invite our sites’ investigators to act as key opinion leaders (KOL). They’re the ones walking the journey with patients and their caregivers every day, making them uniquely capable of identifying the barriers to recruitment and retention so we can address them from the start. The result is a trial that requires fewer protocol amendments and faces fewer recruitment problems, saving you time.
Increasing participation in clinical studies
Currently, less than 10% of physicians and patients participate in clinical research, and among patients who participate, minority groups are significantly underrepresented. Research activities are often concentrated in academic institutions and investigator sites, so patients and their providers are often unaware of the work; and even if they’re interested, many lack the time and resources required to join studies.
Our Community Alliance Network is a collaboration that brings clinical research more fully into community healthcare settings. This model aims to make access to clinical research part of a patient’s routine healthcare experience. Through our Community Alliance Network partnerships, we support thousands of community practitioners and eliminate many barriers to provider involvement.
When we link patients to studies through their established care delivery systems, we’re empowering physicians to offer more treatment options, removing participant barriers, and connecting with underserved communities.
Winners of the 2023 and 2024 Eagle Award by Society of Clinical Research Sites
Parexel received the SCRS Eagle Award in both 2023 and 2024, voted on by the global site community, recognizing outstanding leadership and commitment to advancing the clinical research profession through site partnerships Recipients of the Eagle Award are selected based on votes cast from the global site community. This recognition reaffirms our commitment to collaborating with sites, which is crucial for accelerating drug development and ultimately benefiting patients. Receiving this award two years in a row is a reflection of the efforts and innovative spirit of our global site-facing and site-supporting team.
Our Experts
Frequently asked questions
A clinical research site network is a group of healthcare facilities, clinics, hospitals, or dedicated research centers that collaborate under a unified management structure to conduct clinical trials. These networks bring together multiple research sites with shared standard operating procedures, quality standards, and administrative processes, allowing for more efficient patient recruitment, streamlined study startup, and consistent protocol implementation across locations. Site networks can be organized regionally, nationally, or globally, and may specialize in specific therapeutic areas or trial types.
The primary advantage of site networks is their ability to accelerate clinical research through economies of scale and operational efficiencies. Sponsors and CROs often prefer working with established networks because they offer access to larger patient populations, experienced research staff, and proven track records of performance. Additionally, site networks typically provide centralized contracting, budgeting, and regulatory submissions, reducing administrative burden and study timelines. Many networks also implement standardized technologies for data collection and patient engagement, further enhancing the quality and consistency of clinical trial execution across multiple locations.
Parexel’s Site Alliance team, with input from other teams (feasibility, project teams), put sites through a rigorous selection process to identify the top sites that meet our study needs. Below are the criteria they are evaluated against.
- The site or network must be in operation for at least 2 years. If the site hasn’t previously worked with Parexel, there is a formal Compliance Due Diligence (CDD) screening process.
- Parexel’s study data must show strong performance:
-Number of studies
-Therapeutic Area experience
-Average startup and contract cycle times
-Recruitment factors
-Recruitment rates (where possible) - The Site Alliance team conducts a comprehensive site visit to review facilities, equipment, processes, and resources.
- Site experience and capabilities align with Parexel’s current and future business needs:
-Site type
-Locations
-Patient population
-Parexel’s priority therapeutic areas and indications - The site agrees to:
-Provide a SPOC and engage in regular site relationship calls
-Complete and maintain a comprehensive site profile document
-Continuous re-evaluation (annually)
Site alliance networks in clinical research generally work to improve patient enrollment through strategies like:
- Broader site network: Connecting multiple clinical research sites to share patient populations and recruitment resources
- Standardized protocols: Ensuring consistent enrollment processes across partner sites
- Shared expertise: Leveraging best practices from high-performing sites across the network
- Enhanced communication: Facilitating coordination between sites to optimize recruitment strategies
- Patient access: Expanding the pool of potential participants through multiple connected locations
The key differences between a site alliance network and a standard investigator site are:
Standard Investigator Site
- Single entity: A standalone clinical research facility or practice
- Independent operations: Operates independently with its own protocols, staff, and infrastructure
- Limited scope: Typically enrolls patients from its own patient base and local area
- Individual contracts: Negotiates and manages contracts directly with sponsors on a per-study basis
- Self-contained resources: Responsible for all aspects of study conduct at that location
Site Alliance Network
- Networked structure: Multiple sites connected together under a unified alliance or partnership
- Coordinated operations: Sites work collaboratively and share standardized processes and best practices
- Expanded reach: Access to a larger, combined patient population across multiple locations
- Centralized management: Often has coordinated contracting, training, and oversight across member sites
- Shared resources: Can leverage shared infrastructure, expertise, training programs, and operational support
- Standardized protocols: Implements consistent enrollment and study conduct procedures across all member sites
- Collective strength: Benefits from the combined experience and capabilities of all participating sites
Browse our latest insights
Want to hear from our experts on the latest industry topics? Visit our Insights Center to read, watch, and listen.