In a Tufts CSDD study of 257 sponsors and CROs, companies used an average of six applications to support each clinical study (Tufts CSDD via GlobeNewswire). Wherever two of those systems hold the same fact, someone has to check that they agree.
In trial finance, that checking has a name: reconciliation. Visits are matched between EDC and CTMS, invoices are matched to budgets, and month-end accruals are matched to what was actually done. Each one takes time, and each one exists because the data lives in more than one place. Here are five that disappear when CTMS, CTFM and EDC share one data model, and one that changes shape.
|
Reconciliation |
Why it exists |
On one platform |
|---|---|---|
|
Visits: EDC vs CTMS vs payments |
Visits recorded separately in each system |
One visit record used by all three |
|
Enrolment counts |
Each system counts subjects its own way |
One subject record, one count |
|
Budget vs contract after amendments |
Fee changes made in several places |
Amendment applied once to affected visits |
|
Earned vs accrued at month-end |
Accruals estimated from reports |
Earned-not-invoiced shown directly |
|
Payments vs visits for sites |
Sites match remittances to their own visit logs |
Payment status tied to each visit |
|
Site invoices vs proforma |
Pass-through costs arrive on the site's own invoice |
Still reconciled, but faster, with exceptions routed to people |
The most common reconciliation in trial finance is checking that a visit in EDC is also complete in CTMS and has been paid. When all three use the same visit record, the visit is complete everywhere at once, and the payment follows it.
EDC, CTMS and the finance forecast often show different enrolment numbers on the same day, because each counts screened, randomised and withdrawn subjects differently or updates on a different schedule. A single subject record removes the debate before status meetings.
After an amendment, the new fees have to reach the site budget, the contract and the payment rules. When they are updated separately, someone has to check they match. Applying the change once, to the affected visits and procedures, removes that check.
Finance teams estimate accruals by asking clinical teams what work has been done but not yet invoiced. When completed visits create earned amounts automatically, earned-not-invoiced is a figure to read, not a figure to build.
Sites match the payments they receive against their own visit records to see what is still owed. When payment status is linked to each visit and visible in a portal, the site can see what is paid and what is pending without its own reconciliation.
Pass-through costs, such as travel, local labs or equipment, arrive on the site's own invoice and still need checking against the budget and proforma. What changes is speed: line items can be extracted, classified and compared automatically, with only the exceptions going to a person.
Cloudbyz CTMS, CTFM and EDC are built natively on Salesforce as one platform, so visits, subjects and budgets share one data model rather than being copied between systems. Completed subject visits generate invoices, amendments are applied to the affected visits and procedures, and sponsors and sites see status through portals.
For site invoices, the Invoice Reconciliation Agent, built on Agentforce, is designed to extract line items from invoice PDFs, classify each line, compare it with the system proforma, calculate variance with a red, amber or green status, detect duplicates and route exceptions to a person with a recommendation. Cloudbyz describes it as turning a 30 to 45 minute reconciliation into seconds; actual time depends on invoice complexity. The Financial Navigator answers questions on payments and invoices, read-only. How many reconciliations go away depends on which modules are in use and how they are configured.
Book a demo or visit cloudbyz.com.