General information, not insurance, legal, or regulatory advice. Confirm current ethics / national authority ethics, import, and coverage rules with qualified advisers and a licensed broker. We do not invent premiums, limits, or carrier rates on this page. We do not claim a named carrier as a signed bioaccess® partner here. No patient data. No unpublished client. Always bioaccess®.
If you searched site insurance vs sponsor policy FIH, hospital MSA insurance clinical trial, does the site cover trial liability, you were looking for someone who would write international clinical-trial coverage for an investigational device. bioaccess® is a first-in-human medical-device CRO. We are not an insurance carrier. We do not underwrite policies. We do not sell premiums. We do not quote a binder. OUS and Latin American device trials still need trial-specific liability — local admitted paper, a master with local certificates, or both. We run the trial under ISO 14155. We can introduce a specialty carrier. That introduction is not a signed partnership on this page, and it is not a quote.
Sites have insurance. That sentence has wrecked more start-up calendars than a slow CEP. Institutional coverage is for the hospital’s operations. Sponsor trial-liability is for the investigational protocol. Ethics wants the second object. A CRO who lets you file the first object as if it were the second is not doing the job.
This page is not a clone of Clinical Trial Insurance in Latin America: What Sponsors Need to Know Before Study Start. That hub is the country-snapshot checklist (territory, named insureds, language, runoff). This page is the hospital MSA coverage versus sponsor trial form intercept. Distinct slug. Distinct title. Same operator: the CRO runs the trial; a carrier writes the paper.
The CRO is not the carrier
Founders type “buy clinical trial insurance” and land on CROs, brokers, and hospital MSAs in the same result set. Those are three jobs:
- Carrier. Underwrites participant injury, medical expenses for trial-related events, defense, and site/investigator indemnification — if the form matches the protocol. A hallway conversation is not a binder.
- Broker. Places the form, translations, additional-insured endorsements, and territory wording. Licensed where the paper has to sit.
- CRO. Protocol, IB, ICF, ethics/ethics / national authority packet, importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America, ISO 14155 monitoring, SAE clock, TMF, and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative. See OUS FIH and FDA IDE. Eligibility of foreign data is not FDA clearance.
Mixing those jobs is how a startup buys a U.S. product-liability rider, emails a PDF to an ethics committee, and gets a resubmission. Product liability is not clinical-trial liability. A site’s institutional policy is not the sponsor’s trial form.
What a site policy is built to do
A named hospital can carry malpractice, premises, and sometimes clinical-research riders for its employees. That is necessary for the MSA. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human device. The participant is in a sponsor protocol. The investigational product is the sponsor’s. Import, IB, and ISO 14155 monitoring are the sponsor’s stack. When a committee asks who pays if the device injures the participant, “the hospital is insured” is not an answer unless the hospital is actually the sponsor — and on a bioaccess® FIH it is not.
What the sponsor form has to add
Additional insureds (PI and site) when the committee requires it. Territory that names the country. Period through follow-up. Language the clerk can file. Indemnity in the MSA that matches the policy — not a hospital template that dumps every investigational risk onto a Delaware C-corp with no paper behind it. Leftover-site kill pages on this blog already say “clinical trial insurance is required; we will not invent a campus-only premium.” This page is the dedicated intercept for that sentence.
What ethics and ethics / national authority actually ask for
Use clinical-trials-panama. Panama’s Ministry of Health (MINSA), through the Dirección Nacional de Farmacia y Drogas, is the national file. Ethics review runs through institutional bioethics committees registered with the Comité Nacional de Bioética de la Investigación (CNBI). Published ethics typically 3–5 weeks; with bioaccess® coordination, protocol submission to first-patient enrollment averages 6–8 weeks on that hub. Per-patient costs there: $12,000–$22,000 in U.S. dollars. A hallway conversation at this hospital is not MINSA clearance. Use clinical-trials-peru. INS (DIIS, formerly OGITT) authorizes trials. A published statutory target on that hub is 40 business days in the drug-trial framework, and 60 business days when a biologics / technical commission applies. A novel first-in-human device may take longer. We will not invent a new Peruvian clock on this page. DIGEMID under MINSA regulates devices and investigational import. Accredited ethics is required. The Peru hub already cites experience-based cost on the order of ~30% lower versus US/EU — that is a country-page figure, not a campus quote we invent here. We do not invent a Peruvian legal entity on this page.
Insurance documentation is usually in the ethics / ethics / national authority packet, not a post-approval formality. Typical asks (confirm with the reviewing body — we will not invent a pan-regional limit):
- Territory that names every country on the protocol.
- Site and principal investigator as additional insureds when the committee requires it.
- Policy period through last-patient last-visit plus the protocol follow-up window.
- Spanish (or Portuguese) certificate or notarized summary when the committee asks for it.
- Claims-notice language that can sit next to the SAE clock, not against it.
We will not invent a per-participant dollar figure on this page. Individual ethics committees set thresholds. Ask the carrier and the CRO together, before the packet goes in.
Local policy vs controlled master
Do not let a site MSA “include insurance” replace a master or a local trial policy. Do not let a master ignore the site’s additional-insured ask. Both objects can exist. One does not eat the other.
A “controlled master” that never issues a local certificate is a slide, not a submission. A local-only policy that cannot travel to a second Latin American country is a one-country trap. The operator chooses geography for the device; the paper has to follow the protocol, not the other way around.
What bioaccess® still owns after you have a quote
- Regulatory-fit, not tourism. Going direct to a campus to “use their insurance” is how you confirm a room and still fail ethics. Contract the CRO. Let the CRO activate the site if the site fits. Introduce a carrier for the sponsor form.
- Protocol, IB, ICF, and the ethics / ethics / national authority packet with insurance documents in the same stack — not a parallel founder email.
- Importer of record and device accountability. A binder does not import the investigational product.
- Site activation: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. A site MSA that “includes insurance” is still not ISO 14155 monitoring.
- Introducing a specialty carrier when the founder does not already have admitted paper. Introduction is not a signed partnership on this page. We do not invent rates.
The firm was founded in 2010. Public device case studies (ReGelTec, Axoft, Newrotex, enVVeno, Avantec Vascular / Sangria™ as already published) show FIH execution with import and insurance as workstreams — not as bioaccess® underwriting. We will not invent a premium from those pages.
Colombia is still on the map
A site-name search sometimes arrives with a stale story that bioaccess® “left Colombia.” That is false. bioaccess® still runs clinical trials in Colombia. Always bioaccess® — local entity and office, Miami headquarters, INVIMA clocks in-country. The country page’s published comparison: Panama ethics 3–5 weeks vs. Colombia 4–6 weeks; per-patient $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on clinical-trials-panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.
A Bogotá or Floridablanca ethics packet still wants financial responsibility for participant injury. That does not flip the public line. bioaccess® still runs clinical trials in Colombia. We pick the country the device needs.
Frequently asked questions
Does bioaccess® sell clinical trial insurance?
No. We are the FIH CRO. We can introduce a carrier. We do not underwrite. We do not bind. We do not invent a rate card on this page.
Is this the same article as the LATAM insurance hub?
No. The hub is Clinical Trial Insurance in Latin America: What Sponsors Need to Know Before Study Start. This page is hospital MSA coverage versus sponsor trial form. Do not treat them as clones.
Can a U.S. product-liability policy cover a LATAM device FIH?
Only if the territory clause and the trial-liability form actually name the countries and the investigational activity. Many U.S. GL/PL policies exclude OUS research. Get it in writing from the carrier. A verbal “we’re global” is not an ethics exhibit.
Did bioaccess® underwrite the Avantec / Sangria™ $10M policy mentioned on public pages?
No. Public llms.txt copy says bioaccess® ran FIH execution that included placing a $10M clinical-trial insurance policy as an operational workstream. That is CRO coordination, not underwriting. It is not a SKU. It is not a rate we invent here.
Next step
If the search that brought you here was site insurance vs sponsor policy for FIH, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Do not clone leftover-site campus pages. For the operator path: First-in-Human CRO. Sibling hub: Clinical Trial Insurance in Latin America: What Sponsors Need to Know Before Study Start.
Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®