Pharma programmatic strategy and media investment

A Pharma Programmatic Partner RFP Scorecard

Evaluate pharma programmatic partners with weighted requirements, evidence levels, failure gates, and a controlled validation plan.

Christian Guerrero Published 3 min read Part 7 of 10

The short answer

A useful pharma programmatic RFP combines weighted criteria with non-negotiable gates and evidence ratings. Score what matters to the brand's use case, require documentation behind claims, and validate finalists in a controlled test. A polished demonstration is not proof of audience quality or business impact.

Set requirements before inviting partners

Translate the brief into capabilities: eligible audience, formats, supply, identity, privacy controls, reporting, measurement, service model, integration, and commercials. Mark each as mandatory, scored, or informational.

Category Illustrative weight Evidence to request
Audience and identity 20% Provenance, refresh, match method, validation
Supply and quality 15% Domain/app reporting, authorization, controls
Measurement 20% Methodology, eligibility, lag, minimums
Activation and optimization 15% Control level, change log, frequency capability
Privacy and governance 15% Data flow, retention, roles, incident process
Service and operations 10% Named team, SLAs, escalation path
Commercials 5% Normalized fees, minimums, cancellation terms

Weights are illustrative. A DTC CTV brief and an NPI-based HCP brief should not use the same model.

Grade the evidence

Use a simple hierarchy:

  1. Documented and independently reviewable: methodology, contract language, logs, accreditation where relevant.
  2. Demonstrated in the proposed workflow: live interface, sample output, implementation proof.
  3. Vendor case evidence: useful but not necessarily transferable.
  4. Assertion: roadmap or sales statement without supporting material.

Do not award equal points to all four. Record assumptions and exceptions beside the score.

Add failure gates

A partner can score well overall and still fail a material requirement. Possible gates include inability to disclose material data flows, unsupported promotional format, inadequate seller transparency, missing geography control, or measurement that cannot cover the eligible population. Privacy and legal teams decide applicable obligations.

HHS has published guidance concerning online tracking technologies used by HIPAA-regulated entities, and the FTC explains that its Health Breach Notification Rule can apply to certain health apps and connected devices. These are signals to map the specific data flow with counsel, not to assume all pharma advertising is governed identically (HHS; FTC).

Validate finalists fairly

Where feasible, use the same brief, timing, creative class, geography, outcome definition, and reporting window. Predefine how overlap, fees, and measurement minimums are handled. If a controlled test is impossible, state the confounders rather than forcing a rank.

Practical takeaway

The scorecard should make tradeoffs visible, not automate judgment. The next step is a requirements workshop with brand, agency, analytics, privacy, procurement, and operations before partner outreach begins.

Sources

External guidance and platform documentation change. Links were current at publication; check them again before relying on them for a decision.

Editorial note. Analysis and frameworks are the author's own and do not represent Acxiom or any current or former employer, client, or named platform. Examples labeled hypothetical or illustrative are not results from real campaigns. Nothing here is legal, regulatory, or medical advice.

Working through this decision on a real plan?

I work on health and pharma data, identity, and activation, after five years running HCP and DTC programmatic agency-side. Happy to talk through how this applies to your situation.