What is the primary objective of **FDA 21 CFR Part 11**?

**The primary objective of FDA 21 CFR Part 11 is to establish criteria under which the FDA considers electronic records and electronic signatures trustworthy, reliable, and equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures executed on paper.** Per §11.1(a), it ensures authenticity, integrity, and, when appropriate, confidentiality of records created, modified, maintained, archived, retrieved, or transmitted under predicate rules. Controls in Subparts B (§§11.10 closed systems, 11.30 open systems) and C (§§11.50–11.300 signatures) replicate paper trust properties, with systems and documentation readily available for FDA inspection (§11.1(e)).

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **FDA 21 CFR Part 11**?

**FDA 21 CFR Part 11 applies to organizations using electronic records in lieu of paper for predicate rule requirements or relying on them for regulated activities.** It covers life sciences firms (pharma, biotech, devices) maintaining records under regulations like 21 CFR Parts 211/820/58, or submitting accepted electronic records to FDA (§11.1(b)). Scope excludes paper records transmitted electronically but includes electronic signatures intended as handwritten equivalents. FDA’s 2003 guidance narrows to reliance-based application, requiring documented SOPs for scope decisions.

Does **FDA 21 CFR Part 11** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**No, FDA 21 CFR Part 11 does not require external audits or third-party certification.** Compliance is demonstrated through internal controls, validation, SOPs, and inspection readiness (§11.1(e)). FDA verifies during inspections via records, systems, and documentation. The 2003 guidance emphasizes risk-based validation and predicate rule adherence over formal certification, though supplier audits may support SaaS validation.

How often should an assessment for **FDA 21 CFR Part 11** be performed?

**FDA 21 CFR Part 11 does not prescribe a fixed frequency for assessments; they must occur via change control, periodic reviews, and risk-based periodic evaluation.** §11.10(k) requires controls over documentation changes with audit trails. FDA’s 2003 guidance supports lifecycle management with reassessments triggered by changes, upgrades, or predicate rule impacts; industry practice includes annual reviews for high-risk systems.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **FDA 21 CFR Part 11**?

**Non-compliance with FDA 21 CFR Part 11 can result in FDA Form 483 observations, warning letters, product holds, import alerts, or injunctions.** Predicate rule violations remain fully enforceable, leading to data integrity failures in investigations/CAPA (e.g., Glenmark warning letter). Systems must be inspection-ready (§11.1(e)); failures in access controls, audit trails, or signatures trigger enforcement without discretion per 2003 guidance.

Can **FDA 21 CFR Part 11** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**FDA 21 CFR Part 11 is not explicitly mapped to other frameworks in its text or 2003 guidance, focusing solely on U.S. predicate rules.** Standalone compliance emphasizes equivalency for electronic records/signatures. Organizations may align controls risk-based but must document Part 11-specific scope, closed/open systems (§§11.10/11.30), and signatures (§§11.100–11.300) independently.

What is the first step to begin implementing **FDA 21 CFR Part 11**?

**The first step to implement FDA 21 CFR Part 11 is to establish a formal applicability framework mapping predicate rules to records and assessing business reliance on electronic versions.** Per 2003 guidance, document in SOPs/specifications whether records replace paper, are relied upon for regulated activities, or involve binding signatures (§11.1(b)). Classify systems as closed/open and prioritize non-discretionary controls like access (§11.10(d)).

What is the primary objective of **HITRUST CSF**?

**The primary objective of HITRUST CSF is to provide a certifiable, threat-adaptive control framework harmonizing over 60 authoritative sources into a single assurance program enabling "assess once, report many."** It consolidates requirements across 19 assessment domains and a hierarchical taxonomy of 14 categories, 49 objectives, and ~156 specifications, using risk-based tailoring via organizational, system, and regulatory factors. The framework employs a five-level maturity model (Policy, Procedure, Implemented, Measured, Managed) to ensure operational effectiveness, supported by the MyCSF platform for scoping, evidence management, and validated certification.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **HITRUST CSF**?

**No organization is legally mandated to comply with HITRUST CSF, as it is a voluntary, industry-agnostic framework; however, it is professionally required by many healthcare payers, providers, and business associates handling ePHI/PHI.** Adoption is driven by contractual demands from covered entities, insurers, and vendors in healthcare ecosystems, extending to financial services and cloud providers processing sensitive data. HITRUST targets entities needing standardized third-party assurance, with r2 assessments tailored for high-risk environments via defined risk factors.

Does **HITRUST CSF** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**Yes, HITRUST CSF requires external audits by Authorized External Assessors for validated assessments leading to certification (e1, i1, r2).** Self-assessments via MyCSF provide readiness insights but lack third-party validation. Validated pathways involve evidence-based testing (documentation, interviews, technical scans), HITRUST centralized QA review, and issuance of certification letters valid 1-2 years, with r2 requiring a one-year interim.

How often should an assessment for **HITRUST CSF** be performed?

**HITRUST CSF validated assessments should be performed annually for e1/i1 certifications and every two years for r2 with a mandatory one-year interim assessment.** Readiness self-assessments can occur anytime via MyCSF for gap analysis, while ongoing continuous monitoring of maturity levels (e.g., Measured/Managed) sustains certification. Framework updates (quarterly threat-adaptive) necessitate periodic reviews to align controls.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **HITRUST CSF**?

**Non-compliance with HITRUST CSF results in no direct legal penalties since it is voluntary, but it triggers contractual losses, market exclusion, and heightened regulatory scrutiny in relying ecosystems.** Healthcare business associates risk contract termination by payers requiring certification; broader impacts include elevated cyber insurance premiums, failed vendor approvals, and inability to leverage "assess once, report many" efficiencies, exposing organizations to unmitigated third-party risk.

Can **HITRUST CSF** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, HITRUST CSF includes built-in mappings to over 60 frameworks including HIPAA, NIST SP 800-53, ISO 27001/27002, PCI DSS, and GDPR via MyCSF cross-references and Insights Reports.** Requirement-level results roll up to produce compliance scorecards, enabling a single assessment to demonstrate alignment without redundant audits.

What is the first step to begin implementing **HITRUST CSF**?

**The first step to implement HITRUST CSF is to access MyCSF for scoping via organizational, system, and regulatory risk factor questionnaires.** This generates a tailored control set, identifies inheritance opportunities (e.g., 60-85% from cloud providers), and produces a readiness assessment baseline for remediation planning.

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 vs HITRUST CSF

Standards Comparison

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Mandatory

1997

FDA regulation equating electronic records to paper records

HITRUST CSF

Voluntary

2022

Certifiable framework harmonizing 60+ security standards

Quick Verdict

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 mandates electronic record trustworthiness for life sciences, while HITRUST CSF provides voluntary, certifiable security assurance across healthcare. Organizations adopt Part 11 for FDA compliance; HITRUST for multi-framework assurance and market trust.

Electronic Records

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

21 CFR Part 11: Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

Medium

Implementation Time

18-24 months

Key Features

Establishes electronic records equivalence to paper records
Mandates secure time-stamped audit trails for traceability
Requires unique non-repudiable electronic signatures
Differentiates controls for closed versus open systems
Enforces risk-based validation and access limitations

Information Security

HITRUST CSF

HITRUST Common Security Framework (CSF)

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Harmonizes 60+ standards for assess once, report many
Risk-based tailoring via organizational/system factors
Maturity model with policy-to-managed scoring
Tiered certifications e1/i1/r2 with MyCSF platform
Inheritance from cloud/third-parties reduces scope

Detailed Analysis

A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Details

What It Is

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 is a U.S. regulation defining criteria for electronic records and electronic signatures to be trustworthy, reliable, and equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures. It applies to FDA-regulated industries using electronic systems for predicate rule-required records. Adopts a risk-based approach per 2003 guidance, narrowing scope to relied-upon electronic records.

Key Components

Subpart A: scope, definitions; Subpart B: closed/open system controls (§11.10/11.30); Subpart C: signature rules (§11.50-11.300).
Core controls: validation, audit trails, access limits, authority/device checks, training, documentation.
~11 controls in §11.10; built on predicate rules like CGMP.
Compliance via validation, SOPs; no formal certification.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory for electronic reliance to avoid enforcement.
Mitigates data integrity risks, warning letters.
Enables paperless operations, efficiency gains.
Builds stakeholder trust, supports inspections.

Implementation Overview

Risk-based scoping, CSV (IQ/OQ/PQ), vendor governance.
Phases: gap analysis, design, validation, training, monitoring.
Targets life sciences; scalable by size; ongoing audits required.

HITRUST CSF Details

What It Is

HITRUST Common Security Framework (CSF) is a certifiable, threat-adaptive control framework that harmonizes requirements from 60+ authoritative sources like HIPAA, NIST, ISO 27001, PCI DSS, and GDPR. It employs a risk-based, maturity-scored approach for scalable security and privacy assurance.

Key Components

19 assessment domains covering governance, technical controls, and resilience.
Hierarchical structure: 14 categories, 49 objectives, ~156 specifications.
**Five-level maturity modelPolicy, Procedure, Implemented, Measured, Managed.
Tiered certifications: e1 (44 controls), i1 (182 requirements), r2 (tailored) via MyCSF platform.

Why Organizations Use It

Consolidates compliance for "assess once, report many."
Provides credible third-party assurance, reducing audits.
Enhances risk management, breach reduction (99.4% breach-free).
Boosts market access, insurance benefits, TPRM efficiency.

Implementation Overview

Phased: scoping, readiness, remediation, validated assessment.
Involves MyCSF scoping, evidence collection, assessor validation.
Suited for regulated industries (healthcare, finance); all sizes via tiers.
Requires certification for reliance (1-2 year validity).

Key Differences

Aspect	FDA 21 CFR Part 11	HITRUST CSF
Scope	Electronic records/signatures trustworthiness	Comprehensive security/privacy controls
Industry	FDA-regulated life sciences	Healthcare, finance, regulated sectors
Nature	Mandatory FDA regulation	Voluntary certifiable framework
Testing	Risk-based system validation	Maturity-scored external assessments
Penalties	Warning letters, enforcement actions	Loss of certification, no legal penalties

Scope

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Electronic records/signatures trustworthiness

HITRUST CSF

Comprehensive security/privacy controls

Industry

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

FDA-regulated life sciences

HITRUST CSF

Healthcare, finance, regulated sectors

Nature

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Mandatory FDA regulation

HITRUST CSF

Voluntary certifiable framework

Testing

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Risk-based system validation

HITRUST CSF

Maturity-scored external assessments

Penalties

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Warning letters, enforcement actions

HITRUST CSF

Loss of certification, no legal penalties

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about FDA 21 CFR Part 11 and HITRUST CSF

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 FAQ

HITRUST CSF FAQ

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

CIS Controls v8.1 for Cloud & SaaS: A Practical Safeguard Playbook for AWS/Azure/GCP and Microsoft 365

Turn CIS Controls v8.1 into a cloud-first playbook for AWS, Azure, GCP & Microsoft 365. Get actionable IaaS/PaaS/SaaS safeguards, automation patterns, evidence

CMMC Level 2 Implementation Guide for Small DIB Contractors: First 5 Steps to C3PAO Certification with Infographic

Actionable CMMC Level 2 guide for small DIB contractors: 5-step roadmap to C3PAO certification with infographic on timelines, costs & POA&Ms. Achieve DoD compli

Top 5 Unseen Complexities Modern Compliance Software Effortlessly Manages

Uncover top 5 unseen complexities modern compliance software manages effortlessly—from sensitive data mapping to real-time regulatory shifts. Automate audits, i

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform

Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.

100+ Standards & Regulations

AI-Powered Insights

Collaborative Assessments

Actionable Recommendations

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

ISO 56002 vs NERC CIP

ISO 56002 vs NERC CIP: Compare innovation management frameworks with grid cybersecurity standards. Drive strategic value while ensuring BES compliance—essential guide for utilities.

ISO 20000 vs IATF 16949

Discover ISO 20000 vs IATF 16949: IT service management meets automotive quality standards. Compare HLS alignment, core tools, and benefits for integrated compliance. Explore now!

POPIA vs ISO 21001

Discover POPIA vs ISO 21001: Compare South Africa's data privacy law with the educational management standard. Unlock compliance strategies, security safeguards & governance insights now!

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

HITRUST CSF

Quick Verdict

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Key Features

HITRUST CSF

Key Features

Detailed Analysis

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

HITRUST CSF Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

Key Differences

Scope

Industry

Nature

Testing

Penalties

Frequently Asked Questions

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 FAQ

What is the primary objective of FDA 21 CFR Part 11?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with FDA 21 CFR Part 11?

Does FDA 21 CFR Part 11 require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for FDA 21 CFR Part 11 be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with FDA 21 CFR Part 11?

Can FDA 21 CFR Part 11 be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing FDA 21 CFR Part 11?

HITRUST CSF FAQ

What is the primary objective of HITRUST CSF?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with HITRUST CSF?

Does HITRUST CSF require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for HITRUST CSF be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with HITRUST CSF?

Can HITRUST CSF be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing HITRUST CSF?

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

CIS Controls v8.1 for Cloud & SaaS: A Practical Safeguard Playbook for AWS/Azure/GCP and Microsoft 365

CMMC Level 2 Implementation Guide for Small DIB Contractors: First 5 Steps to C3PAO Certification with Infographic

Top 5 Unseen Complexities Modern Compliance Software Effortlessly Manages

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

ISO 56002 vs NERC CIP

ISO 20000 vs IATF 16949

POPIA vs ISO 21001