What is the primary objective of **FISMA**?

**FISMA's primary objective is to provide a comprehensive framework for federal agencies to develop, document, and implement risk-based information security programs protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of federal information and systems.** Enacted in 2002 and modernized in 2014, it mandates agency-wide programs aligned with NIST's Risk Management Framework (RMF) per SP 800-37, including system categorization under FIPS 199, control selection from SP 800-53, continuous monitoring per SP 800-137, and incident reporting to OMB, DHS/CISA, and Congress.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **FISMA**?

**FISMA legally requires compliance from all federal executive branch civilian agencies and any contractors, vendors, or third parties operating federal information systems or processing federal data.** This includes cloud providers via FedRAMP, state/local entities administering federal programs (e.g., Medicaid), and system integrators handling Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). Agency heads, CIOs, CISOs, and Authorizing Officials bear direct responsibility, with oversight by OMB, DHS/CISA, and Inspectors General (IGs).

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

**FISMA does not mandate external third-party certification but requires annual independent evaluations by agency Inspectors General (IGs) or designees using standardized metrics.** IGs assess program maturity across NIST Cybersecurity Framework functions via 20 core metrics, assigning levels from Ad Hoc (1) to Optimized (5). Contractors face agency-driven assessments, often via DCSA for DoD or FedRAMP for cloud, producing Security Assessment Reports (SARs) and Plans of Action and Milestones (POA&Ms).

How often should an assessment for **FISMA** be performed?

**FISMA requires annual independent evaluations by Inspectors General and ongoing continuous monitoring of controls per NIST SP 800-137.** Agencies report FISMA metrics annually to OMB by July 31 via CyberScope, covering risk assessments, control effectiveness, and incidents. System-level assessments occur during RMF steps (Assess/Authorize/Monitor), with high-value assets assessed continuously via tools like DHS Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation (CDM); major incidents trigger real-time reporting within 30 days.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **FISMA**?

**Non-compliance with FISMA results in unfavorable IG reports, OMB remediation directives, operational restrictions, reduced funding, and public exposure for agencies.** Contractors face contract termination, debarment, and loss of federal business; agencies risk diminished mission capability and Congressional scrutiny. Persistent failures, as in HHS's repeated "Not Effective" ratings, lead to escalated GAO reviews and mandatory corrective actions without direct fines but with severe reputational and financial impacts.

Can **FISMA** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**FISMA cannot be formally mapped to other international frameworks within its standalone U.S. federal context, as it is a mandatory statute tied exclusively to NIST standards like SP 800-53 and RMF.** While NIST controls share conceptual alignments (e.g., risk-based controls), FISMA implementation via FIPS 199 categorization and DHS/OMB oversight remains U.S.-specific without official reciprocity or mappings.

What is the first step to begin implementing **FISMA**?

**The first step to implement FISMA is the RMF Prepare phase: establish governance, assign roles (e.g., CIO, CISO, Authorizing Official), and develop a complete system inventory.** Create a risk management strategy, security program charter, and Configuration Management Database (CMDB) to identify federal systems/data flows, enabling subsequent categorization under FIPS 199.

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 Agency considers electronic records and electronic signatures trustworthy, reliable, and equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures executed on paper (§11.1(a)).** This equivalency enables electronic methods while ensuring authenticity, integrity, confidentiality (when appropriate), and non-repudiation through controls in closed (§11.10) and open (§11.30) systems, plus electronic signature requirements (§§11.50–11.300).

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 created, modified, maintained, archived, retrieved, or transmitted under predicate rules, or submitted electronically to FDA (§11.1(b)).** It targets life sciences firms (pharma, biotech, devices) relying on electronic records in lieu of paper for regulated activities, or where electronic versions are relied upon even if paper exists; exclusions apply to certain food records (§11.1(f)–(p)) and paper transmitted electronically.

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)), with systems and documentation readily available for FDA review; predicate rules remain enforceable, and FDA exercises discretion on some elements per 2003 guidance.

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; organizations must use risk-based periodic reviews tied to change control, validation lifecycles, and predicate rules.** Ongoing monitoring includes audit trail reviews, access checks (§11.10(d),(i)), and revalidation for changes; FDA expects demonstrable fitness-for-use during inspections.

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 enforcement actions including Form 483 observations, warning letters, product holds, recalls, and fines under predicate rules.** While FDA exercises discretion on validation/audit trails, enforced controls (access, signatures) failures lead to data integrity violations, as seen in warning letters citing inadequate records/investigations.

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; compliance stands alone based on predicate rules.** Organizations may align controls risk-based but must prioritize Part 11 criteria for FDA-regulated activities.

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.** Document scope decisions (e.g., in SOPs) per 2003 guidance to determine Part 11 records, classify systems as closed/open, and prioritize risk-based controls.

FISMA vs FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Standards Comparison

FISMA

Mandatory

2014

U.S. law mandating risk-based federal cybersecurity programs

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Mandatory

1997

FDA regulation for trustworthy electronic records and signatures

Quick Verdict

FISMA mandates risk-based cybersecurity for US federal agencies and contractors via NIST RMF, while FDA 21 CFR Part 11 ensures electronic records/signatures are trustworthy equivalents to paper for life sciences firms. Organizations adopt them for mandatory compliance and data integrity.

Cybersecurity

FISMA

Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

Medium

Implementation Time

18-24 months

Key Features

Mandates NIST Risk Management Framework (RMF)
Requires continuous monitoring and diagnostics
Enforces FIPS 199 system categorization
Demands annual independent IG evaluations
Extends to agencies and contractors

Electronic Records

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

21 CFR Part 11: Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Secure, time-stamped audit trails for record changes
Unique electronic signatures with non-repudiation controls
Access limitation and authority checks for users
Closed and open system control distinctions
Risk-based validation with enforcement discretion

Detailed Analysis

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

FISMA Details

What It Is

The Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) of 2014 is a U.S. federal law that modernizes the 2002 FISMA, establishing a mandatory risk-based framework for protecting federal information and systems' confidentiality, integrity, and availability. It requires agencies to implement comprehensive security programs using the NIST Risk Management Framework (RMF), a 7-step process emphasizing continuous monitoring over static compliance.

Key Components

**RMF stepsPrepare, Categorize (FIPS 199), Select/Implement/Assess (NIST SP 800-53 controls), Authorize, Monitor.
Continuous diagnostics and mitigation (CDM), incident reporting, SSPs, POA&Ms, ATOs.
Oversight via OMB policy, CISA operations, IG annual assessments using maturity models aligned to NIST CSF.

Why Organizations Use It

Federal agencies and contractors face legal mandates to avoid IG downgrades, contract losses, debarment. It reduces breach risks, enables federal market access, builds stakeholder trust, and aligns cybersecurity with mission resilience through evidence-based decisions.

Implementation Overview

Phased RMF execution: governance setup, asset inventory/categorization, control deployment, assessments, ongoing monitoring. Targets federal executive agencies, contractors handling federal data; requires automation, audits, scalable for enterprises to SMBs. (178 words)

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Details

What It Is

21 CFR Part 11, officially Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures, is an FDA regulation establishing criteria for electronic records and signatures to be trustworthy, reliable, and equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures. It targets FDA-regulated activities via a risk-based approach outlined in the 2003 guidance, applying narrowly to records relied upon instead of paper under predicate rules.

Key Components

**Subpart AGeneral provisions, scope, definitions (closed/open systems).
**Subpart BControls for closed (§11.10: validation, audit trails, access) and open (§11.30: encryption, digital signatures) systems; signature manifestation/linking.
**Subpart CElectronic signatures (uniqueness, multi-component controls, ID/password security). Built on enduring principles like data integrity (ALCOA+); no formal certification—compliance demonstrated via FDA inspections.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory for pharma, devices, biotech using e-records; prevents warnings, holds, recalls. Drives data integrity, inspection readiness, operational efficiency, quality investigations, and digital transformation benefits.

Implementation Overview

Phased, risk-based CSV (GAMP5): scoping, gap analysis, IQ/OQ/PQ validation, SOPs, training, supplier governance. Applies to US life sciences; ongoing via change control, audits. (178 words)

Key Differences

Aspect	FISMA	FDA 21 CFR Part 11
Scope	Federal info systems security, risk management	Electronic records/signatures trustworthiness
Industry	US federal agencies, contractors	Life sciences, pharma, medical devices
Nature	Mandatory federal law, risk framework	FDA regulation, equivalency criteria
Testing	Continuous monitoring, RMF assessments	System validation, IQ/OQ/PQ
Penalties	Contract loss, debarment, IG reports	Warning letters, product holds

Scope

FISMA

Federal info systems security, risk management

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Electronic records/signatures trustworthiness

Industry

FISMA

US federal agencies, contractors

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Life sciences, pharma, medical devices

Nature

FISMA

Mandatory federal law, risk framework

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

FDA regulation, equivalency criteria

Testing

FISMA

Continuous monitoring, RMF assessments

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

System validation, IQ/OQ/PQ

Penalties

FISMA

Contract loss, debarment, IG reports

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Warning letters, product holds

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about FISMA and FDA 21 CFR Part 11

FISMA FAQ

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 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

TISAX Tabletop Exercises for EV Battery Suppliers: Ransomware Drill Scripts and AAR Templates with 2025 ENX Podcast Breakdown

Practical TISAX tabletop scripts for EV battery suppliers facing 'Very High' ASLP. Download ransomware AAR templates, get 2024 ENX lessons & 2025 podcast on VDA

5 Ways Modern Compliance Software Makes Evolving Regulations Your Strategic Advantage

Discover 5 ways modern compliance software turns evolving regulations into strategic advantage. Automate monitoring, cut 3x non-compliance costs, stay audit-rea

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

PRINCE2 vs ISO 37001

Compare PRINCE2 vs ISO 37001: Project governance powerhouse meets anti-bribery compliance gold standard. Boost success, cut risks—discover key differences now!

ISA 95 vs EN 1090

Compare ISA 95 vs EN 1090: ISA-95 bridges ERP/MES for manufacturing integration; EN 1090 mandates steel/aluminium structural compliance. Gain expert insights for seamless ops and regulatory wins now!

MAS TRM vs CIS Controls

Discover MAS TRM vs CIS Controls: Compare Singapore's financial tech risk guidelines with prioritized cybersecurity safeguards. Uncover alignments, gaps & strategies for resilient compliance. Optimize now!

FISMA

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Quick Verdict

FISMA

Key Features

FDA 21 CFR Part 11

Key Features

Detailed Analysis

FISMA Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

Key Differences

Scope

Industry

Nature

Testing

Penalties

Frequently Asked Questions

FISMA FAQ

What is the primary objective of FISMA?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with FISMA?

Does FISMA require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for FISMA be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with FISMA?

Can FISMA be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing FISMA?

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?

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

TISAX Tabletop Exercises for EV Battery Suppliers: Ransomware Drill Scripts and AAR Templates with 2025 ENX Podcast Breakdown

5 Ways Modern Compliance Software Makes Evolving Regulations Your Strategic Advantage

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

PRINCE2 vs ISO 37001

ISA 95 vs EN 1090

MAS TRM vs CIS Controls