Performance by Technical Area

Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH

General Access to Medicine Management

Ranking: 17 Score: 2.63

Has a strong access-to-medicine strategy with board-level responsibility. Boehringer Ingelheim is one of 14 companies that performs strongly with regards to its newly launched access-to-medicine strategy, which is aligned with its corporate strategies. The strategy has a focus on availability, sustainable access models, awareness and adherence. The highest level of responsibility for access sits with a board-level committee.

No evidence of access-related incentives for employees. Boehringer Ingelheim does not disclose details of how it incentivises employees (financially and non-financially) to perform on access-related issues. It is one of only two companies that do not demonstrate evidence of such incentives.

Measures and monitors outcomes and progress; not impact. Boehringer Ingelheim measures and monitors progress and outcomes of access-to-medicine activities. It also publicly reports on objectives and targets. For example, for its Angels Initiative on patient care, Boehringer Ingelheim reports having trained 33,936 healthcare workers across various countries in the last two years. However, it does not report measuring the impact of its initiatives.

Discloses who it engages with, incorporates local perspectives into strategies. Boehringer Ingelheim publicly discloses which stakeholder groups it engages with on access issues, but does not publicly share its process for selecting who to engage with, nor its policy for ensuring responsible engagement. It does incorporate local stakeholder perspectives into the development of access strategies. 

Market Influence & Compliance

Ranking: 14 Score: 2.34

Does not report processes for ensuring third-party compliance with standards. Boehringer Ingelheim has a code of conduct relating to ethical marketing and anti-corruption, namely its Anti-Bribery and Anti-Corruption Policy. It provides compliance training for employees on an annual basis. It does not provide evidence of having formal processes in place to ensure compliance with standards by third parties. Further, expected performance for sales agents is based solely on sales targets. 

Internal control framework meets some Index criteria. Boehringer Ingelheim's internal control framework to ensure compliance meets some of the criteria looked for by the Index. Namely, it has an internal auditing department for the whole company, involving both internal and external resources—that also applies to third parties. It does not, however, report fraud-specific risk assessments, nor does it demonstrate evidence of having a monitoring system for non-compliance in the workplace, or procedures to segregate duties, to ensure decisions are checked by another party.

Below average transparency regarding access-related practices. Boehringer Ingelheim publicly discloses its policy positions on access-related topics (e.g., its corporate policy on supply chain integrity). It does not disclose political contributions in countries in scope. Boehringer Ingelheim discloses its membership of relevant institutions but not whether it provides financial support. The company discloses its policies for responsible engagement through its code of conduct. It does not publicly disclose its policy approach to payments made to healthcare professionals in countries in scope.

Research & Development

Ranking: 16 Score: 1.73

R&D commitment has limited public health rationale. Boehringer Ingelheim has made a specific commitment to R&D for diseases in scope, but it is not publicly available. Its R&D strategy for low- and middle-income countries lacks an evidence-based public health rationale including internal assessments and calls for action from external sources like WHO. It lacks time-bound strategies for completing R&D projects for diseases in scope and evaluating progress toward these targets. Boehringer Ingelheim has one of the largest pipelines in the Index with 111 projects. Boehringer Ingelheim is active in R&D for non-communicable diseases, for which a globally accepted priority list does not exist.

Access provisions in place for 29% (2/7) of late-stage candidates. Boehringer Ingelheim has a clear process in place to develop access plans during R&D. The process considers some R&D projects for diseases in scope, namely projects for non-communicable diseases where it is actively involved in low- and middle-income countries. In general, Boehringer Ingelheim develops access plans for R&D projects in Phase III of clinical development. To date, Boehringer Ingelheim has project-specific access provisions in place for two of its late-stage R&D projects, both of which are being conducted in-house.

No policy for post-trial access. Boehringer Ingelheim does not have a policy for ensuring post-trial access to treatments for clinical trial participants. Additionally, it does not disclose a commitment to registering newly approved products in all countries where clinical trials for these products have taken place.

Pricing, Manufacturing & Distribution

Ranking: 12 Score: 2.17

Does not publicly commit to equitable pricing or report a commitment to file to register new products in scope. Boehringer Ingelheim does not commit to filing its newest products for registration in countries in scope within one year of first market approval. Neither does it publicly commit to implementing equitable pricing strategies. However, it does have equitable pricing strategies for some products in scope of the Index.

No new products in scope filed for registration in the majority of priority countries. Boehringer Ingelheim has not filed any of its newest products for registration to date in more than half of the relevant priority countries (disease-specific subsets of countries with a particular need for access to relevant products). Its most widely registered product, for diabetes mellitus, is registered in five out of 12 possible priority countries. It also does not publicly share registration information for any of its products.

84% of products have equitable pricing strategies targeting priority countries. Boehringer Ingelheim's overall performance is average compared to peers in equitable pricing. It demonstrates evidence of having equitable pricing strategies for 84% of its products for diseases in scope. These strategies apply to an average of 41% of priority countries. All of these strategies apply inter-country pricing strategies; these take into account an average of two socioeconomic factors. Boehringer Ingelheim also applies an equitable pricing strategy to one further product informed by a public health rationale. 

Has both globally consistent recall guidelines for countries in scope and processes to track products. Boehringer Ingelheim has guidelines for drug recalls that apply to all countries in scope. It has processes to track the distribution of products in countries in scope to facilitate rapid and effective recalls.

Patents & Licensing

Ranking: 9 Score: 2.21

Does not publicly disclose patent statuses. Unlike most of its peers, Boehringer Ingelheim does not disclose the status of its products for diseases and countries in scope.

Uses non-assert declarations to enable generic supply. Boehringer Ingelheim has a non-assert declaration in place for one compound (for diseases in scope). Its non-assert declaration, for nevirapine (Viramune XR®), encompasses 135 low- and middle-income countries in scope. It has not issued any non-exclusive voluntary licensing agreements for products in scope.

Does not share IP assets with 3rd-party researchers. Boehringer Ingelheim reports no instances where it shares IP assets with third-party researchers developing products for diseases in scope, during the period of analysis.

Public commitment not to enforce patents in countries in scope. Boehringer Ingelheim commits publicly to neither file for nor enforce patents related to diseases within the scope of the Index. This commitment applies to most low-income, low-development countries, and in a subset of lower-middle income countries and upper-middle income countries.

Capacity Building

Ranking: 12 Score: 1.97

Eight initiatives included for evaluation. Boehringer Ingelheim has eight capacity building initiatives that were included for analysis by the Index: i.e., the initiatives demonstrably address a specific local need and involve local partners. Companies could submit a maximum of 25 initiatives across all areas for assessment; Boehringer Ingelheim submitted 24.

Focused on supporting pharmacovigilance systems. Boehringer Ingelheim has initiatives which meet inclusion criteria in all areas of capacity building, except R&D. Most of these initiatives are focused on pharmacovigilance capacity building and health system strengthening. Two of these health system strengthening initiatives are focused on stroke. 

One initiative meets all applicable good practice standards:
-Angels Initiative
Boehringer Ingelheim's remaining included initiatives typically have goals in place, but fall short on monitoring progress and outcomes and ensuring good governance structures are in place. 

Timely approach to reporting substandard or falsified medicines to relevant authorities. Boehringer Ingelheim provides evidence that it systematically reports confirmed cases of substandard or falsified medicines to local regulatory authorities within the period recommended by stakeholders (maximum seven days).

Product Donations

Ranking: 15 Score: 2.02

Responds to emergencies and humanitarian crises and tracks delivery. Boehringer Ingelheim donated medicines on the request of relief agencies. For example, during the period of analysis, it donated products in response to hurricanes in Haiti and the Dominican Republic. The company discloses that such ad hoc donations are aligned with international guidelines (issued by WHO, PQMD), and it works, for example, with Americares, MAP International and Direct Relief to ensure products are rapidly delivered. It also monitors the delivery of the product until received by end user.

No donation programmes covering diseases and countries in scope. Boehringer Ingelheim does not have any structured donations programmes that were active during the period of analysis in any countries in scope.

Learn more

View our detailed overview of each company’s performance in the Index, including breakdowns of their product portfolios and R&D pipelines.

Back to top |