Accreditation Scheme for Conformity Assessment
FDA voluntary program in which accredited testing labs perform standards-based testing accepted with reduced FDA scrutiny.
Definition
Under ASCA, FDA accepts test reports from accredited labs against eligible standards (e.g., portions of IEC 60601-1 and ISO 10993) with a presumption of conformity, reducing the likelihood of additional information requests during review. ASCA was established under the FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017 and became a permanent program in 2023. Testing labs accredited by ASCA-recognized accreditation bodies can perform testing to eligible standards, such as IEC 60601 series and ISO 10993 biocompatibility standards. When a manufacturer submits an ASCA summary test report, FDA generally does not request the underlying data unless a specific concern arises.What this means in practice
Sponsors plan testing with ASCA-accredited labs to compress 510(k) review time on commonly tested standards.Examples
- A MedTech manufacturer submitting a 510(k) for an electro-medical device uses an ASCA-accredited lab for biocompatibility testing according to ISO 10993-1, significantly streamlining the biocompatibility review process.
- An in vitro diagnostic company leverages an ASCA-accredited facility for electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) testing against IEC 60601-1-2, reducing the timeline for FDA's assessment of EMC data.
- A company developing a new surgical tool sends its product for electrical safety testing per IEC 60601-1 to an ASCA-accredited lab, anticipating a more efficient FDA review of those specific test results.
- •Misinterpreting ASCA as a blanket approval for all testing, rather than a program for specific eligible standards and tests.
- •Failing to verify that the chosen laboratory is actively accredited under ASCA for the specific standard and test method required.
- •Submitting ASCA-generated test reports without proper documentation or in a format not aligned with FDA guidance for ASCA submissions.
- •Believing that ASCA eliminates all potential for FDA additional information requests related to testing, which is not guaranteed.
- •Not understanding that ongoing surveillance and re-accreditation are part of the ASCA program for laboratories, impacting the validity of older reports.
Frequently asked questions
Related terms
Grouped by themeEditor's picks
· Hand-selected related conceptsMore in Regulatory
· Same categoryFDA submission demonstrating a device is substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate.
Two alternative disclosure mechanisms in a 510(k) submission, a Summary is public on FDA's website; a Statement promises to share Safety & Effectiveness info on request.
Formal mechanism to ask FDA whether a product is a device and, if so, its likely classification.
510(k) variant that relies on FDA guidance, special controls, or recognized consensus standards.
Where this term appears across MedTech Terms.
Latest in MedTech
Sources
3 sourcesEvery citation below opens the original document. Each is graded against our source-tier hierarchy so you can see what rests on binding law versus commentary.
- 1FDA - Medical DevicesTier 2 VerifiedFDAfda.gov
- 2European Commission - Medical DevicesTier 2 VerifiedEuropean Commissionhealth.ec.europa.eu
- 3IMDRF DocumentsTier 2 VerifiedIMDRFimdrf.org
Inline markers like [1] jump to the matching reference above.