AutoGrant for research
Connect sponsor fit, scientific context, requirements, routing, and resubmission in one governed workflow.
AutoGrant helps research institutions evaluate sponsor and topic fit, convert solicitations into complete requirements plans, coordinate investigators and administrators, preserve scientific and institutional context, and carry submissions into reporting, resubmission, and renewal—with explicit human and institutional approval.
Requirements plan
Illustrative sample
Solicitation converted into assignments and routing
- Specific aimsPI draft in progress
- Biosketches4 of 5 collected
- Data-management planCompliance review
- Budget and subawardsWith finance
- Facilities and resourcesApproved language
The research problem
A strong proposal may require:
- Principal investigator and co-investigator input
- Sponsored-programs review
- Department and institutional approvals
- Detailed budgets and subawards
- Data-management and sharing plans
- Facilities and resources
- Human-subjects, animal, biosafety, export, or other compliance review
- Letters, collaborators, and external partners
- Sponsor-specific forms and portals
- Scientific and commercialization narratives
- Internal deadlines well before the sponsor deadline
AutoGrant creates a structured operating layer without replacing the institution's authoritative research-administration, finance, compliance, or submission systems.
Research profile
Approved context may include:
Sensitive, controlled, unpublished, proprietary, or regulated information requires explicit governance.
- Institutional capabilities and strategic research areas
- Investigator expertise, publications, and prior work
- Facilities, equipment, cores, and resources
- Preliminary data and evidence
- Collaborators and partner institutions
- Prior submissions, reviews, and awards
- Commercialization and translation capabilities
- Approved institutional language
- Research integrity and disclosure requirements
- Sponsor and program history
AI Judge for research
Sponsor and mechanism eligibility
Institution type, investigator status, career stage, registration, geography, small-business or partnership requirements, and mechanism-specific rules.
Scientific or technical fit
Whether the proposed work directly addresses the topic, mechanism, program goals, scientific gap, and expected impact.
Investigator and institutional readiness
Team expertise, preliminary data, collaborators, facilities, compliance path, budget support, internal routing, and deadline feasibility.
Competitive position
Novelty, significance, approach, team, environment, translational relevance, prior feedback, sponsor history, and likely field.
Strategic value
Alignment with the research portfolio, future funding path, investigator development, institutional capability, commercialization, or partnership strategy.
Requirements and routing
AutoGrant can organize:
- Sponsor questions and review criteria
- Page and format limits
- Biosketches and support documents
- Budget, justification, and subaward inputs
- Facilities and resource descriptions
- Data-management plans
- Letters and collaborator commitments
- Compliance dependencies
- Internal review dates
- Sponsor portal requirements
- Authorized organizational representative approval
Workflow
Investigator or research leader enters the concept.
Institutional and investigator context is assembled.
AI Judge evaluates sponsor, mechanism, topic, team, readiness, and strategic fit.
A human committee or named authority approves pursuit.
Requirements and internal deadlines are structured.
Investigators, administrators, finance, compliance, and collaborators receive clear assignments.
Drafts remain grounded in verified scientific and institutional sources.
Scientific, administrative, budget, compliance, and institutional reviews are recorded.
The authorized organizational representative approves final submission.
Feedback, decisions, reports, and resubmission strategy remain connected.
Resubmission
Preserve:
That history supports a governed resubmission rather than a rushed rewrite.
- Prior versions
- Reviewer critiques
- Scores and decisions
- Response strategy
- Evidence or preliminary-data changes
- Team changes
- Sponsor conversations
- Decisions not to resubmit
- Lessons for future mechanisms
Integrity and boundaries
AutoGrant should not:
- Invent citations, results, preliminary data, methods, or facilities
- Convert hypotheses into verified findings
- Hide AI use where sponsor or institutional policy requires disclosure
- Make human-subjects or compliance determinations
- Submit without institutional authorization
- Replace scientific peer review or research administration
Platform or Enterprise
Platform
Platform may fit smaller institutions, institutes, or teams using standard controls and approved context.
Enterprise
Enterprise may fit universities, health systems, research networks, laboratories, or multi-unit institutions requiring dedicated deployment, institutional identity, governance, integrations, stronger data controls, or customer-environment architecture.
Not sure which fits? Compare operating models
FAQ
Score the research opportunity before the internal deadline begins.
Evaluate sponsor fit, mechanism eligibility, scientific alignment, team readiness, competitive position, and the conditions required for a credible submission.