Research development offices
Nobody on your faculty gets left behind
Your problem is not finding grants. It is that some of your faculty stopped trying, you know roughly who, you cannot scale yourself to sit with each of them, and you have very little visibility into what is actually happening across the college.
Not ready to sign up? Start with a free template.
The uncomfortable part of the job
New faculty who never cracked the system, and mid-career faculty who tried twice and stopped, do not announce that they have given up. They just stop appearing in the pipeline. You know it is happening. You cannot fix it one office hour at a time, and the ones who need you most are the least likely to ask.
That is a capacity problem you have been told to solve with encouragement, and encouragement does not scale either.
The expertise gap runs in both directions
You know grants and you do not know their subject. They know their subject and they do not know grants. Neither of you can write the other’s half, which is why the help you can give is real but always partial.
This is the single best fit for our writer that exists in any market we serve, because it drafts from the researcher’s own documents. You do not need to understand quantum optics to help a quantum-optics professor put an application together. Their papers and protocols supply the substance; the assembly is what gets taken off both of you.
What you can finally see
The admin view is a scoreboard across everyone in your program.
- Who is applying, and who is not
- Applied, won, lost, and pending, per person. The zeros in the applied column are the answer to the question you have been guessing at. Read it monthly and the quiet ones stand out.
- Readiness across the whole group
- An average readiness score with the distribution behind it, so you can tell a strong group with a long tail from an evenly weak one. Those need completely different interventions and the difference is invisible from submission counts.
- What was requested and what was won
- Rolled up across everyone, which is the number your dean asks for. It fills in as your faculty record outcomes.
- Onboarding, per invitation
- How many faculty you invited against how many actually started. The quiet failure in every program like this is the people who never logged in, and this is where they show up.
You cannot read their work, deliberately
Clicking a faculty member does not open their proposals or documents, and there is no code path that would let it. You see the scoreboard, never the work product.
That is the answer to the question a suspicious PI will ask you in the first week, and it is worth being able to answer it flatly. Their drafts stay theirs. If they want your eyes on something they share that file with you, and they can revoke it. The enforcement is documented.
How it fits your institution
Quillify is not a research administration system. It works alongside whatever your sponsored programs office runs. It covers discovery, eligibility, deadlines, drafting from a researcher’s own material, and outcome tracking across a group.
You find the funding and draft here, then hand the proposal into your institution’s routing, approval, and submission process as usual. Internal approvals, effort reporting, and subawards stay in your institution’s systems. A person with institutional credentials submits through Grants.gov, ASSIST, or Research.gov.
Enterprise plans support institutional single sign-on. A completed HECVAT is available on request.
Results
University research offices are among the hundreds of customers we have served. Quillify drafted the application below, and a person spent about four hours editing it before it was filed. Your faculty get the same split: Quillify assembles the draft and the expert reviews it.
Quillify wrote this application. Grantvest filed it, won $300,000 from a competitive state innovation program in 2024, and ran the award.
Free templates
- NIH Specific Aims page template
A free NIH Specific Aims page template: the opening gap, your hypothesis, two or three aims, and the payoff, all on one page.
- NSF Project Summary template
A free NSF Project Summary template with the three required parts: Overview, Intellectual Merit, and Broader Impacts.
- AI-use policy for grant work template
A free AI-use policy template for grant work: approved tools, what never goes in, human review, funder rules, and disclosure. For universities and nonprofits.
- Budget justification template
A free budget justification template: fill-in wording for each cost category that shows the arithmetic and explains why the project needs it.
Talk to us about your faculty.
Or try it on a single proposal first. Both are reasonable places to start.