Independent proposal quality assurance
PAP provides independent, evaluator-oriented audit and pre-evaluation for competitive research, innovation, education and impact proposals. We identify structural, evidence, consistency and evaluator-material weaknesses, then convert the findings into a prioritised repair roadmap.
Please do not submit confidential proposal files through the initial intake form. By submitting the form, you acknowledge the PAP Privacy Notice.
Independent · Evidence-traceable · Expert-reviewed · Confidential
Please do not send confidential proposal documents through the initial intake form. Document transfer arrangements are confirmed separately.
Approach
A proposal may contain excellent science, a valuable innovation or a socially important solution and still be difficult to evaluate convincingly. Weak links between the call, problem, evidence, objectives, activities, resources, outputs, outcomes and impact can reduce clarity and credibility at the point of evaluation.
PAP examines the proposal as an integrated argument and delivery system — not simply as a piece of writing.
PAP does not treat every imperfection as fatal. Findings are differentiated by evidence confidence, evaluator materiality, repair priority and repair risk. Potentially serious findings are challenged for false positives before they enter the final client report.
The objective is twofold: to reduce the risk of missed critical weaknesses and to avoid harmful overcorrection of elements that are already defensible.
PAP is an independent pre-submission quality-assurance service. It does not replace the applicant’s scientific expertise, write the proposal on behalf of the consortium or guarantee a funding outcome.
It provides a defensible diagnosis of how the submitted version may be read, questioned and evaluated.
Audit Scope
The audit scope is tailored to the call, action type, proposal stage and available documentation. Depending on the assignment, PAP may examine:
Alignment with the scope, expected outcomes, eligibility conditions and evaluation criteria of the selected call.
Whether the proposed methods, assumptions, evidence and implementation logic support the claims being made.
Whether the proposal defines a credible baseline, identifies the relevant gap and demonstrates a defensible advance beyond existing approaches.
Traceability across the problem, objectives, activities, outputs, outcomes, impact, indicators and resources.
Consistency between tasks, deliverables, milestones, responsibilities, effort, timing and requested resources.
Whether material scientific, technical, operational, partnership and delivery risks are identified and matched with credible mitigation measures.
The credibility of expected effects, pathways to uptake, quantitative claims, stakeholder logic and continuation beyond the funded period.
Whether partner roles, expertise, responsibilities and resource allocation support the proposed work.
Where relevant, PAP also examines prior evaluator feedback, resubmission logic and final submission readiness.
Services
For early-stage concepts before substantial proposal-writing effort has been committed.
Tests call fit, concept architecture, innovation positioning, evidence base and feasibility. Identifies concept-level gaps that may require redesign before full proposal development.
For complete or near-complete proposal drafts approaching submission.
Provides a full evaluator-oriented pre-evaluation and proposal stress test, covering the agreed criteria, cross-section consistency, evidence gaps and evaluator-material risks. The findings are converted into a prioritised repair roadmap.
View a sample PAP-2 audit →For teams that want both a full audit and a targeted assessment of the revised version.
Includes PAP-2 followed by re-audit of the agreed revisions. The re-audit checks whether material findings were addressed and whether the changes introduced new inconsistencies or repair risks.
Scope, required materials, timeline and fee are confirmed individually after intake. Submission of the intake form does not constitute acceptance of an assignment.
See the current pricing for PAP-1, PAP-2 and PAP-3, including the Early Client Programme offer.
PAP is designed for competitive programmes including Horizon Europe, MSCA, LIFE, Erasmus+, Jean Monnet, NATO Science for Peace and Security, the Visegrad Fund, national research programmes and foundation or NGO funding calls.
Each audit is anchored to the official documents and evaluation logic of the specific call. PAP is an independent service and is not affiliated with any funding body.
What You Receive
The client report separates the issue detected from the evidence supporting it, its likely relevance to evaluation and the priority of repair. Where appropriate, the analysis also identifies the risk that a proposed correction could weaken an otherwise defensible part of the proposal.
The report is designed to answer five practical questions:
Findings are consolidated into a prioritised repair roadmap so that the proposal team can focus first on weaknesses with the greatest potential evaluation consequence.
Where a score or readiness assessment is included, it is a diagnostic estimate based on the available version and call documentation — not a prediction or guarantee of the funding decision.
PAP-2 demonstration sample
This public demonstration shows the structure, depth and practical outputs of a PAP-2 Full Proposal Audit. It is based on a fully synthetic Jean Monnet Module proposal created specifically for methodological testing and public demonstration.
Service: PAP-2 — Full Proposal Audit
Proposal type: Jean Monnet Module
Report length: 12 pages
Status: Fully synthetic public demonstration
This is a demonstration based on a fully synthetic proposal. It contains no client materials, personal data or confidential information. The diagnostic score is not a prediction or guarantee of funding.
The sample includes:
Process
Provide basic information about the call, proposal stage, deadline, requested service and known concerns. Do not upload confidential proposal files at this stage.
PAP reviews the request and confirms whether the assignment can be accepted, which materials are required, the audit scope, timeline, fee and, where needed, NDA arrangements.
The exact proposal version and supporting documents to be audited are identified before analysis begins. This preserves traceability between findings and source materials.
The proposal is examined against the official call documents, evaluation criteria, internal logic, evidence base and agreed audit dimensions. Material findings are reviewed and potentially serious findings are challenged for false positives.
PAP provides an expert-reviewed audit report and a prioritised repair roadmap. The proposal team retains responsibility for all final decisions and revisions.
Under PAP-3, the revised proposal is assessed against the agreed findings and checked for newly introduced inconsistencies or repair risks.
Short answers about PAP services, timelines, audit outputs, and the handling of confidential materials.
PAP is an independent pre-submission audit of a grant proposal. We read the materials from an evaluator’s perspective and test their alignment with the call, project logic, strength of evidence, cross-section consistency, and implementation credibility. The report shows what weakens the proposal, why it matters, and what should be repaired first.
Yes. The report has two levels of explanation. The first part presents the decision, main problems, and sequence of actions in plain language. The second part provides professional tables, references to criteria and proposal sections, and detailed checks of evidence, risks, and internal links for a grant specialist or an experienced team.
The right service depends on the stage of the proposal.
If you are unsure, describe the current state of your materials in the initial form. PAP will recommend an appropriate format or explain honestly if the request needs to be narrowed or declined.
Every request is screened individually before an assignment is accepted. An audit is possible when the official call documents are available, the evaluation criteria are clear, and PAP has sufficient subject-matter competence to provide a reliable opinion. If these conditions are not met, we will propose a narrower scope or decline the assignment.
The earlier a problem is identified, the less costly it is to repair. Use PAP‑1 to test the idea before drafting the full proposal. PAP‑2 requires a near-final proposal that the team is ready to lock temporarily for the audit. PAP‑3 is appropriate only when the schedule leaves enough time for both revision and re-audit.
The standard timeline depends on the service and starts after the complete package has been received, the scope confirmed, and the proposal version locked.
The exact timeline is confirmed before work begins. An urgent audit is accepted only after its scope and practical feasibility have been checked.
There is no single minimum because it depends on the proposal volume and selected service. PAP‑2 requires the standard 7–10 working days plus separate time for the team to make repairs. PAP‑3 also requires a revision period and 3–5 working days for the re-audit, so it may be unsuitable close to a deadline. PAP will not accept an assignment that cannot be completed professionally within the available time.
In some cases, a separately agreed limited audit is possible. However, reviewing one section cannot support a readiness decision for the whole proposal because many weaknesses occur between the objectives, activities, budget, outputs, and impact. A limited-section review is not a standard PAP‑2 or PAP‑3 assignment and is scoped separately.
The package depends on the service, but PAP always needs the official call documents and the version of the materials to be reviewed. For PAP‑1, this may include a concept note and descriptions of the problem, objectives, target groups, and intended results. PAP‑2/PAP‑3 normally require the full proposal, work plan, budget tables, and substantive annexes where they affect the evaluation. The final checklist is confirmed before the audit begins.
Submitting the form does not mean that the assignment has been accepted. PAP first checks whether the request fits its competence, the available time, any potential conflict of interest, and the required scope. The service, timeline, fee, confidentiality terms, and file-transfer method are then agreed. Only after that does the team provide the full materials and lock the version for audit.
The client receives a structured report with a clear decision and a prioritised repair plan. The main part explains the proposal’s condition, its most important weaknesses, and the recommended sequence of actions in plain language. Professional annexes provide detailed findings, references to criteria and proposal sections, and analyses of evidence, internal inconsistencies, risks, and repair completion. The exact set of tables depends on PAP‑1, PAP‑2, or PAP‑3.
No. PAP diagnoses weaknesses and defines repair requirements, but it does not write the proposal on the team’s behalf. For each material finding, we explain what was identified, why it affects the evaluation, where the problem occurs, and what a successful repair should achieve. Final content decisions and wording remain the applicant’s responsibility.
No. These are not standard PAP deliverables. The audit may flag wording that obscures the logic, creates a contradiction, or fails to address a criterion. Full proofreading, translation, and line-by-line language editing require a separate service and agreement.
No. No independent audit can guarantee an evaluator’s decision or funding. PAP helps identify weaknesses before submission and reduces the risk of losing points because of problems with logic, evidence, criterion alignment, or implementation. The relevant programme authority always makes the final decision.
No. It is an independent diagnostic assessment. Where the call provides a clear official scoring model, PAP may give a reasoned indicative score or range by criterion. Where a precise numerical estimate would be unreliable, we use a qualitative conclusion. PAP does not promise a mechanical “score increase” after repairs.
Yes, but the re-audit is included specifically in PAP‑3. Standard PAP‑3 covers one full audit of the initial locked version and one targeted re-audit of one consolidated revised version. Additional cycles, a new concept, or a materially redesigned project require a new agreement. PAP‑2 does not include a re-audit.
The fee is fixed before work begins after the initial information has been reviewed. It depends on the proposal’s stage, volume and complexity, the number of official documents and criteria, technical depth, consortium structure, timeline, and any need for a re-audit or specialist expertise. Work does not begin until the scope, timeline, and fee have been agreed.
Do not upload the full proposal or other confidential files through the initial form. Once the request has been accepted, PAP agrees the transfer method, access, retention period, and deletion procedure with the client. These conditions are recorded in the engagement confirmation and the applicable privacy or confidentiality notice. Deletion requests are handled in accordance with those agreed terms.
AI may assist with technical text comparison, table construction, and the detection of possible inconsistencies, but it does not make final audit decisions. All material findings, priorities, and recommendations are reviewed by a human expert. Confidential client materials are not used to train public models and are not entered into unapproved public services.
Not sure which service you need?
Briefly describe the call, current stage, and deadline in the initial form. Do not attach confidential files at this stage.
Please do not submit confidential proposal files through the initial intake form. By submitting the form, you acknowledge the PAP Privacy Notice.
Confidentiality and AI Use
Confidential proposal materials should not be transferred until the assignment, document-transfer process and confidentiality conditions have been confirmed. An NDA may be completed before document transfer where required.
PAP may use AI-assisted tools to support structured analysis, cross-consistency checks and defect detection. AI-assisted output is not treated as a final finding by default. Material findings, evaluator-materiality assessments and repair priorities receive expert review.
Anonymised audit metadata may be retained for internal quality control only where this has been agreed. Confidential proposal text is not included in retained quality-control materials unless separately agreed.
PAP is an independent proposal quality assurance and pre-evaluation practice built around a structured, evaluator-oriented methodology. Its analytical model integrates expert judgement, evidence-to-claim traceability, cross-section consistency checks and AI-assisted workflows to identify weaknesses that may materially affect evaluation and convert the findings into a prioritised repair roadmap.
Each assignment is conducted under expert oversight. Where a proposal requires specialist domain input, relevant expertise may be engaged with the client’s approval and under the same confidentiality conditions. All material findings and repair priorities remain subject to human expert review.
Start with a short, non-confidential intake form. Please do not submit proposal documents at this stage. The audit scope, document-transfer process and confidentiality conditions will be confirmed before any materials are received.
Open the intake formPlease do not submit confidential proposal files through the initial intake form. By submitting the form, you acknowledge the PAP Privacy Notice.
For general enquiries, email contact@papaudit.com. Please do not attach proposal documents or confidential materials before the document-transfer and confidentiality conditions have been agreed.