You’re Not Underperforming.
You’re Under-Supported.
Academic research teams are being asked to deliver more with the same people, the same budget, and systems that were never built for this level of complexity.
Download the One-Pager Academic Teams Use to Make the Internal Case for Better Tooling
In 5 minutes, you’ll have:
The real numbers behind "free" — including the hidden labor costs most teams never calculate
A ready-made framework for quantifying coordinator time in budget terms your finance office will recognize
Language that resonates with finance, IRB, and institutional leadership
Get the One-Pager
Academic research teams are being asked to do more with less.
The problem isn’t just staffing. It’s that your tools are quietly shifting operational cost onto your people — and it never shows up as a line item.
- 60–80 hours of setup work every time a new protocol launches — versus 15–20 with a purpose-built system
- 20–25 hours of monthly maintenance your coordinator handles manually, instead of running research
- Compliance gaps closed at the last minute — often surfacing as audit findings, not resourcing constraints
- Critical institutional knowledge living in one coordinator's head
- A $180,000* risk that looks like a tooling choice until an FDA inspector arrives
*That last point isn’t hypothetical. One academic site faced a $180,000 penalty and an 18-month study suspension when auditors found inadequate audit trails in their free EDC during an FDA inspection.
You’re not over-resourced—you’re overburdened by inefficient systems.
Pricing should reflect that reality, not make it worse.
See how our pricing supports academic teams.