Skip to content
IdeaScore
Solutions · Universities

Run your seed fund and innovation-cell calls without a spreadsheet marathon

Institute seed funds, innovation-cell grants and student competitions all run on the same rhythm: a form, a busy faculty jury, and a governing body that expects a ranking it can defend. IdeaScore carries the whole call, and can sit on your own server if that is what your IT office needs.

Book a demoSee how it works
Who this is for

Three people, one call

Innovation cell administrator

Builds the form once each cycle, opens the window, and triages incoming applications without touching a spreadsheet.

Faculty evaluator

Scores a batch between lectures on a laptop, against a rubric someone else set up, with no software to install.

Student or faculty applicant

Fills a long form across several sittings, uploads a pitch deck, and can see exactly where the application stands.

A team sorting a stack of applications into trays beside a whiteboard on review day
Typical programme

A seed-fund call, start to disbursement

The stages most institute funds already run, now with one system carrying every handoff.

  1. Call opens

    A registration window with a capacity limit and a public link goes out to departments.

  2. Faculty screening

    Reviewers triage for completeness and flag resubmissions from an earlier cohort.

  3. Jury round

    Faculty and invited industry evaluators score against a shared rubric, in their own time.

  4. Pitch day

    Shortlisted teams present live, with a timer and a projector board the room can see.

  5. Disbursement

    The committee report goes to governance and funding follows the ranking it approved.

Collect

One form for the whole institute, built once a cycle

Build a multi-stage form with the fields an institute application actually needs — team details, stage of development, a TRL selector, a department question that only appears for faculty applicants. Attach guidance documents, set a capacity and a closing date, and applicants save drafts and resume across sittings.

Explore applications
Seed Fund 2026 · Cohort III

Venture

Venture nameShort text
SectorSelect
Stage of developmentSelect (TRL)
DepartmentSelect
Show when applying as is faculty
Pitch deckFile upload · PDF up to 20 MB
Evaluate

A ranking your faculty jury can stand behind

Evaluators score against a weighted rubric on their own time, on their own laptop. Calibration normalises the strict scorer and the generous one before the leaderboard is final, and a second round can promote only the shortlist forward for a jury day.

  • Conflict-of-interest declarations before assignment
  • Blind review when identity should not colour a score
  • Human, AI and blended leaderboard views
Explore evaluation

Leaderboard

5 of 126 teams · ranked by human score

  1. 1
    Halcyon Grid#0142
    46.5 / 50 (93%)
  2. 2
    Quorum Bio#0127
    43 / 50 (86%)
  3. 3
    Farmlight#0139
    41.5 / 50 (83%)
  4. 4
    Tessel Labs#0118
    39 / 50 (78%)
  5. 5
    Orrin Health#0083
    37 / 50 (74%)
Decide

Pitch day and a report your governing body will accept

Run the live pitch session with a timer and a projector board the room can watch update. Afterwards, export the committee report as Excel or HTML — the same ranking the jury produced, ready for the meeting that approves disbursement.

Explore pitch day and reports
Seed Fund 2026 · Cohort IIINow pitching

Farmlight

04:32
  • 1Halcyon Grid46.5
  • 2Quorum Bio43
  • 3Farmlight41.5

Committee report

Seed Fund 2026 · Cohort III · .xlsx

Generated 2 min ago · scheduled weekly to the committee

What teams use most

What university teams use most

  • Rubric with weights and descriptors

    The same criteria every evaluator sees, so a governing body can trust the ranking it is handed.

  • Calibration across evaluators

    Z-score normalisation adjusts for a strict examiner sitting next to a generous one.

  • Conditional multi-stage forms

    Ask a question only when it applies — a department field for faculty applicants, a co-founder panel for teams.

  • Resubmission and duplicate detection

    A student reapplying next cohort, or two overlapping team entries, is flagged before anyone reviews it twice.

  • Self-hosting on your own server

    Docker or Apache with PM2 on a VM your IT office already runs, if data has to stay on campus.

  • Committee Excel export

    A ranked, ready-to-circulate spreadsheet for the governing body meeting, generated on demand.

  • Applicant portal with magic-link sign-in

    No password to lose between sittings; applicants resume a draft and track status from any device.

  • Audit log

    Every approval, rejection and reopened decision is timestamped, for when a department asks why.

Questions

Frequently asked

Can IdeaScore run on our institute's own server?
Yes. IdeaScore runs as a Docker deployment or on Apache with PM2 on a VM your IT office controls — the way our first university tenant runs it today — or in our cloud if you would rather not manage a server.
Do faculty evaluators need training to use it?
No installation and nothing to learn beyond opening a link: an evaluator sees a batch of applications, a rubric with descriptors, and a score field. Most reviewers finish their first application without help.
Can we run more than one call a year on the same account?
Yes. Programmes are independent inside an organisation, so a seed fund, an innovation-cell grant and a student competition can each keep their own form, evaluators and rubric.
How does IdeaScore stop the same student applying twice by mistake?
Resubmission and duplicate detection flags a new application that resembles an earlier one, so reviewers see the history before they decide, rather than scoring it cold.

See IdeaScore run a call with your own rubric

A 30-minute walkthrough with a founder, using your programme's form and criteria.

Book a demoStart free