Modern Funding Application Starts With AI Assistance: How TekstiAI is Transforming the Field

Researchers often spend weeks writing funding proposals when they could be focused on discovery. The complexity of today’s grant system drains creativity and slows innovation. TekstiAI is redefining how researchers find and write funding applications by bringing clarity, speed, and focus to a process that has long been a source of frustration. It is not replacing expertise, but rather giving the experts a chance to better focus on their research.

Timo Tuomi

• Industry Insights • Reading time: 11 minutes

The Demanding Reality of Grant Applications

Applying for research and development (R&D) funding, whether from EU programs or national agencies, is time-consuming and complex. Researchers often lament that they sometimes spend more time writing proposals and filling out forms than doing actual research (source). Overworked Grant writers on the other hand struggle to help researchers who are pressured to provide even "some kind of application" for the grant writers to review before deadlines.

What are the causes for this? For one, the requirements are highly complex and demanding. Funding proposals can easily run dozens of pages and must follow detailed guidelines. Every funding body has its own application forms, rules, and evaluation criteria, which applicants must master. For example, some programs use a two-stage process (an initial proposal or abstract, then a full proposal if shortlisted), while others require a full detailed plan from the start. Applicants must tailor each application to the specific funder's format and priorities which is a significant effort.

Grant funding is increasingly competitive, with relatively low success rates. In Horizon Europe (the EU's flagship R&D funding program), the average success rate is around 15-16%, meaning roughly 7 out of 10 proposals (many of them high-quality) still get rejected (source). National funding schemes often have similar odds. Studies have shown that preparing a single research grant proposal can take 30-40 full working days of a researcher's time (source). Consider that many academics submit multiple proposals per year, most of which will not be funded. That is a big investment of time with little return. One analysis in Australia estimated researchers spent over 500 person-years writing funding proposals in a year, with about 80% of that effort ultimately wasted on unsuccessful submissions, produced by a research centre that generated 284 submissions. It's no wonder a former Harvard professor quipped that some grants have a "net negative" value once you factor in the time spent applying (source).

The Challenge of Finding the Right Funding

A significant part of the struggle happens before the writing even begins meaning finding the right funding opportunity. The R&D funding landscape is vast: European Commission programs, national research councils, innovation agencies, private foundations etc. Identifying a grant that perfectly fits your research topic, goals, and eligibility is a task of itself. It often requires combing through databases and calls for proposals, interpreting jargon-heavy work programmes, and staying on top of new calls opening and closing. The search is time-consuming, but important. If you submit to the wrong call, even a great proposal will likely be rejected. As one guide put it, "identifying possible grantors is a time-consuming task, but it eventually brings benefits… Even the most appealing research proposal, if not sent to the right institution, is unlikely to receive funding." In other words, matching your project to the appropriate funding source demands substantial effort and expertise.

Complex Criteria and "Dark Art" of Proposal Writing

Once you have targeted a suitable funding call, the real work of writing the application begins. Every grant application must address official evaluation criteria in detail. For instance, European grants are scored on criteria such as "excellence", "Impact", and "implementation". You need to convincingly demonstrate your project's scientific excellence, its societal or economic impact, and the quality of your implementation plan (team, budget, work plan, etc.). Each of those broad criteria comes with sub-criteria and specific points that evaluators expect to see addressed. A successful proposal is not just about a good idea. It is also about checking all the boxes in the eyes of the reviewers.

The result is that proposals have become very detailed and technical documents. Researchers find themselves writing exhaustive sections on risk management, gender balance, data management, dissemination plans, and more. As Bob Bushaway of the University of Southampton noted, applications have grown so elaborate that selecting the best proposals has become "a bureaucratic sledgehammer". For every funded application, 15-20 others are rejected, representing a huge wasted effort for many.

In summary, the traditional grant application process is a perfect storm of information overload, strict criteria, repetitive paperwork, and high stakes. It takes researchers' time and energy, creates stress, and in extreme cases might even discourage innovation (when people stick to "safe" ideas they think reviewers will prefer).

A New Way: AI Tools Enter Grant Writing

Given the challenges above, it is no surprise that many have started looking to artificial intelligence (AI) for help. The past couple of years have seen an explosion of AI tools (especially those powered by large language models like GPT-4) that promise to assist with various writing / administrative / intellectual tasks. Grant writing is no exception. In fact, it is an ideal candidate for AI support, since much of the work involves preparing text under specific constraints and criteria. Recently, AI chatbots and writing assistants have been used to brainstorm ideas, draft proposal sections, edit text, and even proofread. The appeal is clear: these tools can generate text rapidly, help overcome writer's block, and potentially speed up the tedious parts of writing (source). In a Nature survey of over 1,600 scientists in 2023, 15% said they had already used generative AI to help write grant proposals. AI is quickly becoming a part of the researcher's toolkit, and funding applicants who learn to use it effectively will gain an edge in the near-future.

However, using general-purpose AI tools naively in grant writing can backfire. Leading research funders have issued cautions about AI. The European Research Council (ERC), for example, warned that using AI in writing a proposal "does not relieve the author from taking full and sole authorship responsibilities". Applicants are still fully accountable for their content, and misuse (like plagiarism or factual errors introduced by AI) can threaten scientific integrity. In practice, generic AI chatbots have some well-known limitations when applied to grant writing:

  • Lack of context about funders: A broad AI like ChatGPT doesn't inherently know the specific goals of a given funding program or the nuances of a particular call. As one analysis noted, "Generative AI tools can't grasp the unique aims of each competition or funder". They tend to produce generic text, which is dangerous in grants, where specificity and alignment with the funder's mission are critical.
  • No built-in compliance: Generic AIs won't automatically follow the required format or word limits of your application, nor ensure you've covered all required sections. They might ignore a crucial application question or fail to address a key evaluation criterion, simply because they do not have that procedural knowledge.
  • Risk of inaccuracies and "hallucinations": AI models often fabricate plausible-sounding information. They might invent a statistic or reference that looks impressive but is completely false (source). If such an error slips into a grant proposal, it could be catastrophic for credibility.
  • The confidentiality risk: feeding your proposal text into a public AI service could leak sensitive ideas. (Indeed, funders have urged applicants and reviewers not to paste confidential proposal text into public AI tools, to avoid intellectual property leakage). This is especially true in the EU: if you use US tools like ChatGPT or Gemini for your application you risk that all of this data goes to US servers outside GDPR and EU AI ACT protection.
  • Lack of nuance in writing: While AI can draft text, it may lack the persuasive narrative flow that human experts craft. A grant proposal needs a coherent story and must weave together objectives, methodology, and impact in a way that excites evaluators. Out-of-the-box AI might produce sections that don't connect logically or inspire confidence (source).

In short, AI has huge potential to ease the grant writing grind, but generic tools can fall short on the very things that matter most and are a cybersecurity risk. As one review found, most general AI assistants do well at basic drafting but "underperform on opportunity alignment, evidence gathering, and compliance - precisely where grants are won or lost". The good news is that this has sparked a new generation of specialized AI solutions tailored for grant writing and research funding applications. These tools aim to combine the best of both worlds: the efficiency of AI and the domain-specific knowledge and guidance needed for successful proposals. One such solution leading the charge is TekstiAI.

TekstiAI: AI-Powered Relief for Researchers and Grant Writers

TekstiAI is an AI tool designed specifically to help with research funding applications, from European Union grants to national R&D funding programs. Unlike generic writing AI, TekstiAI has been built with grant writers and researchers to address the specific pain points they face. Its goal is to make it faster and easier to craft high-quality proposals without sacrificing compliance, safety or quality. Here's how TekstiAI stands out:

  • Finding the Right Funding: One of TekstiAI's core features is funding discovery. The tool includes key funding instruments: in other words, it has up-to-date knowledge of major EU calls (like Horizon Europe, ERC, MSCA, etc.) as well as national funding opportunities (source). With TekstiAI, you can input information about your research idea or project and then help identify the most suitable funding calls to match the topic, goals, and eligibility. This saves researchers and grant offices countless hours scouring websites and databases. By quickly zeroing in on the best-fit funding opportunities, you increase your chances of success and avoid the trap of investing in the wrong application.
  • Intelligent Draft Feedback: TekstiAI doesn't just stop at finding calls. It becomes your AI grant writing coach. As you draft your proposal, TekstiAI provides feedback based on the official criteria and guidelines of the target funding call. In practice, this means it can analyze your text and check whether you have addressed all the points that evaluators will look for. For example, if a call's criteria emphasize "innovation potential" or "stakeholder engagement", TekstiAI will look for those elements in your draft and can prompt you if something is missing or unclear. TekstiAI's application tool includes application guidelines and provides intelligent feedback for each draft. Essentially, it is like having a virtual grant consultant review your proposal in real-time, ensuring you meet the funder's requirements. This feature helps writers craft more compelling narratives tightly aligned with what reviewers expect to see. No more second-guessing whether you have hit all the points on the evaluation form.
  • Built for Grants, Not Just Generic Text: Because TekstiAI is specialized for R&D funding applications, it is less likely to produce the kind of irrelevant or off-base content that a general AI might. Its knowledge base is oriented towards research contexts and funding language, so it can suggest text that sounds like it was written for a proposal. It can even help with structure and compliance, foundation grant, and can adapt its guidance accordingly.
  • Minimal Hallucinations, Maximum Trust: TekstiAI has been developed with a strong emphasis on accuracy and source-backed information. Thanks to its advanced text-processing and retrieval techniques, the tool's tendency to generate unfounded statements is greatly reduced. When you ask it to, say, provide evidence or data to support a need statement in your proposal, it is more likely to pull from reliable sources or prompt you to provide real references, rather than making something up. This means you can trust the suggestions more, though of course human verification is always required. The goal is to boost your productivity (by handling rote tasks and offering suggestions) while keeping you in control as the expert who curates and finalizes the content.

By combining these features, TekstiAI helps you create better applications, faster. Our clients say that it feels like a knowledgeable research administrator on your team: one who knows the ins and outs of funding schemes, reminds you of the rules, and gives creative input but never takes offense if you don't follow every suggestion.

Built on Trust: Data Security and AI Ethics

For any AI tool in the research arena, especially one dealing with potentially sensitive proposal content, compliance with data protection and ethics is important. TekstiAI has been designed from the ground up to respect user privacy and comply with regulations like the EU's GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) and the EU AI Act.

When you use TekstiAI, your data (such as your proposal text, project ideas, or personal details) is handled with strict confidentiality and security. TekstiAI ensures that any information you input is stored and processed securely (on EU-based servers) and is not used to train public models without permission. In fact, when evaluating AI tools for grant writing, experts emphasize GDPR alignment and data privacy guarantees as a key requirement (source). TekstiAI meets these standards, so users can adopt it without violating institutional data policies. By contrast, using a generic AI service might raise concerns. For instance, if you were to paste sections of your proposal into a public chatbot, you could inadvertently violate confidentiality rules and risk data leaks or data flowing to US servers. With TekstiAI, your data stays your data, and you can focus on writing knowing that privacy is not being compromised.

The AI Act places an emphasis on AI systems being [safe, transparent, and subject to human oversight](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence#:~:

text=What%20Parliament%20wanted%20in%20AI,legislation). TekstiAI embodies these principles: it functions as a collaborative tool under your control (the researcher is always the final decision-maker, maintaining "full and sole authorship responsibility" as the ERC advises). The tool is transparent in how it works. It can explain its suggestions or point to criteria in guidelines, so you know why it's recommending a change. And it's designed to be non-discriminatory and fair, simply assisting with content based on the criteria rather than injecting any bias. In short, TekstiAI is an ethical, trustworthy AI assistant.

Conclusion: Better Applications, Less Stress

By automating some time-consuming aspects of funding applications, from scouting suitable opportunities to cross-checking draft proposals against criteria, TekstiAI frees up researchers and grant writers to focus on their main strengths: the creative and intellectual core of their projects. The early adopters of AI in grant writing are already seeing benefits in efficiency, and as funding competition intensifies, using such tools may shift from an advantage to a necessity.

By adopting an AI co-pilot for your grant writing, you're not handing over the reins to a machine: you are equipping yourself (or your team) with a powerful assistant that helps you play to win. With an approachable yet professional tool like TekstiAI by your side, you can approach the next application confidently, knowing that you're leveraging the latest technology to put your best proposal forward.

Sources:

Previous article

Kunnat hyötyvät tekoälykehityksestä ensimmäisten joukossa

Timo Tuomi

Industry Insights