PayLineHQ
Trusted by NIH-funded researchers · 25 years · $7M+ awarded

Stop your NIH grant from getting triaged.

PayLineHQ runs your application through a simulated Study Section before NIH does. Three reviewer perspectives, three-pass quality review, citation verification, and a competitive impact score — so you fix what real reviewers would have flagged, before they count.

No credit card · No commitment · 30 sec to first reviewer score

$7M+

in NIH awards

3

independent reviewer sims

5–7 days

to submission-ready

342Grants peer-reviewed$7.2M+in NIH awards+12 ptsAvg. impact-score lift63Active submissions1,847Citation hallucinations caught30 daysRefund if not worth submitting342Grants peer-reviewed$7.2M+in NIH awards+12 ptsAvg. impact-score lift63Active submissions1,847Citation hallucinations caught30 daysRefund if not worth submitting
The Process

From draft to submission-ready in 5–7 days

You stay the principal investigator. We bring the structure, reviewer psychology, and the QA your draft needs.

1

Describe your science

Plain language. We extract aims, mechanism, target institute, and commercialization angle. You provide the science — we add the structure.

2

We write & simulate review

Every section drafted to NIH conventions. Three independent reviewer personas score it before delivery. Weak spots come back to you with the receipts.

3

Certified & delivered

Three-pass quality review: science, NIH compliance, simulated impact score. If the score isn't competitive, we rewrite. You get a submission-ready package.

Featured Capability

Peer review before you submit

Our Study Section simulation surfaces the same weaknesses real reviewers will flag — so you fix them before they count.

Study Section Simulation Results

Mechanism: SBIR Phase I · Simulated panel: NCI SEP · FOA: PA-24-059

Impact Score

24

Competitive (Excellent)

Dr. Sarah Chen

Basic Scientist · Molecular Biology

2

  • Strong scientific rationale and clearly stated hypothesis
  • Excellent preliminary data supporting feasibility
  • Well-qualified PI with relevant track record

Concern: Innovation claim could be more precisely articulated against existing literature

Dr. Marcus Williams

Translational Researcher · Oncology

3

  • Compelling clinical significance and clearly defined unmet need
  • Realistic timeline with measurable Phase I milestones

Concern: Sample size justification should include explicit statistical power calculation for primary endpoint

Dr. Patricia Rodriguez

Biostatistician · Clinical Trials Design

2

  • Well-designed experimental approach with appropriate controls
  • Alternative strategies clearly identified and justified

Concern: Missing data handling plan for primary endpoint needs to be specified

Certified for delivery — Impact score 24 is competitive. Concerns addressed before submission. Ready for NCI.

How we compare

Across every dimension biotech founders actually care about.

FeatureHuman consultantGeneric AIPayLineHQ
Cost$5k–$15k$20–50/mo$2,500 + 3% if funded
Timeline4–8 weeksInstant (unreviewed)5–7 business days
NIH expertiseVariesGeneric25 years · $7M+ awarded
Peer review simulation✗ Not offered✗ Not offered✓ Always included
Citation verificationManual✗ Hallucinations✓ 5 databases verified
FOA-specific complianceManual✗ None✓ Automated
Quality certification✗ None✗ None✓ Three-pass mandatory
You own the IPUnclear✓ Always
Success-aligned pricing✗ Full fee✗ Subscription✓ 3% if funded
Founder POV

Why I built PayLineHQ

I'm Eddie Bannerman-Menson, founder of COARE Holdings. We're developing DCLK1-targeted CAR-T cell therapy for ovarian cancer. Like every biotech founder, my path to the clinic runs through non-dilutive funding — primarily NIH SBIR/STTR.

I spent years writing applications, waiting 9 months, watching them get triaged for fixable reasons — vague innovation framing, underpowered statistics, citations that didn't quite support the claim. Reviewers caught what I couldn't see. There was no way to simulate their perspective before submission.

PayLineHQ is what I wished existed. It runs your application through three independent reviewer simulations using 25 years of NIH peer-review psychology, scores it against real funding lines, and tells you exactly what to fix before NIH does. The same engine that's now writing my COARE submissions.

If it works for me, it works for you.

Pricing

Pick the path that fits your timeline

Self-Serve for hands-on PIs. Submit-Ready when you'd rather we drive.

For hands-on PIs

Self-Serve

$149/month

You write. The app simulates peer review, verifies citations, and runs FOA-specific compliance checks every time you save.

  • Study Section simulation engine
  • Three-pass quality review on demand
  • FOA-specific compliance checking
  • Citation verification across 5 databases
  • All NIH mechanisms supported
  • DOCX export · unlimited revisions
Try free for 14 days
Most Popular
When you'd rather we drive

Submit-Ready

$2,500upfront

+ 3% success fee if funded

We draft the entire application, run three peer-review simulations, certify it, and deliver a submission-ready package. 5–7 business days.

  • Complete NIH application — every section
  • Commercialization Potential narrative
  • Three-pass quality certification
  • Study Section simulation with impact score
  • Citation verification (5 databases)
  • FOA-specific NIH compliance check
  • DOCX + PDF submission package
  • 90-day post-delivery revision support
Book a consult

Phase II / Fast Track from $4,500 · R01/R21 from $3,500 · Full pricing

Common questions

Your science deserves to be reviewed before NIH does.

Start free in the app, or book a call and we'll write the whole thing.