Scholiad
—I — Partnerships

Institutional partnerships for humanities scholarship

Departments, graduate programs, research centers, and libraries partner with us to streamline opportunity discovery for their communities. Plain pricing, channel-agnostic onboarding, no surveillance.

Talk to us → View pricing

We read every institutional inquiry and reply personally.

At a glance What you get
I Multi-seat licensing
department / center
II Channel-agnostic onboarding
email or call
III Discipline coverage
26 fields, 20 regions
IV Quarterly review
usage + fit
Inquiry → pilot Async-first

Indicative; tailored per institution

§ II · The partnerships brief

Departments, programs, centers, libraries

Each partner type works differently. We adapt scope, pricing, and onboarding to the unit's actual workflow rather than asking the unit to adapt to our product.

I

Departments

Per-faculty or per-graduate-cohort licensing for departments tracking opportunities for their members.

Typical seats
II

Graduate programs

Cohort licensing aligned with program admission cycles; renewal aligned with academic year.

Typical seats
III

Research centers

Project-affiliated researcher coverage; flexible seat allocation for centers with rotating membership.

Typical seats
§ III · Partnership pathway

How a partnership begins

We work with departments and graduate schools in two stages — a focused pilot first, then an institution-wide partnership. Pricing is scoped to each engagement; there is no public price list. Start with a conversation.

Stage 1

Guided Pilot

One department or program, one semester

  • A single department or program for one term — roughly 20–50 participants, no institution-wide IT rollout
  • White-glove onboarding and success metrics agreed up front
  • Direct posting: push your openings to Scholiad through our intake API — they appear immediately, marked a direct, primary source
  • Per-institution AI control: you decide which AI feedback tools your participants may use, enforced across the platform and audit-trailed
  • Full access to Scholiad's verified humanities opportunity and funding database
Scoped to your department
Schedule a conversation →
Stage 2

Institutional Partnership

Institution-wide or multi-department

  • An institution-wide or multi-department license, scoped to your structure
  • HECVAT and security-practices documentation provided for procurement review
  • An annual agreement aligned to your fiscal year, with usage reporting
  • Everything in the pilot — direct posting, per-institution AI control, and full database access — across the partnership
  • A branded institution profile is in development for founding partners
Institution-wide
Schedule a conversation →
§ IV · What partners receive

Substantive deliverables, not engagement loops

Every partnership delivers concrete artifacts on a stated cadence. No engagement metrics in invoices; no attention-extracting design.

I

Quarterly opportunity report

Discipline-filtered summary of opportunities surfaced for partner-affiliated researchers; redacted to respect individual privacy.

II

Onboarding session

Channel-agnostic onboarding (async email exchange or live call at partner's preference) covering setup, discipline preferences, deadline calendars.

III

Stakeholder review

Annual review meeting with department / center leadership covering coverage gaps, feature requests, renewal decisions.

IV

Discipline tuning

Adjustment of discipline filters to match partner unit's actual research profile, refreshed at renewal.

Cadence: quarterly Async-first
§ V · Configurable AI per institutional contract

Institutions choose whether students see AI feedback features

Scholiad's AI advisor features — structural feedback on cover letters, research statements, and CVs — are architecturally separable from the platform's core job-matching catalog. Institutional contracts include a per-institution toggle that disables AI advisor features for all researcher accounts provisioned under the institution's seat license.

Some institutional academic-integrity policies treat AI-assisted writing review differently than peer review or writing-center feedback. Scholiad respects those policy decisions — the configuration is yours, not ours.

When AI advisor features are disabled by institutional policy, researchers retain full access to the matching catalog, posting alerts, saved searches, and application tracking. Only the AI advisor feedback features — CV gap analysis, CV tailoring suggestions, cover-letter feedback, research-statement review, portfolio coherence audit, dual-source CV gap analysis, and venue discovery — are gated. The audit-trail architecture means that when AI features are enabled, each interaction is logged with the researcher's original draft and the AI feedback; when the researcher submits a revised draft, that revision is kept alongside them. The log is exportable for institutional review.

The relevant institutional comparison is not AI-assisted review versus none. Researchers who want AI feedback on job materials can find it off-platform, where the institution has no visibility. When AI advisor features are enabled under an institutional contract, that use is observable, bounded to feedback on the researcher's own authored draft, and audit-trailed. Disabling the features via the per-institution toggle removes that institutional visibility — it does not remove a researcher's access to general-purpose AI elsewhere.

This is enforced at the application layer, not the marketing layer. Subscription tier determines feature access; per-institution AI-disable is a contract-time configuration setting that the platform's feature gates consume everywhere downstream. Automated test coverage enforces the gating, so AI features cannot accidentally be surfaced to researchers at an institution that has disabled them. The audit trail is recorded as append-only ledger entries; the application layer provides no path to delete or retroactively edit an AI interaction record.

§ V.5 · Procurement readiness

What institutional procurement teams ask about Scholiad

§ Audit trail

Every AI interaction is recorded as an append-only audit record — the researcher's original draft, the AI feedback, and, when the researcher submits a revision, the revised draft. The application layer provides no path to delete or retroactively edit these records. Records are exportable for institutional review.

§ AI feature disable

A per-institutional-contract toggle disables AI advisor features for all researcher accounts. Researchers retain catalog, alerts, and matching; AI features simply aren't available.

§ Data minimization

Drafts sent to AI advisor features run only under commercial terms that contractually prohibit the provider from training on the content, and a researcher's surname is removed before text is sent to the AI provider. Scholiad does not use submitted documents to train any AI model and selects its AI providers accordingly. Specific vendor data-handling terms are available on request.

§ Enforced guarantees

Scholiad's core integrity constraints — conditional framing, audit-trail preservation, and an anti-fabrication discipline, with source-citation on the grounded-appraisal and advisor paths — are enforced by automated tests in the production codebase, not just policy. The scope and design of these constraints is available for discussion in a procurement conversation.

§ Configuration & administration

Seat management, the AI feature toggle, and audit-log review are configured at contract time by the Scholiad team. Roster and roster-revocation changes are handled directly by the team, at no additional charge.

Scholiad does not yet hold its own SOC 2 Type II attestation; our infrastructure provider publishes SOC 2 Type II documentation, and our security-practices documentation and completed procurement security questionnaires are available on request. Reach out to the team to start a procurement conversation.

Start an institutional partnership conversation →
§ VI · Founding partner programs

Early access for institutions that shape the platform

Founding partners co-develop Scholiad's discipline coverage and institutional features.

Founding-partner agreements are designed for institutions that want to establish the platform's discipline coverage and feature roadmap together with the team — not merely consume the product. In return for early commitment and structured feedback, founding partners get direct roadmap input and program terms agreed at contract time.

The institutions that join early shape what scholarship discovery looks like for everyone who follows.

Founding partners help shape the platform's discipline coverage and feature roadmap. Program terms — including early-cohort benefits, priority onboarding, direct input into roadmap priorities via quarterly feedback sessions, and early access to new features before general availability — are agreed at contract time.

Founding partner · I

Department Founding Partner

Contact us

Program terms agreed at contract time.

Who this is for Humanities or social-science departments with 10–60 active researchers seeking opportunities.

What we ask

  • Quarterly 30-minute feedback session with a department representative
  • Written summary of coverage gaps at each annual renewal
  • Permission to list the institution as a founding partner (logo + name)

What you receive

  • Full platform access for up to 30 seats
  • Founding-partner program terms agreed at contract time
  • Direct roadmap input channel
  • Early access to new features before general release

Seat count adjustable at renewal.

Founding partner · II

Program Founding Partner

Contact us

Cohort-aligned licensing for graduate programs; terms agreed at contract time.

Who this is for Graduate programs with an active job-market cohort of 15–40 candidates per cycle.

What we ask

  • Cohort-cycle timing feedback (placement officer or DGS)
  • One case-study contribution per year (anonymized)

What you receive

  • Full platform access for up to 20 seats
  • Cohort-cycle licensing aligned to your academic calendar
  • Founding-partner program terms agreed at contract time

Founding-partner slots are limited. Once the platform reaches 10 institutional contracts, founding-partner terms close and standard institutional pricing applies.

Apply for founding-partner status → View full pricing

Launch note We're accepting founding-partner inquiries now — reach out to scope terms for your institution.

§ VII · What we will not do

Honest scope boundaries

We are scholars and engineers, not marketers.

Some things institutional vendors routinely promise that we decline to promise. Each entry below is a deliberate boundary, not a missing feature.

  • I Engagement metrics. We do not measure or report 'time on platform' or DAU/MAU style metrics. Usage statistics are aggregate utility (opportunities surfaced, deadlines tracked), not attention extraction.
  • II Vendor lock-in. Partner data exports are available on request without contract negotiation. Migration assistance to alternative tools is offered if a partner decides to switch.
  • III Aggressive renewal. Renewal is opt-in. We do not auto-renew without explicit consent. Renewal conversations begin 60 days before expiry.
  • IV Custom branding. We do not white-label the application. The Scholiad name and identity remain visible. Co-branding for partnership marketing is fine.

If any of these matter to your unit, we may not be the right partner.

§ VIII · How partnership starts

Channel-agnostic, async-first

Onboarding is structured but flexible. Each step has a typical duration; partners can compress or expand timelines as needed.

I

Initial inquiry

Email exchange covering institution, scope, expected seats, and timeline.

Async (1–2 days) · Email

II

Pilot scoping

Refinement of seat count, discipline focus, and onboarding cadence.

Async (3–5 days) · Email or call

III

Setup

Account provisioning, discipline filter calibration, and initial opportunity surfacing.

1–2 weeks · Email

IV

Steady state

Quarterly reports begin; partner contacts us with adjustments as needed.

Ongoing · Async

§ IX · Coverage

26 disciplines, 20 regions

Coverage spans the humanities and social sciences. Discipline- specific keyword banks drive matching precision against our canonical discipline taxonomy.

26 disciplines
Canonical humanities + social science fields
20 regions
Distinct geographic coverage
I

Humanities

Literature, history, philosophy, classics, religious studies, linguistics, art history, musicology.

II

Social sciences

Anthropology, archaeology, sociology, political science, economics, area studies.

III

Interdisciplinary

Adjacent humanities-and-social-science fields including digital humanities and science studies.

IV

Regional coverage

North America, United Kingdom, European Union, and adjacent jurisdictions.

Coverage updated quarterly as new sources are validated and added.

§ X · Early partners

Institutions that partner early

Logo slots are reserved for founding-partner institutions. Reach out to secure a founding-partner slot.

§ XI · Begin a conversation

Why we partner the way we do

Scholarly tools should serve scholarship, not extract attention from it. Our partnership terms reflect that.

We sustain the project on transparent subscriptions rather than data brokering or advertising. This means our incentives and yours are aligned: we succeed when our partners' researchers find more relevant opportunities and when partners renew because the tool works.

Onboarding stays channel-agnostic because partner workflows differ. Some institutions prefer async email exchanges; others want live calls. We accommodate either.

If a partnership is not working, we want to know early. The annual stakeholder review exists for that conversation.

Email partnerships@scholiad.com
Subject prefix Institutional partnership
Response time Personal reply
Channels Email-first; calls scheduled on request

From the editors Editorial address