Your R&D Claim Readiness Score
High exposure if lodged as-is.
Your answers suggest structural gaps that frequently cause problems later.
This commonly includes:
- AI-generated or template-driven language
- hypotheses that aren’t framed from a scientific perspective
- unclear ownership of the technical narrative
If the application has already been lodged, options are limited.
If it hasn’t been lodged yet, this is the point where changes matter most.
Some avoidable risk identified. Usually fixable pre-lodgement.
Your R&D itself may be legitimate, but parts of the application could attract questions later.
This range often reflects:
- prior-year material being reused too heavily
- hypotheses written without strong technical ownership
- descriptions that explain outcomes more than experiments
These issues are common — and usually fixable — before anything is submitted.
Structurally strong. Ahead of most claims.
Based on your answers, the application appears well framed.
Typically, this means:
- hypotheses are grounded in the actual technical work
- the language reflects experimentation, not marketing
- there’s no obvious reliance on templates or AI
At this level, the main risk is small issues creeping in over time — particularly if future claims are rushed or reuse wording too heavily.