Compliance module
Conflict of interest software that knows about the award
Collect significant financial interests, assign project-based disclosures, run the review, and report on all of it — inside the same system that holds the proposal and the award the disclosure is actually about.
The failure this replaces
"Conflict-of-interest review that depended on who remembered to ask."
That is how NJIT described its process before Streamlyne — a $190M research enterprise where COI disclosure and review were, in their words, inconsistent and difficult to track. It is not an unusual description. COI is the compliance function most often run on a spreadsheet, because it is the one where nothing visibly breaks until an audit.
What it does
Disclosure, review, and the paper trail
Disclosure collection
Faculty, students and staff who design, conduct or report research maintain their significant financial interests in one place, and update them when something changes rather than once a year from memory.
Project-based disclosure
Disclosures are assigned against the specific project, electronically, so the question is not 'did this person disclose' but 'did this person disclose for this award' — which is the question a sponsor actually asks.
Review workflow
Assignment, completion and review all happen inside the system. A committee sees what is outstanding without anyone maintaining a spreadsheet of who has been chased.
Reporting
Compliance metrics through Streamlyne Reporting, alongside every other module — so COI status appears next to the award it belongs to instead of in a separate report nobody runs.
Linked to the rest of the record
COI lives in the same system as the proposal, the award and the protocols. That is the entire argument for not buying it separately: the disclosure and the thing being disclosed about share a record.
Consistent against NIH and NSF expectations
NJIT's project-based disclosures are assigned, completed and reviewed in the system, consistently against NIH and NSF guidelines — replacing a process they described as inconsistent and difficult to track.
Why not buy it separately
A disclosure is about a project
If the disclosure lives in a COI product and the project lives in your eRA system, then somebody at your institution is reconciling the two by hand — usually at the worst possible moment, which is when a sponsor asks.
In Streamlyne, COI is one of twelve modules in a single codebase. The disclosure, the proposal, the award and the protocols share a record. Nobody re-enters anything, and nothing quietly diverges.
- IRBHuman-subjects protocols, amendments, continuing review
- IACUCAnimal care and use protocols
- IBCBiosafety, on the same committee machinery
- COIFinancial disclosure for faculty, students and staff
- Export controlActivity tracking wired into Negotiations
Questions
What procurement and the COI committee both ask
What is conflict of interest software in research administration?
It is the system that collects financial-interest disclosures from everyone involved in designing, conducting or reporting research, routes them for institutional review, records the determination, and reports on the whole thing. In practice its job is to answer one question on demand: for this award, at this moment, is every required disclosure in place and reviewed?
Do we need a standalone COI system?
You need the function. Whether it should be a separate product is a different question, and our answer is no — a disclosure is about a project, and if the disclosure lives in one system and the project in another then somebody is reconciling them by hand. Streamlyne's COI module is part of the same system as the proposal and the award.
Does it handle project-based disclosure, or only annual?
Project-based. Disclosures are assigned electronically against the specific project, completed and reviewed in the system. Annual disclosure is the easier half; per-project is where manual processes usually break down.
How does this relate to the other compliance modules?
IRB, IACUC and IBC share the same submission, review and committee machinery, and COI sits alongside them with export control. A coordinator who learns one already knows the shape of the next, and protocols link to the proposals, institutional proposals and awards they belong to.
Can we start with COI alone?
Yes. Institutions commonly begin with whichever module is costing them the most time and add the rest later. Because it is one codebase, adopting another module afterwards is a configuration exercise rather than a second implementation.
Does Streamlyne check disclosures automatically?
No, and we will not claim it does. Automated disclosure checking is not a shipping capability. What the system does is make the process consistent, assigned, tracked and reportable — which is what was actually failing when institutions describe COI review as depending on who remembered to ask.