Book an intro callIntro call
Retyped orders and a spreadsheet next to the ERP, tackled with subsidy behind it.
A subsidy advisor writes the application, but does not build the project. We do both: design it, file the WBSO and MIT applications, and build it. At a wholesaler, nobody retypes over 3,300 of 5,017 order emails anymore. The application describes work that genuinely happens, which counts at an audit.
Rather talk right away? Book an intro call
- 36-50%WBSO on development costs
- 35%MIT on the broader project
- 2 out of 3Order emails at a wholesaler nobody retypes anymore
- FreeThe funding check
A solution architect at the table.
No sales team and no subsidy salesperson. In 30 minutes we go through the plan and say whether there is funding in it, how much roughly, and whether the project is worth doing without it. That last answer is free too.
Sound familiar?
The advisor delivered an application, not a project
A fee for the paperwork, and afterwards a builder still has to be found. If that builder scopes the work differently than the application describes, the problem shows up at the audit and not before.
Nobody can say whether this counts as R&D
The line between 'development' and 'just implementing an existing tool' decides the whole application. It is a technical judgement, and a subsidy consultant without engineers cannot make it.
The scheme is understood, the project is not
WBSO reimburses development hours, MIT covers the wider project costs. Which part of the work falls into which pot decides how much actually comes back.
The Data Impact Scan
Curious what this looks like on your data?
Book an intro call with the solution architect who also builds the work. You walk through your processes together and get an honest answer on where the numbers are for you, and where they are not.
30 minutes, no obligation, directly with the builder.
How it works, without risk
- 01
1. Funding check, 30 minutes
We go through the plan and say plainly which schemes fit, which do not, and roughly what stays on the company's own books. If nothing fits, that is said in the same call.
- 02
2. Application and technical file
We write the application from the actual build plan: which parts are genuinely development, which hours belong to them, and why that qualifies. That file is what carries the company through an RVO audit.
- 03
3. Build, with the hours recorded properly
The project gets built and the hours are recorded as the scheme requires. No reconstruction afterwards from memory, which is where most companies lose their claim.
Why not a subsidy consultancy or a no-cure-no-pay agency?
| Subsidy consultancy | No cure no pay | Stratalytic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| What comes out | An application | An application, on commission | Application plus the working project |
| Technical judgement | By generalists | Optimised for approval odds | By the engineer who builds it |
| Risk at the audit | With the company | With the company | The file matches the actual work |
| What it costs | Fee, regardless of outcome | A share of the grant | Included in the project |
Before the call
Does our AI project qualify for WBSO?
WBSO reimburses development work that is technically new for the organisation: building the forecast or the reading of documents, preparing the data, the architecture, technical research. Setting up a ready-made package does not qualify. The honest test is whether the team faces a technical problem with an uncertain outcome. We judge that in the first call, on the actual plan.
How much do we get back?
WBSO gives 36% on the first tier of R&D labour costs, 50% if the company is under five years old, and a lower rate above that tier. MIT adds 35% on the broader project costs. Combined, that regularly clears 50% of total project cost, but the exact figure depends on how many hours are genuinely R&D.
Can you apply and build at the same time?
Yes, and that is the point. A separate advisor writes an application based on what the company tells them; we write it from the build plan we are going to execute. That means the hours, the deliverables and the technical narrative already line up when RVO comes to check.
What if the application is rejected?
Then the project is scoped on its own business case, which is how we advise judging it anyway. Subsidy should shorten the payback period, not be the reason to start. If a project only makes sense with a grant, we say so.
What are the deadlines?
WBSO runs in application rounds through the year and must be filed before the work starts, which is the mistake we see most often. MIT R&D has a fixed opening per province with a hard closing date and is usually oversubscribed. In the call we say which window is realistic.
What if the project does not work out?
Then we find out early and cheaply: the feasibility study runs on a share of the company's own data, free, before anything is invoiced. If there is nothing to gain, there is no proposal. And it does not need a new system or a lot of the team's time: the call takes 30 minutes, and the build sits next to the ERP that is already there.