TrackImpact tracks every place your scholars’ work lands — Congress, agency dockets, the courts, the press, the literature — with a link to each source. Every quarter it rolls that up into the report a development director hands a donor and a research director hands a board, read against your institution’s own goals.
One page per period: what the team published, who cited it, where it ran, and how that advances the goals you set for the year. Exports to PDF.
Scholars get something they want to keep accurate: a public page, a CV that updates itself, a weekly briefing, and op-ed openings matched to their work.
The week’s high-value items for the research director: op-eds, pickups, citations, briefings, enacted actions. Quiet weeks say so.
A nine-scholar research team at a legal nonprofit, fiscal year to date as of October 21, 2026. Every figure links to its source inside the report.
| Question | Overton, Altmetric, Meltwater | TrackImpact |
|---|---|---|
| What do you get? | A score, or a feed of alerts to triage. | An evidence file per scholar and a report per team, every row linked and verifiable. |
| Who keeps it accurate? | Nobody. Noise accumulates. | The scholars, because the same data is their public page and CV. |
| Can a donor check it? | Not without a login and an explanation. | Yes. The report is a PDF; every number opens to the source. |
| Does it know your goals? | No. | Yes. Objectives are first-class; evidence is linked to them. |
| Who does the setup? | You do. | We do. Your scholars are tracked before the first call. |
Three slots. $3,000 for the first year against a list price of $6,000 a year for up to 15 scholars, $400 per scholar beyond that. One invoice.
What counts as an impact?
A verified appearance of a scholar’s work somewhere that matters: a congressional report or hearing, a federal rule or docket comment, a court filing, a think-tank study, a news story, a republication by another outlet, an academic paper. The full definition.
How do you keep false positives out?
Every candidate row has to pass a deterministic check against the source text before it is stored, an automated audit stage re-checks new rows against the live page, and both the scholar and the team manager can confirm or remove any row. Rows below a confidence threshold never appear on public or team surfaces unless a scholar verifies them. When a scholar shares a common name, the gates are stricter, not looser.
Who sees what?
The team sees what each scholar makes public, plus the activities they choose to share with the institution. Private activities stay private. A manager cannot see more than a scholar has released.
How long does onboarding take?
About two weeks for a ten-person team. We build each profile from the scholar’s bio page, CV and the academic indexes, run discovery, review the first batch, then invite each scholar to confirm what is theirs.
What about our goals and fiscal year?
You give us the year’s objectives, we load them, and from then on every publication and activity can be linked to the goal it advances. The report follows your fiscal calendar.