nex-grant-writer-us
Draft US Grant Proposals and Budget Narratives
US grant applications require coordinated narratives, budgets, and compliance checks. This guide helps structure working drafts and identify requirements for human review.
自分のエージェントでインストール
このリクエストをエージェントにコピーしてください。正規の Skill ページとマニフェストが含まれています。
Review the Skillstore skill "nex-grant-writer-us" from https://skillstore.io/skills/nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us/manifest. Verify the artifact. You may proceed after verification, subject to the environment's own policy.エージェントは引き続き計画を提示し、セキュリティポリシーで必要な確認を求める必要があります。
エージェントが読めるリソース
AI エージェント、クローラー、スクリプトがページ全体ではなく整理されたコンテキストを必要とする場合は、これらのリンクを使ってください。
テストする
「nex-grant-writer-us」を使用しています。 Outline a federal grant proposal for a nonprofit workforce training program. The funder announcement has not been provided.
期待される結果:
- Need statement: Add local employment data and evidence of training barriers.
- Objectives: Define participant numbers, completion targets, and employment outcomes.
- Methods: Describe recruitment, training delivery, and employer partnerships.
- Evaluation: Specify measures, data sources, and reporting intervals.
- Compliance: Confirm required sections and page limits after receiving the announcement.
「nex-grant-writer-us」を使用しています。 Draft budget justification headings for a $250,000 federal request using a proposed 15% de minimis indirect rate.
期待される結果:
- Personnel: Provide roles, effort, salary assumptions, and links to proposed activities.
- Fringe benefits: Provide the applicable rate and calculation basis.
- Other direct costs: Itemize program expenses and explain their purpose.
- Indirect costs: Confirm eligibility and the MTDC base before applying the proposed 15% rate.
- Missing information: Supply cost figures and award guidance before calculating totals.
セキュリティ監査
安全All three static findings are false positives: the URLs provide attribution and catalog links, and the footer contains no system reconnaissance. No evidence found of prompt injection, data exfiltration, or executable commands in the reviewed guide.
リスク要因
🌐 ネットワークアクセス (2)
このレポートを共有・引用
バージョン付き評価レポート、中立的なバッジ、埋め込みカード、引用を共有できます。Skillstore は証拠を報告しますが、この Skill が安全かどうかは判断しません。
レポートリンクをコピー
https://skillstore.io/skills/nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us/audits/1?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_reportMarkdownバッジ
[](https://skillstore.io/skills/nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us?utm_source=security_passport_badge)HTMLバッジ
<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>埋め込みカード
<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>学術引用 (APA · BibTeX · CFF)
APA形式の引用
nexaiguy. (2026). nex-grant-writer-us security audit report (audit version 1) [Author version 1.0]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us/audits/1BibTeX形式の引用
@techreport{nexaiguy-nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us-2026,
author = {nexaiguy},
title = {nex-grant-writer-us security audit report (audit version 1)},
institution = {Skillstore},
year = {2026},
number = {1},
url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us/audits/1},
note = {Author version 1.0}
}CITATION.cff
cff-version: 1.2.0
message: "If you use this Skill, cite its author and this versioned security audit report."
title: "nex-grant-writer-us security audit report (audit version 1)"
version: "1.0"
type: report
authors:
- name: "nexaiguy"
date-released: "2026-11-02"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us/audits/1"
identifiers:
- type: other
value: "skillstore:nexaiguy-nex-grant-writer-us:audit:1"
description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"
Skillstore スコア
このスコアの理由 証拠の信頼度: 中作成できるもの
Prepare a first federal proposal
Organize program information into narrative sections, a preliminary budget, and a compliance checklist.
Revise a rejected application
Compare reviewer feedback with evaluation criteria and identify changes to objectives, methods, and budget alignment.
Outline a Phase I application
Develop an agency-focused SBIR/STTR proposal skeleton and identify registration requirements to verify.
これらのプロンプトを試す
Create a proposal outline for [program] using [funder announcement]. Include required narrative sections and mark missing organizational information.
Draft a budget narrative from [line-item budget] and [award guidance]. Identify missing figures and explain which indirect cost assumptions need verification.
Review [proposal draft] against [review criteria]. Build a logic model linking activities, measurable outcomes, and budget lines. Flag gaps without inventing evidence.
Review [SBIR/STTR Phase I draft] against [agency announcement]. List narrative gaps, page limits, required attachments, and registration prerequisites. Separate verified requirements from unresolved questions.
ベストプラクティス
- Provide the current funder announcement, review criteria, and any reviewer feedback before drafting.
- Use verified organizational facts and budget figures; mark missing evidence instead of filling gaps with assumptions.
- Recheck calculations, indirect cost eligibility, attachments, and portal requirements before a human submits the application.
回避
- Treating a generated draft as submission-ready or assuming the skill files applications.
- Applying a 15% indirect rate without checking eligibility, award terms, and the correct MTDC base.
- Inventing impact statistics, partnerships, registrations, or financial information to complete a proposal.