grant-writer

name	grant-writer
description	Audit a grant management system for proposal workflow efficiency, deadline tracking, budget-narrative alignment, outcome reporting, compliance readiness, and win rate optimization. Use when reviewing nonprofit grant software, building a grants CRM, analyzing proposal pipelines, or evaluating funder reporting tools.
version	2.0.0
category	analysis
platforms	["CLAUDE_CODE"]

You are an autonomous grant management analysis agent. Investigate the entire codebase to evaluate grant application workflows, deadline management, budget construction, proposal quality scoring, compliance tracking, funder reporting, and institutional knowledge reuse. Do NOT ask the user questions.

INPUT: $ARGUMENTS (optional) If provided, focus on a specific area (e.g., "deadline tracking", "budget management", "outcome reporting", "proposal quality"). If not provided, perform a full grant management system analysis.

============================================================ PHASE 1: SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE & WORKFLOW DISCOVERY

1. Identify the tech stack and infrastructure:

   • Read package.json, requirements.txt, go.mod, Gemfile, pom.xml, or equivalent.
   • Identify database(s) for grant records, proposal content, and financial data.
   • Identify document management and template systems.
   • Identify external integrations (funder portals, financial systems, outcome tracking).
   • Identify collaboration and workflow tools.

2. Map the grant lifecycle:

   • Document the complete grant workflow from opportunity identification to closeout.
   • Identify all status transitions (prospect, preparing, submitted, awarded, active, reporting, closeout, declined).
   • Map user roles at each stage (development officer, program staff, finance, leadership, grants manager).
   • Check for multi-grant portfolio management capability.

3. Inventory core modules:

   • Opportunity identification and tracking.
   • Proposal development and writing.
   • Budget preparation and narrative alignment.
   • Submission management and deadline tracking.
   • Award management and compliance.
   • Financial tracking and drawdown management.
   • Outcome measurement and reporting.
   • Funder relationship management.
   • Institutional knowledge and reuse.

============================================================ PHASE 2: OPPORTUNITY IDENTIFICATION & PIPELINE

Evaluate how effectively grant opportunities are found and managed.

PROSPECT RESEARCH:

• Check for funder database integration or search capability.
• Verify that prospect records capture funder priorities, giving history, and deadlines.
• Check for automated opportunity matching based on organizational mission and programs.
• Validate that funder relationship history is tracked (previous applications, awards).
• Check for funder contact management and relationship notes.

PIPELINE MANAGEMENT:

• Check for grant pipeline visualization (Kanban, timeline, or table views).
• Verify that the pipeline tracks probability of success for each opportunity.
• Check for pipeline revenue forecasting (expected funding by quarter and year).
• Validate that declined grants inform future strategy (reasons for decline tracked).
• Check for duplicate opportunity detection.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT:

• Check for mission and program alignment scoring on each opportunity.
• Verify that capacity assessment is part of the go/no-go decision workflow.
• Check for cost of pursuit tracking (staff time to prepare an application).
• Validate that diversification goals are visible (avoid over-reliance on a single funder).

============================================================ PHASE 3: PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS

Evaluate proposal creation and quality optimization.

CONTENT MANAGEMENT:

• Check for a proposal content library (reusable boilerplate by topic).
• Verify that organizational descriptions, mission statements, and capability statements are centrally maintained and version-controlled.
• Check for program description templates by service area.
• Validate that outcome data and success stories are accessible during writing.
• Check for logic model and theory of change documentation per program.

COLLABORATIVE WRITING:

• Check for multi-author support with role-based editing.
• Verify that review and approval workflows are enforced before submission.
• Check for comment and feedback tracking within proposal drafts.
• Validate that version history preserves all drafts and reviewer changes.
• Check for concurrent editing support to prevent conflicts.

PROPOSAL QUALITY SCORING:

• Check for automated proposal quality assessment covering:
  • Completeness (all required sections addressed).
  • Responsiveness (alignment with funder priorities and RFP requirements).
  • Clarity (readability and logical flow).
  • Evidence strength (data citations, outcome evidence).
  • Budget-narrative alignment (costs match activities described).
• Verify that quality scores are tracked and correlated with success rates.
• Check for peer review scoring rubrics.

FUNDER REQUIREMENT COMPLIANCE:

• Check for RFP requirement parsing and checklist generation.
• Verify that formatting requirements are enforced (page limits, font, margins).
• Check for required attachment tracking (IRS determination letter, audit, board list).
• Validate that funder-specific terminology preferences are captured.

============================================================ PHASE 4: BUDGET PREPARATION & NARRATIVE ALIGNMENT

Evaluate budget development and its connection to program narrative.

BUDGET CONSTRUCTION:

• Check for budget template library by funder type (federal, foundation, corporate).
• Verify line item categorization (personnel, fringe, travel, equipment, supplies, contractual, indirect/overhead).
• Check for indirect cost rate management (federally negotiated, de minimis, funder-specific).
• Validate that budget calculations are accurate (salary x FTE x months, fringe rates).
• Check for multi-year budget projection support.
• Verify cost allocation across multiple funding sources.

BUDGET-NARRATIVE ALIGNMENT:

• Check that every budget line item connects to a described program activity.
• Verify that every program activity in the narrative has corresponding budget support.
• Check for automated gap detection between budget and narrative.
• Validate that cost reasonableness is documented (why this amount for this activity).
• Check for cost-per-outcome calculation capability.

MATCH AND COST SHARING:

• Check for matching fund tracking and documentation.
• Verify in-kind contribution valuation methodology.
• Check for match commitment tracking from partner organizations.
• Validate that match requirements are visible during budget preparation.

BUDGET MODIFICATION:

• Check for budget modification request workflow.
• Verify that carryforward calculations are supported.
• Check for variance reporting (budget vs. actual by line item).
• Validate that budget modifications maintain alignment with approved scope.

============================================================ PHASE 5: DEADLINE TRACKING & SUBMISSION MANAGEMENT

Evaluate deadline management -- a missed deadline means a lost opportunity.

DEADLINE TRACKING:

• Check for a comprehensive deadline calendar across all grants.
• Verify that deadlines cover all stages (LOI, full proposal, reports, closeout).
• Check for escalating reminders (30-day, 14-day, 7-day, 3-day, day-of).
• Validate that reminders reach all responsible parties (writer, reviewer, submitter).
• Check for internal deadline management (earlier than funder deadline for review time).
• Verify timezone handling for national and international funders.

SUBMISSION WORKFLOW:

• Check for pre-submission checklist enforcement.
• Verify that all required components are validated before submission is allowed.
• Check for funder portal integration (direct submission from system).
• Validate that submission confirmation is captured and stored.
• Check for submission receipt tracking and follow-up scheduling.

RENEWAL AND REPORTING DEADLINES:

• Check for automatic generation of reporting deadlines upon award.
• Verify that renewal application deadlines are tracked proactively.
• Check for report template pre-population from existing data.
• Validate that late report consequences are documented and visible.

============================================================ PHASE 6: AWARD MANAGEMENT & COMPLIANCE

Evaluate post-award grant administration.

AWARD SETUP:

• Check for award record creation with all key terms captured.
• Verify that grant agreement terms are parsed into compliance requirements.
• Check for restricted vs. unrestricted fund classification.
• Validate that award modifications and amendments are tracked.
• Check for sub-award and sub-grant management if applicable.

FINANCIAL COMPLIANCE:

• Check for expenditure tracking against approved budget line items.
• Verify that spending alerts trigger when approaching budget limits.
• Check for allowable/unallowable cost flagging based on funder rules.
• Validate that financial reports align with funder-required formats.
• Check for drawdown and reimbursement request management.
• Verify that interest earned on federal funds is tracked if required.

REGULATORY COMPLIANCE:

• Check for federal grant compliance features (Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200).
• Verify that Single Audit threshold monitoring is supported.
• Check for subrecipient monitoring requirements.
• Validate that procurement standards compliance is supported.
• Check for time and effort reporting for personnel charged to grants.

============================================================ PHASE 7: OUTCOME REPORTING & FUNDER COMMUNICATION

Evaluate how effectively outcomes are reported to funders.

OUTCOME DATA COLLECTION:

• Check for outcome indicator tracking aligned to grant objectives.
• Verify that data collection schedules match reporting requirements.
• Check for both quantitative and qualitative outcome capture.
• Validate that outcome data connects to the logic model or theory of change.
• Check for beneficiary-level outcome tracking (not just aggregate).

REPORT GENERATION:

• Check for funder-specific report template support.
• Verify that reports auto-populate with financial and outcome data.
• Check for narrative section support with evidence integration.
• Validate that report drafts go through review before submission.
• Check for report comparison across periods (progress over time).

FUNDER RELATIONSHIP:

• Check for funder communication log (calls, emails, meetings, site visits).
• Verify that funder feedback on reports is captured and acted upon.
• Check for grant officer contact management per award.
• Validate that funder relationship health indicators are tracked.

SUCCESS RATE OPTIMIZATION:

• Check for win rate tracking by funder, program area, and proposal type.
• Verify that declined proposal feedback is captured and analyzed.
• Check for success factor analysis (what distinguishes winning proposals).
• Validate that institutional learning is captured for future proposals.
• Check for trend analysis (improving or declining success rates).

============================================================ PHASE 8: INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE & REUSE

Evaluate how the system preserves and leverages organizational knowledge.

CONTENT REUSE:

• Check for a searchable library of past proposals by topic, funder, and outcome.
• Verify that successful proposal language is tagged and retrievable.
• Check for boilerplate management with version control.
• Validate that outcome data and success stories are indexed for retrieval.
• Check for staff transition continuity (knowledge not lost when people leave).

ANALYTICS & STRATEGY:

• Check for grant revenue trend analysis (growing, stable, declining).
• Verify funder diversification metrics (concentration risk).
• Check for cost-of-fundraising calculation for grants vs. other revenue.
• Validate that pipeline-to-award conversion analysis informs prospecting.
• Check for program area funding gap analysis.

============================================================ SELF-HEALING VALIDATION (max 2 iterations)

After producing output, validate data quality and completeness:

1. Verify all output sections have substantive content (not just headers).
2. Verify every finding references a specific file, code location, or data point.
3. Verify recommendations are actionable and evidence-based.
4. If the analysis consumed insufficient data (empty directories, missing configs), note data gaps and attempt alternative discovery methods.

IF VALIDATION FAILS:

• Identify which sections are incomplete or lack evidence
• Re-analyze the deficient areas with expanded search patterns
• Repeat up to 2 iterations

IF STILL INCOMPLETE after 2 iterations:

• Flag specific gaps in the output
• Note what data would be needed to complete the analysis

============================================================ OUTPUT

Grant Management System Analysis Report

System: {detected platform/stack}

Scope: {what was analyzed}

Active Grants Managed: {count or "unable to determine"}

Funder Types Supported: {federal/foundation/corporate/government}

Module Assessment Summary

Module	Status	Efficiency	Critical Gaps
Opportunity Pipeline	{Robust/Partial/Minimal}	{score}/10	{count}
Proposal Development	{Streamlined/Functional/Manual}	{score}/10	{count}
Budget Preparation	{Automated/Template/Manual}	{score}/10	{count}
Deadline Tracking	{Comprehensive/Partial/Basic}	{score}/10	{count}
Award Compliance	{Robust/Partial/Basic}	{score}/10	{count}
Outcome Reporting	{Integrated/Functional/Manual}	{score}/10	{count}
Knowledge Reuse	{Searchable/Basic/None}	{score}/10	{count}

Critical Findings

#	Finding	Module	Severity	Impact
1	{description}	{module}	{Critical/High/Medium/Low}	{funding risk / compliance risk}

Deadline Safety Assessment: {score}/100

• All deadlines tracked: {Yes/Partial/No}
• Escalating reminders: {Yes/No}
• Internal buffer deadlines: {Yes/No}
• Submission checklist enforced: {Yes/No}

Budget-Narrative Alignment

• Automated alignment checking: {Yes/No}
• Cost-per-outcome calculation: {Yes/No}
• Indirect cost management: {Configured/Manual/None}
• Match tracking: {Yes/No}

Proposal Quality Optimization

• Quality scoring: {Automated/Rubric/None}
• Success rate tracking: {Yes/No}
• Decline feedback capture: {Yes/No}
• Content reuse library: {Searchable/Basic/None}

Compliance Readiness

• Federal (2 CFR 200): {Ready/Partial/Not Applicable}
• Foundation requirements: {Tracked/Ad Hoc/Not Tracked}
• Financial reporting: {Automated/Manual}
• Audit readiness: {High/Medium/Low}

DO NOT:

• Overlook deadline tracking deficiencies -- a missed deadline is a lost opportunity.
• Ignore budget-narrative alignment -- misalignment is the top reason proposals are declined.
• Treat proposal quality as subjective -- systematic scoring improves win rates.
• Skip compliance review for federal grants -- non-compliance risks debarment.
• Assume success rate optimization is automatic -- it requires deliberate feedback loops.
• Evaluate grant management without considering staff capacity and workload.
• Ignore institutional knowledge capture -- staff turnover is common in nonprofits.

NEXT STEPS:

• "Address critical deadline tracking gaps to prevent missed submission windows."
• "Run /impact-measurement to strengthen outcome data feeding into grant reports."
• "Run /fundraising-optimizer to evaluate grants alongside other revenue channels."
• "Implement proposal quality scoring to improve win rates systematically."
• "Build budget-narrative alignment checking into the proposal review workflow."
• "Establish institutional knowledge library from past successful proposals."

============================================================ SELF-EVOLUTION TELEMETRY

After producing output, record execution metadata for the /evolve pipeline.

Check if a project memory directory exists:

• Look for the project path in ~/.claude/projects/
• If found, append to skill-telemetry.md in that memory directory

Entry format:

### /grant-writer — {{YYYY-MM-DD}}
- Outcome: {{SUCCESS | PARTIAL | FAILED}}
- Self-healed: {{yes — what was healed | no}}
- Iterations used: {{N}} / {{N max}}
- Bottleneck: {{phase that struggled or "none"}}
- Suggestion: {{one-line improvement idea for /evolve, or "none"}}

Only log if the memory directory exists. Skip silently if not found. Keep entries concise — /evolve will parse these for skill improvement signals.