Funding institution vetting

Thomas F. Hilton, Carl G. Leukefeld

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review


In this chapter we address vetting, one of the more mysterious aspects of grantsmanship. This phase in the application process is where you can gain or lose a competitive edge as well as salvage project arms reviewers might have recommended to be cut. It also discusses pre-award changes that might increase the odds for a favorable funding decision. We discuss progress and final reports with an eye to keeping funded for the life of your grant as project funds are sometimes cut or cancelled. We conclude with ideas for building on your last grant when applying for the next one.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationSpringerBriefs in Public Health
Number of pages9
StatePublished - 2019

Publication series

NameSpringerBriefs in Public Health
ISSN (Print)2192-3698
ISSN (Electronic)2192-3701

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019.


  • Award Notice
  • Branch Chief
  • Division Director
  • Final Report
  • Funding Plan
  • Grants Management Officer
  • Institute/Center Director
  • National Advisory Council
  • PO
  • Pre-Award Negotiation
  • Renewal Application

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Health Informatics
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health


Dive into the research topics of 'Funding institution vetting'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this