Funding Institution Vetting

  • Thomas F. Hilton
  • Carl G. Leukefeld
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Public Health book series (BRIEFSPUBLIC)


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.


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


  1. Scott, C. K. (2004). A replicable model for achieving over 90% follow-up rates in longitudinal studies of substance abusers. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 74(2004), 21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas F. Hilton
    • 1
  • Carl G. Leukefeld
    • 2
  1. 1.Indian Harbour BeachUSA
  2. 2.School of Medicine, Center on Drug and Alcohol ResearchUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations