Abstract
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReference
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hilton, T.F., Leukefeld, C.G. (2019). Funding Institution Vetting. In: Grantsmanship for New Investigators. SpringerBriefs in Public Health. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01301-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01301-1_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01300-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01301-1
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)