Assessment of STSM applications – criteria and rules
- As defined in 6.1 and 6.2, in the COST Vademecum Part 1 – COST Action
- Merit Review Criteria
- Is the workplan aligned with the relevant technical/scientific fields of the Action, as defined in the MoU ?
- Is the CV of the candidate relevant for the workplan?
- Is there added-value for the STSM applicant ?
- Is there added-value for the host institution/research group in the proposed STSM ?
- Does the workplan have potential for further coordinated scientific activities and relevant results beyond the period of the STSM (e.g., joint research work, publications, PhD supervision, project proposals, etc) ?
B. Rules and procedure
- The following documents are submitted to the STSM coordinator as defined in COST Vademecum Part 1 – COST Action:
- COST application form
- Applicant’s CV
- Motivation letter
- Work plan
- Invitation from host
- Support letter from home institution
- The STSM coordinator checks the eligibility as defined in A.1 and sends applications to the STSM Evaluation Board for evaluation according to criteria defined in A.2.
- The STSM Evaluation Board is given a maximum of 2 weeks to assess the application.
- The absence of feedback from any member of the STSM Evaluation Board is assumed as a “YES, with no remarks” to the recommendation of the STSM coordinator.
- Based on the comments received from the STSM evaluation Board, the STSM coordinator may ask the applicant to change and resubmit the application.
- In this case the STSM coordinator decides about the final evaluation of the modified version of the STSM application without sending it again to the STSM evaluation board.
- The STSM coordinator sends the applications to the MC Chair with a recommendation for acceptance/rejection, based on the assessment obtained from the evaluation board.
- The MC Chair submits the application to the MC, including his own evaluation and comments, as well as those from the STSM coordinator.
- The MC votes the recommendation of the STSM coordinator (1 country = 1 Vote).
- The absence of a vote is assumed as a “YES” to the recommendation
- Vote against must be justified
- One week is given to the MC to vote
- The MC Chair informs the applicant about the evaluation results.
Approved in the MC meeting of 14/September, Sardinia Cagliari
Amended in the MC meeting of 12/April, Poznan, Poland