COST full Proposal (tree)
This is the ‘root’ placeholder for the Interedition COST full proposal. All parts that should be considered in writing the full proposal are sub members in a tree reprensenting the structure of an ESF/COST full proposal.
All placeholders are headed by a boxed section in blue holding the guidelines given by COST for that part of the proposal.
A number of general style and structure guidelines that should be applied to the final document in general, is given here.
IntroductionIn case a proposal is selected to become a COST Action, the first part of the Full Proposal, the draft Technical Annex, will become part of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). Therefore the thorough drafting of the Full Proposal is of highest importance. The draft MoU which will be presented to the CSO for final approval consists of the Memorandum proper which is prepared by the COST Office, and the Technical Annex which is prepared by the Proposer.Good proposals are precise, concise, formally and linguistically correct and drafted in a clear and easily understandable way. Please keep in mind that you are about to draft a specific formal intergovernmental document, not a scientific paper.The proposal should consist of a title page and two parts:
- Part I â€“ the draft Technical Annex
- Part II â€“ Additional information.
In order to help you to draft a Full Proposal that corresponds to the particular COST framework, the following guidelines â€“ formal and content-related â€“ have been developed. Please note that your Full Proposal may be rejected if it does not comply with these guidelines.
The structure of Part I â€“ draft Technical Annex â€“ of the proposal is mandatory, while the structure of Part II â€“ Additional Information â€“ is a recommendation (except for the List of Experts which is mandatory and must include current contact details for each named person).
Please make sure that your proposal contains all the necessary information in parts I and II for its evaluation, which must follow this template.
Checklist for Proposers of new COST ActionsBefore submitting your Full Proposal, please check it against the following items:
- Confirming to the title page template given in the Template
- Respecting the formatting guidelines
- Respecting the indicated structure of the draft Technical Annex
- Respecting the word limits
- Language check
- Spell check
- Use of capital letters for COST-specific and Action-related expressions; nonexhaustive list: Action, Action Chair, Management Committee, Working Group, STSM (Short-Term Scientific Mission), Steering Group, etc.
- No mentioning of individual scientists, institutes or organisations
- Avoiding pronouns such as â€œIâ€, â€œweâ€; rather use â€œthe Actionâ€
- Avoiding expressions such as â€œplannedâ€ or â€œproposedâ€ when referring to the Action; rather use â€œaims atâ€, â€œwillâ€, etc.
- Proper quoting of standard texts (Part A: main objectives; part E: commitment to
- gender balance and involvement of early-stage researchers; part G: economic dimension)
- Proper calculation of the economic dimension in part G
- Clarity and comprehensibility (also for non-specialist readers)
- Addressing all indicated items
General specifications on the format
- The Full Proposal has to be submitted as a word file (.doc) or a rich-text format (.rtf)
- Margins: Top 2cm, Bottom 2cm, Left 2cm, Right 2cm, Header/Footer 1.25cm
- Font type: Times New Roman
- Size: 12pts
- Font colour: black
- No font effects, underlining or background colours
- Alignment: left (except Body text: justified)
- No foot notes/endnotes
Make sure that the text is of high linguistic quality. COST does not provide translation or correction services. Peer reviewers, likely to come from several different countries, will assess the proposal as presented.
Have the full document spell checked. For terms like â€œActionâ€, â€œAction Chairâ€, â€œManagement Committeeâ€, â€œWorking Groupâ€ etc. please use capitals.
Make sure (use â€œFindâ€ function on Word/Edit) in Part I
- that neither â€œIâ€ nor â€œweâ€ appears in the text
- that no individual scientists or institutes are mentioned in sections C and D
- that words like â€œplannedâ€ or â€œenvisagedâ€ or â€œproposedâ€ about the Action are deleted. Rather use factual words such as â€œwill beâ€, “this COST Action” etc.
- that no references to information contained in Part II are used (such as “see attached list of experts”)
- that the indicated structure A, B, C, â€¦ is respected
- that the economic dimension is properly cited and calculated