COop ration Europ enne dans le domaine de la Recherche Scientifique et Technique BIOMEDICINE AND MOLECULAR BIOSCIEN

2. COST ACTION B14Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy CHAIR: Prof. DANIEL MATHIEU (FR); 1998 – 2005; 19 participating countries OBJECTIVE: Ameliorer les connaissances sur l`usage rationnel de HBOT, pour fair possible l’établissement des guides spécifiques sur l’implantation et le development des centres cliniques HBOT et pour formuler des recommendations basées sur des dates scientifiques pour des traitements HBOT des divers maladies.

3. B14: DIFUSION DES RESULTATS ET DE L’INFORMATION *Handbook on hyperbaric medicine, Springer, Dordrecht, 2006, 812 pages. * European Journal of Underwater and yperbaric Medicine, vol.5, Suppl.1, Dec.2004 *Documents :  Research quality guidelines Risk analysis in hyperbaric medicine European Code of Good Practice Competencies and diplomas in diving and hyperbaric medicine. Web site : http://www.oxynet.org

4.

5. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

6. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

7. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

8. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

9. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

10. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

11. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

12. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

13. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

14. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

15. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

16. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

17. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

18. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

19. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

20. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

21. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

22. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

23. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

24. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

25. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

26. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

27. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

28. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

29. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

30. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

31. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

32. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

33. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

34. Domain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changesDomain Committees supply advice to the CSO. Nomination procedure for the Domain committee members is under way. Nominations are the strategic issue for the success (and FP7 contract) of the reform. The Domain Committees shall provide scientific advice on the selection, the progress and the results of COST Actions to the CSO. They involve independent external experts to provide this advice. Therefore preference should be given to candidates with experiences gained as science managers, e.g. in research funding organisations (research managers), previously active in research or technological development to provide a broad overview on the ongoing research activities. a good overview on the research and technological developments as well as the relevant political developments in their field (EU level, global level). the ability to cooperate in a complex network involving external experts. the capacity to coordinate the national research activities relevant to the particular Domain. the capacity to serve as a national focal point able to ensure a broad and swift dissemination of information. the capacity to motivate the relevant parts of the research community to join in Action when this is deemed useful. clear perspectives on future developments in the specific Domain and the political requirements in their country. willingness and ability for selecting, monitoring and evaluating off COST Actions in the relevant Domain, which requires a minimum time commitment of one working week p.a.. gender balance and a priority to young delegates should be observed. Retiring delegates should be replaced. It might be considered useful to coordinate these aspects amongst the CNC themselves. A potential conflict of interest induced by being member (or even chair) of a Management Committee should be avoided. A majority voting procedure has been adopted for CSO decisions. Instead of making decisions by consensus only, now a simple majority of ¾ of the COST Member States decides. 2-stage proposal submission implemented External peer-review becoming the normal procedure ESF – COST cooperation on strategic research agendas established The COST Office less involved in micro-management of Actions Efficient IT tools in place The Open Call will introduce an open competition between Domains and the CSO will play an increasingly strategic role But Governance stays heavy and slow The COST Office will strive for a 7 month max evaluation and decision time FP6 contract imposes difficulties for a mini-agency Traditions hamper swift changes

35. COST MEDECINE ET SANTE/BMBS SECRETAIRE SCIENTIFIQUE/ SCIENCE OFFICER: Mihail Pascu E-mail: mpascu@cost.esf.org SECRETAIRE ADMINISTRATIF/ ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Anja VAN DER SNICKT E-mail: avandersnickt@cost.esf.org