Child pages
  • Frequently asked questions
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Stage 2


Funding - general remarks:

  • The RCs are asked to provide information of such external competitive funding, where:
    - the funding decisions have been made during 1.1.2005-31.12.2010, and
    - the administrator of the funding is/has been the University of Helsinki
  •  The RC member to report the funding is the one named as the grant recipient (hankkeen vastuullinen johtaja) in the funding decision


1. When calculating the external funding in large projects, funded by e.g. Tekes, EU, etc., should we include the total sum administrated by the University or the sum used at the University? There are projects where a significant part of money is channeled further to industrial partners (Tekes) or international consortium members (EU).

  • On the e-form please give the total amount of euros granted by a funder during 1.1.2005-31.12.2010 (calculate by summing up the euros of each funding decision). There is no need to indicate the portion of funding used by the external partners of a project.
  • Example:
    • Funding organization: TEKES
    • The total amount of funding TEKES has decided to allocate to the RC members during 1.1.2005-31.12.2010: TEKES funding decision 1 (150 000 eur) + TEKES funding decision 2 (400 000 eur) + TEKES funding decision 3 (450 000 eur) --> the total sum to be written on the e-form for TEKES funding is 1 000 000 eur.


2. Where on the e-form to report of funding which the RC receives from an industrial partner as the consequence of a successful TEKES project application (e.g. cases where the industrial partner of the project is committed to provide x% of the project funding, if the TEKES application is successful).

  • Such funding can be reported under external competetive funding (e-form question no 7), in the box titled 'Other (inter)national funding’.

3. Who reports of funding which has been granted to Centers of Excellence, consortia etc.?

  • RC member named as the grant recipient (hankkeen vastuullinen johtaja) in the funding decision is the person to report the funding. Those members of the Center of Excellence/consortia who do not belong to the same RC with the grant recipient can describe the funding elsewhere on their e-form (in the text boxes).

4. How to report of the funding if only part of it is used by the end of the evaluation period?

  • The RCs are asked to report the total amount of funding (in euros) a funding organization has decided to allocate to the RC members during 1.1.2005-31.12.2010. There is no need to divide the funding between the evaluation period and future years. Thus, if an RC member received a funding decision of e.g. 500 000 euros in 2009 for years 2010-2012, the RC reports of 500 000 euros on the e-form.

5. How to report of funding decisions concerning posts for Academy Professors and Academy Research Fellows? The funding of these instruments was administered by the Academy of Finland until the end of 2009, but since then by the University.

  • If the funding decisions for the posts of Academy Professors/Academy Research Fellows were made between 1.1.2005 and 31.12.2010, you may report them on the e-form as part of the Academy's funding, for simplicity.

6. According to the instructions only funding that has been administered by the University shall be reported. External foundations (Väisälä, Ehrnrooth, Aaltonen, Kulttuurirahasto, etc.) often give the grants directly to the recipients. In some RCs this is a significant part of PhD thesis funding. Shall it be left out?

  • On the e-form there is no box for competetive funding paid directly to the account of the recipient. However, the RCs are welcome to describe such funding in their text.

7. Do the panels receive the registration material? The question is: do we need to repeat the descriptions we have done in the registration phase?

  • The Panels will have your registraton documents excluding the suggestions for panellists. 



Stage 1

1. Who is affiliated with the University of Helsinki?

  • All Principal Investigators designated by UH by 31.10.2010
  • Representatives of research and teaching personnel who are/have been employed by UH during 1.1.2005-31.10.2010
  • Scholars who are/have been working at UH during 1.1.2005-31.10.2010 with external funding from a source other than a university or a research institute
    • A further prerequisite for the affiliation of doctoral candidates is that they have been granted the right to pursue postgraduate studies at the University of Helsinki by Oct 31, 2010.
    • A docentship alone does not constitute an affiliation with the University. 

2. How is the information regarding competitive external funding collected (stage 2 of the evaluation process)?

3. In the evaluation announcement published on September 20th, the participation category no 5 (The research of the participating community has a highly significant societal impact) is described to include significant collaboration with public, private and/or 3rd sector. Why is this no longer mentioned in the final version of the guidelines?

  • Collaboration with public, private and/or 3rd sector is seen as a genuine component of societal impact of research, thus the category includes such activities by definition and for this sake mentioning it was considered as unnecessary repetition.

4. How can the international panellists evaluate "other scientific activity" if the information in TUHAT database is written in Finnish?

  • The advantage of the researcher is that he/she saves his/her "activity information" in English - not only because of the evaluation but because of his/her international cooperation.

5. Questions about filling in the registration excel chart

a) What to write if the title of the person has changed during the years 2005-2010?

  • This can be described by writing in the title column for example ‘doctoral candidate - postdoctoral researcher - senior researcher’. Alternatively, one can choose to give only the current titles of all the RC members.

b) If a person is both a professor and a research director, which title to use?

  • Both titles can be written in the column.

c) Should the RC members be listed in alphabetical or in some other order?

  • Alphabetical order is recommended.

d) Is ‘X’ really enough to describe supervision of doctoral dissertations, is there no need for numbers, names etc.?

  • At the registration stage ‘X’ is enough. Details concerning supervision of doctoral dissertations are to be stored in TUHAT database by Jan 31, 2011 under the activity ‘Participation in thesis supervision, mentoring and examination’.

e) Why is the status of PIs not indicated in the excel chart?

  • The Evaluation Office will check the PI status via TUHAT.

f) What is the closest analogue of an Academy Research Fellow in the University’s table for titles of research and teaching personnel?

  • Please use the title ‘Senior Researcher’ and add in the parenthesis ‘Academy Research Fellow’.

g) What to write in the affiliation column for those who have left the University - their current affiliation or their affliation while still at the University?

  • Please indicate here their place of affiliation while still at the University.

h) What to write in the e-mail address column for those who have left the University - their current e-mail or their e-mail while still at the University?

  • You do not need to give any e-mail address for those who have already left the University (they will be identified from TUHAT by other means)

6. Who is calculated as a member of the researcher community (RC)? Only the currently active researchers or also those who have already left the community/university?

  • The RC may include maximally 120 members, who are or have been affiliated with the University of Helsinki during the period under evaluation. The RC members are listed in the registration excel chart where each name is counted as one member of the RC. 

7. Is it necessary/desirable to list all doctoral students in the registration phase, including both presently active students and those who have graduated during the evaluation period and left the RC? This question concerns in particular students that are, or have been, employed by external research organizations throughout their doctoral studies. We think they form an important part of the University's connection with the real world.

  • From the perspective of the University and as long as the prerequisites for participation and affiliation are met (see the ‘Guidelines for the participating researcher communities’ at, everyone involved in the research done at UH during the period under evaluation is welcome to participate.
    Please note: To list the names of the RC members in the excel chart, a permisson is needed from each person in question. The proposed RC members have also the right to deny the use of their names in the evaluation.

8. Can the excel file of the RC members include people who do not have profile in TUHAT? How to add a TUHAT profile for someone who has already left the university?

 PLEASE NOTE, updated answer:

  • It is recommended that all RC members who are named on the RC’s registration excel chart have a profile in TUHAT. However, this is not a must if a person is no longer affiliated with UH and his/her scientific output is already stored in TUHAT via another member of the RC (e.g. co-authored publications). NB! To list the names of the RC members in the excel chart, a permisson is needed from each person in question. The proposed RC members have also the right to deny the use of their names in the evaluation.
  • To add a profile for someone who is currently not affiliated at UH requires a permission from the person in question. The recommended way to add a TUHAT profile for a person is that he/she him/herself applies for the TUHAT username and password at Such applications are accepted at the department with which the person was affiliated while at UH.
    Alternatively, person profiles can be added into TUHAT in a centralized manner. To do this, the RC members are compiled into a list (first name, last name, gender, date of birth, current e-mail address, department while affiliated with UH and the affiliation years) and the list is sent to After the profiles are created they can be updated by the persons themselves.

9. What is the focus in the question number seven?

  • Evaluation for justification of the quality of the RC’s research and doctoral training at the national and international level during the period under evaluation.
    The evaluation will find out the 'relevant indicators' from the RC’s point of view such as doctoral training, competed external funding and academy professors. There can be a lot other indicators, too. The response will be exploited for the background information. The stage two will ask more detailed information and exploit TUHAT data for that, too.

10. What means “Suggestion for methods of assessing”?

  • We ask for the RCs’ proposals which are the methods that should be used in the evaluation of the scientific performance and doctoral training.
    The reason for the question is that the general/traditional bibliometrics are not relevant on all fields of research. The RC may have some special features that should be taken into account in the evaluation (for ex. publishing in Finnish or Swedish). In order to be able to tailor our evaluation service, the extra information for that is needed.
    RCs’ publication policy or practices can differ from the main stream i.e. databases such as WoS and Scopus do not tell the significance of the research but other methods or analyzing tools are needed for the justification of the performance. The RCs are asked to propose alternative methods for the evaluation.
    An example: Conference proceedings and monographs are often excluded because the international databases do not take them into account. It is important to know if RC is not satisfied for the general method of metrics and suggests alternatives. If this is clearly elicited, the evaluation office will discuss this chance with the RC during the evaluation process.

11. Does ‘productivity’ include also other scientific activity than publications?

  • Productivity includes also ‘other scientific activity’, such as societal impact and other information stored in TUHAT database ‘activities’.

12. What does publishing strategy mean?

  • You can describe what your policy is when researchers publish their articles. What media RC considers relevant and useful in order to add visibility and success? Do you have publishing strategy and how is it implemented?
  • No labels