Bridge funding regulation

Regulations for Extraordinary Activity Support Allocated from the IEES Base Funding

Approved by the Council of the Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences on 04.05.2026

§ 1. Scope of the Regulations

(1) This document governs the allocation of extraordinary support for the research activities of employees of the University of Tartu Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences (IEES) from the Institute’s base funding resources. The purpose of allocating such support is to ensure the sustainability of key focus areas that are important to the Institute. In accordance with Resolution No. 9 of the Council of the University of Tartu (29.06.2020), base funding resources are used, among other purposes, to ensure job security for the university’s academic staff.

(2) The regulation for funding from base funding governs grants exceeding 20,000 euros, the allocation of which is decided by the Institute’s Council.

(3) The support measures include:

1. Support to enable research groups to continue operating when the future employment of the group at the university is clearly at risk, hereinafter referred to as bridge funding;
2. Support for strengthening research groups in order to take advantage of unexpectedly emerging opportunities for advancing research.

§ 2. General Principles for the Allocation of Support

(1) Support is allocated through a competitive process; these regulations govern only the conditions for allocating exceptional need-based support and do not constitute a regular grant call.

(2) The opening of calls and the amounts allocated to the measures depend on the Institute’s possibilities. Relevant decisions are made by the Institute director at the beginning of autumn and/or at the end of the financial year.

(3) Deadlines for submitting applications for bridge funding are determined by the Institute director, and the application procedure is specified in the relevant circular. Applications for strengthening support may be submitted to the Institute director on a rolling basis. Applications are submitted to the council by the head of department or the Institute director.

(4) If the circumstances underlying the allocation of support change significantly, the Institute Council may revoke the decision to award support. A decision to terminate support allocation may be made regarding the unused balance in cases where:

1. the supported researchers obtain sufficient funding from other sources;
2. the supported researcher no longer works at the Institute.

Recipients of support are obliged to notify the IEES Council if any of the above situations arise.

§ 3. Bridge Funding for Research Groups

(1) Bridge funding is an extraordinary support measure intended to enable the long-term continuation of IEES research groups in the event that a research or applied research grant application is not funded, provided that reasonable possibilities for ensuring the continued employment of the group from departmental resources have been exhausted.

(2) The maximum duration of the bridge funding period is one year.

(3) Bridge funding covers employee salary costs up to the minimum rate of the applicable salary grade in force at the University of Tartu during the funding period, and essential research costs up to 20% of the salary fund.

(4) Bridge funding may be applied for outside the competitive application process for up to 1.5 positions for groups that were the highest-ranked unfunded groups in an Estonian Research Council (ETAG) grant competition or an equivalent grant competition.

(5) All research groups meeting the eligibility criteria for bridge funding may apply for support through the competitive application process, including groups that were first below the funding threshold if support exceeding 1.5 positions is requested.

(6) Research expenses are costs directly related to the objectives of the bridge funding. Bridge funding is not intended to finance ancillary activities (e.g. non-essential travel, website maintenance, event organisation, etc.).

(7) The application must include the following information in the prescribed format:

1. whose salary costs are to be covered and to what extent support is requested;
2. plans for applying for research funding and increasing the success rate of applications;
3. activities undertaken during the previous support period to secure funding and improve application success rates (in the case of repeated bridge funding applications);
4. a description of the research planned during the support-covered period;
5. the budget and its justification;
6. a comprehensive overview of funding sources previously available to the research group and available during the application period, including amounts and funders.

(8) In the accompanying letter, the head of department shall explain the importance of the research group for the department/institute/society, both from the perspective of research and teaching activities (including supervision). In addition, the head of department shall provide an overview of the department’s capacity and efforts in supporting the applicant. If the applicant is the head of department, this part of the application shall be prepared by the Institute director.

§ 4. Support for Strengthening Research Groups

(1) The purpose of strengthening support for research groups is to provide research groups with resources to take advantage of unexpectedly emerging time-critical research. It is expected that the quality, scope, and/or visibility of the research will improve to an extent that is significant from the perspective of the Institute as a whole. For example, changes may occur in nature or society that require faster scientific response than the conventional funding application system allows.

(2) The purpose of the support is not to provide additional funding for the routine activities of research groups or for developing future plans.

(3) Support for strengthening research groups is awarded as a one-time grant.

(4) Strengthening support may also be applied for in order to recruit a promising early-career researcher to the group if the need to support them is time-critical.

(5) Applications must include the following information in the prescribed format:

1. the purpose for applying for support;
2. an explanation of the time-critical nature of the situation and the expected impact of the support on the Institute’s research activities and potential;
3. an action plan and expected results;
4. the budget and its justification.

§ 5. Principles for Evaluating Applications for Support Allocated from the Institute’s Base Funding

(1) Applications are evaluated by a working group formed from members of the Institute Council (up to six members), including representatives from each department and the Institute director as a voting member. The working group is appointed by the Institute director for one year.

(2) The working group prepares a justified ranking of applications together with funding recommendations.

(3) In the event of a tie vote, the vote of the Institute director shall be decisive. The Institute director submits the final proposal (who will receive support and in what amount) to the Institute Council, while respecting the ranking prepared by the working group.

§ 6. Evaluation Criteria

(1) Bridge funding

• The applicants’ research potential and capacity to secure future funding (note that ETAG primarily evaluates the research project, whereas bridge funding evaluates the research group).
• The importance of preserving the research direction for the Institute, also considering the teaching activities carried out by group members.
• The justification of the action plan.
• The appropriateness of the budget.
• The presence of doctoral students requiring supervision.
• The funding body’s evaluation in the most recent application round (if available).

(2) Support for Strengthening Research Groups

• Compliance of the application with the criteria.
• The applicants’ research potential and capacity to develop a novel/unexpected research direction.
• The importance of strengthening the research direction/activity for the Institute.
• The justification of the action plan.
• The appropriateness of the budget.