EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 30.4.2018 SWD(2018) 159 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Mid-term evaluation of Creative Europe Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Mid-term evaluation of the Creative Europe programme (2014-2020) {COM(2018) 248 final}



Glossary Term or acronym Meaning or definition AV Audiovisual AVMSD Audiovisual Media Services Directive CAGR Composed Annual Growth Rate CED Creative Europe Desks CCS Cultural and Creative Sector(s) DG European Commission Directorate General DSMS Digital Single Market Strategy EAO European Audiovisual Observatory ECoC European Capital of Culture EU European Union FE Focused Evaluation(s) GF Guarantee Facility GVA Gross Valued Added LPF Level Playing Field OPC Open Public Consultation PCC Production Capacity Countries PMF Programme Monitoring Framework SME Small and Medium Enterprise(s) TFEU Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union US United States of America VOD Video On Demand 1.INTRODUCTION As required by the legal base of the Creative Europe programme the Commission has undertaken a mid-term evaluation of the programme, covering also the ex-post evaluation of its predecessor programmes (Media 2007, Culture 2007-2013 and Media Mundus). The evaluation covers the implementation of the Creative Europe programme, its predecessor programmes and all their sub-programmes, in the territory of all countries which are eligible to be programme beneficiaries. The purpose of the evaluation is to: - Assess the effectiveness of the measures taken to achieve the Programme's objectives, the efficiency of the programme and its European added value. - Address the Programme’s internal and external coherence, the continued relevance of all of its objectives, and the scope for simplification. - Address the contribution of Creative Europe to the policy priorities of the EU. - Assess the long-term impact of the predecessor programmes. This SWD is based on an external and independent evaluation as well as thematic studies, a wide range of data sources and stakeholder dialogue, including an online public consultation. The methodological approach to the independent evaluation combined a variety of data collection and assessment methods, as explained in chapter 4 (Method of the Evaluation): (1) collection and analysis of programme data and (2) contextual data; (3) Six Focused Evaluations including counterfactual analysis; (4) Surveys among the beneficiaries of the programme; (5) scoping and key informant interviews; (6) an Open Public Consultation on Creative Europe. Only a limited number of Creative Europe projects were finalised at the time of the evaluation (1.5 % for Culture) making difficult to measure the real impact of the programme. The evaluation is therefore mainly based on applications' data and stakeholder consultations and for indicators like job creation the data was extrapolated from the MEDIA and Culture surveys (see chapter 5.3). The surveys targeted all the successful project lead applicants and responses received were equivalent to approximately 20% of target group. Furthermore the existent indicators, as established by the legal base, were not sufficiently related to the outcomes of the schemes and projects of the Programme. In this regard the Commission services prepared a concrete proposal to strengthen the monitoring framework system (see table of the revised set of "Creative Europe" indicators in annex 4 ), that should result in the adoption of supplementary performance indicators by a "Delegated Act", in line with article 20 of the Creative Europe Regulation. The implementation of the new set of indicators will allow a proper monitoring of the programme. This monitoring will be done regularly, at 3 stages, based on project data: (1) data from the applications of selected projects; (2) data related with the implementation of the projects; (3) once finalised and validated by EACEA, output data of the projects. These data will feed the Qlikview dashboard in real time and the regular monitoring process by EACEA. Finally, these data will be gathered at programme level to feed the final evaluation report, assessing the impacts and the sustainability of the programme to be submitted to the European Parliament and the Council by 30 June 2022, as established in the legal base. This Staff Working Document summarises the main findings of the evaluation and accompanies the mid-term Evaluation Report submitted to the European Parliament and the Council.

2.BACKGROUND TO THE CREATIVE EUROPE PROGRAMME Creative Europe (2014-2020) is the European Union's framework programme for support the European cultural and creative sectors. The value of the cultural and creative sectors (CCSs) in Europe was EUR 560 billion in 2014, representing 4.5% of EU GDP, whilst it employed 8.5 million workers, equivalent to 3.8% of Europe's workforce. European cultural and creative sectors are inherently diversified along national and linguistic lines, thus contributing to a rich cultural landscape. Cultural and creative sectors encompass all activities based on cultural values and/or artistic and other creative expressions. They are a major asset for Europe because they produce works rooted in our unique cultural heritage, talent and capacity for innovation. They are a source of innovative ideas that can be turned into products and services that create growth and jobs across the economy. They also shape our values and identities and therefore have an intrinsic value for European citizens. At the same time, cultural and linguistic diversity gives rise to obstacles to the circulation of works and the mobility of cultural operators which hampers the development of a shared cultural area and limits the choices available for citizens and consumers. Whilst fully respecting the principle of subsidiarity, the CE Programme seeks to complement and build on the support policies of the Member States. The Programme provides combined financial support mainly through grants and a loan guarantee facility. It responds to the main challenges affecting the sectors, namely fragmentation along national and linguistic lines, the transformation of the value chain by the digital revolution and the globalisation of the economy leading to the tough competition from global players. Recognising the intrinsic value of culture as a public good and the dual societal and economic value of the cultural and creative sectors, the Programme pursues the cultural, industrial and training goals of the European Union. The twin general objectives of the Programme are to safeguard cultural and linguistic diversity and to strengthen the competitiveness of the European cultural and creative sectors. The specific objectives are to support the sectors' capacity to operate transnationally and internationally; to promote the transnational circulation of works and the transnational mobility of operators; to strengthen the financial capacity of SMEs; to foster policy development. Furthermore it pursues cross-cutting themes of supporting economies of scale and critical mass, as well as ensuring a more level playing field, by taking account of low production capacity countries, in particular in the audiovisual sector. The programme structure, aligned with the objectives, comprises three parts: (i) a MEDIA Sub-programme, supporting quality content, cross-border access and distribution, promotion of works and skills in the audiovisual sector; (ii) a Culture Sub-programme, supporting cross-border cooperation, platforms, networking in all cultural and creative sectors (except audiovisual), as well as literary translations; (iii) a Cross-sectoral Strand, including a Guarantee Facility and transnational policy cooperation and support to policy development. The programme took into account the specific nature of the different sectors, their different target groups and their particular needs through tailor-made approaches within two independent sub-programmes and a cross-sectoral strand. Creative Europe is open to cultural and creative organisations from EU Member States, as well as non-EU Member States. It provides support mainly to SMEs, non-profit organisations as well as public bodies The Programme allocates funds through annual Work Programmes and promote simplification of implementation through e-applications, lump sums and rationalisation of procedures. A network of Creative Europe Desks, covering all participating countries, has the mission of reaching out to potential beneficiaries and raising the visibility of the Programme in the sector and more widely.



Creative Europe programme intervention logic: NEEDS: -Consolidated market for cultural works with optimal circulation and large choice of consumers -Capacity of the cultural sector to adjust to the impact of globalization and the digital shift





3.IMPLEMENTATION / STATE OF PLAY OF CREATIVE EUROPE During the period 2014-2016, the volume of support provided by Creative Europe to the cultural and creative sectors (CCS) has amounted to €544 million, subdivided between €327 million and €179 million for the MEDIA and Culture Sub-programmes respectively as well as €38 million through the Cross-sectoral Strand (including the €14.8 million committed for the implementation of the CCS GF). Since the start of the Programme, around 2,580 CCS entities have benefited from the Creative Europe support, including 1,280 audiovisual companies and 1,300 cultural organisations. Around 150 entities and operators received support under the Cross-sectoral Strand. The CCS GF has been implemented only recently. As of June 2017, the first SMEs have started to receive loans under the scheme, through the first participating bank in Spain. 1Creative Europe MEDIA Sub-programme: Supported schemes and spend per scheme (million) 2Creative Europe CULTURE Sub-programme: Supported schemes and spend per scheme (million) 3Creative Europe Cross-Sectoral Strand: Supported schemes and spend per scheme 4.METHOD OF THE EVALUATION This evaluation was supported by an external and independent study, together with thematic studies and stakeholder dialogues. The methodological approach to the independent study combined a variety of data collection and assessment methods:

1.Collection and analysis of programme data included collection, structuring, review and analysis of data from programme databases and documentation, , including data on project applications, final project reports and programme management. 2.Collection and analysis of contextual data have been undertaken continuously and up to the interim stages of the evaluation. The key external data sources reviewed and used in the analysis include the contextual data collected by the European Audiovisual Observatory (EAO), Eurostat and Federation of European Publishers’ Annual Statistics as well as other surveys (e.g. Eurobarometer), reports and studies. 3.Six Focused Evaluations (FEs) covered a total of 10 key schemes under MEDIA and Culture sub-programmes field, assessing the performance of these schemes across the six evaluation criteria and six sectors. The methodologies for the FEs included counterfactual analyses of data on 70 supported projects and 30 rejected applicants’ case studies. 4.Surveys among the beneficiaries of the programme (i.e. projects supported by the current and predecessor programmes). The survey's results are analysed in annex 2 together with the responses to the OPC. The purpose of the surveys was fourfold: - to complement the existing programme and project monitoring data feeding especially ‘softer’ indicators and evaluation issues for which monitoring data is not available; - to inform the evaluative assessment especially as regards to effectiveness and added value, collecting across the main project types, under the Creative Europe Programme as well as from completed projects under the MEDIA, MEDIA Mundus and Culture Programme; - to inform the efficiency and implementation assessment of these programmes; - and to inform the relevance and coherence assessment. The surveys targeted all the successful project lead applicants under the Creative Europe Programme and predecessor programmes selected schemes. Over 1,400 responses were received, equivalent to approximately 20% of target group. 5.Around 20 scoping interviews and 103 key informant interviews were carried out with key informants/stakeholders of the current and predecessor programmes, including interviews with national policy makers, sector organisations, funding bodies and Creative Europe Desks (CEDs), programme managers and EU-level sub-sector representing organisations as well as international institutions . 6.An Open Public Consultation on Creative Europe was launched on 23 January 2017 and it was closed on the 23 April 2017. A total of 547 contributions were received (see more in annex 2 – stakeholder consultation). 7.The evaluation of the MEDIA sub-programme also draws on other studies on distribution, online aggregators, training, film heritage, cinema networks and market access. Furthermore, as foreseen in the 2014 Communication on European Films in the Digital Era , the European Commission launched the European Film Forum, a structured dialogue with stakeholders, to develop a common strategic agenda for the audiovisual sector . The CCSs are particularly difficult to quantify, because of the need to consolidate statistical methodologies at European level and the existence of data gaps . Also, there is an intrinsic problem in measuring the contribution of small European programmes to policy fields governed by subsidiarity where national policies and programmes play a leading role. Furthermore, there are some data gaps on the impacts of the Programme, stemming primarily from weaknesses in the indicators established in the legal base which, although they have been regularly monitored, did not always sufficiently correspond to the outcomes of the schemes and projects financed by the Programme. Taking account of the above limitations the evaluation has been conducted using the best available data. More information on the methodological approach, data collection and key challenges is presented in annex 3.



5.ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS

In accordance with the Commission's Better Regulation Guidelines, the Creative Europe interim evaluation addresses evaluation questions under each of the sections, which are structured around six evaluation criteria: relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and EU added value. 5.1.RELEVANCE Summary box: Key conclusions on relevance ·Creative Europe’s specific objectives of supporting transnational collaboration and cooperation, increasing access to finance as well as policy development remain relevant to the ongoing challenges of the digital shift, globalisation, fragmentation of markets and the need for investment. ·The MEDIA Sub-programme has adapted its support to respond to new market developments, inter-alia to strengthen innovative distribution strategies and online access to works. ·However, the fragmentation of the MEDIA Sub-programme into 14 separate schemes limits flexibility and weakens the capacity to achieve collaboration across the industry. ·The Culture Sub-programme has contributed to mobility of artists, circulation of works of art and repertoire, internationalisation of careers, support for emerging artists and strengthening of the competitiveness of cultural operators. ·The introduction of the European networks scheme in the Culture Sub-programme is relevant in offering cultural sub-sectors a framework to develop the necessary skills and business models with a view to remaining competitive in the digital economy. ·The strong market response to the launch of the Cultural and Creative Sectors Guarantee Facility, with three Guarantee Agreements signed in the first year, shows the relevance of this innovative market instrument. Overall, the programme’s rationale for intervention and objectives remain relevant to the key challenges of the cultural and creative sectors and EU policy priorities. The Impact Assessment of CE found that cultural and creative markets are fragmented along national and linguistic lines, whilst the digital disruption of the landscape is ongoing and global competition from major players is intensifying. Greater access to finance is more pressing than ever because of the need to invest in such a competitive environment. The Programme's support to cross-border circulation and cooperation as well as to innovative market instruments therefore continues to be relevant to help the sector face these challenges. At the same time the low budget limits the scope of the action and its impact and dampens the ambition of the cultural organisations for cross-border activity which is badly needed given the high fragmentation of the cultural landscape. Creative Europe also responds to both the ongoing and emerging needs of the AV and Culture sectors. As emerged from the review of stakeholder consultation/interview results, Creative Europe continues to address the ongoing needs of the European CCS, and even more so than the previous programmes thanks to its ‘business-oriented’ dimension. The main ongoing needs of CCS are development of skills and talent, developing quality and innovative content, cross border circulation and promotion and access to finance. Concerning emerging needs, in the audiovisual field, European films have lower audiences than US films and are on average available in fewer European countries. The MEDIA Sub-programme responds to this challenge by strengthening the capacity of European works to appeal to cross-border audiences and to be distributed. Also, the digital revolution is changing the audiovisual landscape i.e. the arrival of global online players in Europe, the drop in DVD sales, the difficulty for many films to be screened in theatres, pressure on broadcaster revenues. Therefore MEDIA schemes have been adapted. The development schemes support quality content with the main focus being on quality story telling irrespective of its format or distribution model, which is in line with the increasingly blurred distinction between cinema and TV. It also potentially covers film heritage while new opportunities are being offered by digital technology for this category of films. Distribution support, which incentivizes distributors to promote non-national films, also covers online distribution costs. Compared to national support schemes, MEDIA has also the characteristic of supporting activities such as promotion of European works online, audience development or market access or training with a certain focus on the latest technological and market development. Stakeholders including several national film bodies are globally in favour of this orientation. However, the fragmentation of the MEDIA Sub-programme into 14 separate schemes addressing specific projects and categories of beneficiaries potentially limits the flexibility of the programme and weakens its capacity to foster collaboration across the industry . In particular, the structure itself of the selective distribution scheme has the effect of dividing the same film by as many territories of distribution, which isolates the work of each national distributor from others and from production companies. This is at odds with current practices where a film starts to be promoted already at the production stage. Also, this structure gives insufficient margin of manoeuvre to adapt the schemes during the 7 year period of implementation of the programme. Also, the MEDIA Sub-programme plays only a limited role in promoting European works in global markets. This could be reconsidered if we consider that the market share of European films outside of Europe is just as high as within Europe and that there are significant opportunities for growth. In fact, a number of producers, distributors and government bodies have called for increased support for international distribution and promotion in third countries.

Regarding the emerging needs in the Culture Sub-programme, stakeholders see the introduction of the European networks scheme as more relevant than the generic operational grants of the previous programme in terms of offering cultural sub-sectors a framework to develop the necessary skills and business models with a view to remaining competitive in the digital economy. They also consider Creative Europe as relevant to respond to the necessity of increasing the transnational and international circulation of European cultural and creative works . Creative Europe is relevant to the strategies pursued by the Member States. Most national strategies aim to ensure the creative sectors are skilled, resourceful and innovative in the digital era, while recognising the contribution they potentially make to the economy. As such, the strategies pursued at the national level are also relevant to EU policy objectives emphasising innovation and inclusion to foster jobs and growth in the CCS (e.g. Europe 2020). At the same time, national funding schemes have been operating with reduced resources as a result of budget cuts in a number of Member States. Only two EU Member States have increased their CCS funding as a share of GDP post-2008, while 12 have reduced funding and 14 have remained stable. This has led in some cases to a reorientation of priorities in certain countries with a stronger focus on enhancing the financial independence of operators in the CCS, notably through the concept of cultural entrepreneurship. This reorientation mirrors the rationale and objectives of Creative Europe’s Culture schemes, which are more geared towards capacity building and the development of new business models compared to those of Culture 2007-2013. Furthermore the tax incentives offered in some Member States to attract foreign investments in an effort to enhance the viability of national AV operators in an increasingly competitive global environment are both relevant and complementary to Creative Europe’s financial support towards capacity-building and internationalisation prospects of the EU AV industry. Creative Europe continues to be fully relevant to EU policy priorities. Creative Europe is part of the 2014-2020 Multi-Annual Financial Framework designed to contribute to the delivery of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. As such, a wide range of policy and industry stakeholders have noted that the priorities of Creative Europe are highly relevant to those of Europe 2020 in terms of realising the potential of the CCS as drivers of innovation-driven growth and sustainable employment in the digital era. This also credits Creative Europe’s explicit commitment to investing in skills and capacity building to support the consolidation of the AV and culture sectors in a fast-changing and globalised market environment. Moreover Creative Europe MEDIA facilitates the adaptation of the European audiovisual industry to the Digital Single Market, in particular by underpinning the cross-border access objective of the copyright reform, the promotion and prominence requirements of the AVMSD (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) and helping build the capacity of industry to operate at a European level. For example, several measures adopted by MEDIA have aimed to strengthen capacity regarding online distribution of and access to European works e.g. through support to catalogues for VOD platforms. On another level, EU policy also underlines the importance of investing in culture to stimulate social cohesion, job creation and economic growth in regions and cities. This priority is, under the programming period 2014-2020, clearly captured under the Creative Europe Culture -funded European Capitals of Culture (ECoC) special action. Indeed, the 2014 ECoC Decision now requires cities to present a long-term cultural strategy when bidding for the title. On that basis, the Commission expects that cultural players in ECoC cities will be able to benefit from local authorities’ strategic support over the longer term, both in terms of capacity-building and inter-city or cross-border networking. Greater access to finance is more pressing than ever because of the need to invest in such a competitive environment at a time of cuts in public support in many Member States. The Cross-sectoral strand is responding through an innovative market instrument, the Cultural and Creative Sectors Guarantee Facility. The Guarantee Facility, with an initial allocation of € 120 million from 2014-2020, aims to encourage banks to invest in the sector thus boosting the potential for growth. The strong market response to its launch in 2016, with three Guarantee Agreements signed in the first year, shows the relevance of this innovative instrument to the needs of the market. It has been decided that the European Fund for Strategic Investments shall top-up the initial allocation by 50% in 2017. Lastly, the schemes under the 2007-2013 MEDIA and Culture Programmes and Creative Europe continue to be relevant to the objective of preserving cultural heritage and diversity in Europe as well as promoting artistic creativity, in accordance with Article 167 TFEU and the 2005 UNESCO Convention respectively.



5.2.COHERENCE Summary box: Key conclusions on coherence ·Efforts have been made to develop external synergies between Creative Europe and other EU funding programmes, in particular Erasmus +, Horizon 2020, COSME and the ERDF, but these can be strengthened further. ·The MEDIA Sub-programme schemes are internally coherent as they are designed to cover the traditional value chain of the audiovisual industry and avoid overlaps and gaps. MEDIA has accompanied the copyright reform and the refit of the AVMS Directive, as part of the Digital Single Market strategy. ·Coherence with Member State policies is being actively developed through structured dialogue. The impact of MEDIA would be strengthened if its objectives were integrated more fully into the Member State film policies. ·The Culture sub-programme’s schemes are coherent with each other and Literary Translation occupies a niche area with a much more targeted beneficiary group. The Culture Sub-programme schemes correspond to the needs and expectations of the different sectors and are complementary, offering a variety of possibilities. ·There is a strong coherence between Creative Europe and the European Agenda for Culture’s objective of promoting culture as a catalyst for creativity but there is less evidence of coherence with the objective of promoting culture as a vital element in the EU’s international relations. ·The Guarantee Facility has the potential to strengthen the coherence of Creative Europe. However the limited budget of the Cross-sectoral strand has in practice restricted the capacity to develop the cross-sectoral synergies envisaged as regards policy development and innovation. ·

The Creative Europe programme is broadly internally (among the different programme strands and the actions within these) and externally coherent (with other EU interventions and policies) although some aspects can be improved. Creative Europe provides a set of actions to support the AV and cultural sectors and is internally coherent with both the MEDIA and the Culture sub-programmes. No overlaps or duplications in the actions funded have been identified. The sub-programmes mainly function independently of each other. Strategy and planning of the MEDIA sub-programme lie with DG CNECT and equivalent activities for the Culture sub-programme lie with DG EAC. Most stakeholders consulted noted that the coherence of EU support to the CCS improved under Creative Europe as compared to the predecessor programmes. However stakeholders consulted noted that communication between the DGs and EACEA could be expanded and further inputs from EACEA in the strategy and planning process could help identify how to increase the integration of these strands in practice. The MEDIA Sub-programme schemes cover the traditional value chain of the audiovisual industry in a comprehensive manner, supporting skills and capacity building, content development and production, distribution of works, promotion and access to markets. A specific scheme has been created to cover online distribution. No overlaps or gaps between the schemes have been found whereas they fit coherently together, for example with Development Slate and Development Single schemes supporting portfolios of projects and individual projects respectively. The MEDIA Sub-programme has helped the European audiovisual industry to adapt to the Digital Single Market. It provides for measures accompanying the copyright reforms, for example through support to catalogues of European films, support to licensing hubs, support to a more efficient use of subtitling and an Animation Action Plan. Also, the new scheme "Promotion of European Works Online” supports the industry’s adaptation to the proposed provisions of the future AVMS Directive on a quota of European works for VOD services and obligation to make such works prominent. Coherence between EU and national film policies is important given the central role of national film funds. The national film funds represent the bulk of the support to the audiovisual sector, with approximately € 2.5 billion per year compared to € 120 million from MEDIA. The European Film Forum and the dialogue with the European Film Agency Directors (EFADs) were launched to develop a shared strategic vision for the sector, following the Commission Communication on European film in the digital era. Also, the Open Method of Coordination group of Member States was launched in July 2017, further to the request by the Education, Youth, Culture and Sport Council. Its mandate is to identify complementarities between film policies at regional, national and EU level with a view to improving the circulation of films. The dialogue so far has shown that the impact of MEDIA would be strengthened if its objectives were integrated more fully into the Member State film policies and the activities of the film funds. The Culture sub-programme’s schemes are coherent with each other, although more could be done to clarify the relationship between individual schemes among stakeholders and beneficiaries. While there is strong coherence between Cooperation Projects and respectively Networks and Platforms, the relationship between Networks and Platforms is less clear. Meanwhile, Literary Translation occupies a niche area within the Culture sub-programme. None of the stakeholders or beneficiaries from Cooperation Projects, Networks, and Platforms referred to this scheme, suggesting low awareness and a lack of integration with the rest of the Culture sub-programme. This is likely to be because Literary Translation has a much more targeted beneficiary group than the others. The Cross-sectoral strand contains a mixture of schemes which have a cross-cutting character together with some activities which benefit mainly specific sectors. As a result the coherence of the cross-sectoral strand is somewhat uneven. The largest activity, the CCS Guarantee Facility, has established terms and conditions which are open to all SMEs in the cultural and creative sectors and with the objective of strengthening the financial capacity across the cultural and creative sectors. The Facility is a major innovation of Creative Europe which diversifies the range of instruments deployed by the Programme compared to the exclusive grant approach of the predecessor programmes. 80% of respondents to the public consultation believed that the Guarantee Facility has the potential to strengthen the coherence of Creative Europe The special call for Refugee Integration Projects, which provided support to AV, cultural, and cross-sectoral projects that aimed to facilitate the integration of refugees into European communities, could serve as a model for future more cross-sectoral work. The Creative Europe programme is broadly externally coherent. Creative Europe’s objectives and priorities are overall coherent and complementary with those of national programmes, thus respecting the principle of subsidiarity. What distinguishes Creative Europe most from national funding schemes is its focus on international and transnational activities, which are rarely funded at national level. Interviewees confirm that Creative Europe fills an important gap, as not only does it provide support for the additional activities of European networking organisations, but it also enables national organisations to reach out across the borders. Creative Europe is largely coherent with other EU funding and support mechanisms relevant to the AV and cultural sectors. Although other EU funding can benefit the AV and culture sectors, they do not specifically focus on AV and culture and their main objectives are different than those of Creative Europe. Nevertheless, the surveys show that more could be done to increase beneficiaries’ awareness of the existence of other EU funding streams. Creative Europe is largely coherent with Europe 2020’s objectives of smart, sustainable, and inclusive growth and its flagship, the Digital Single Market strategy launched in 2015. In particular, MEDIA facilitates the adaptation of the European audiovisual industry to the Digital Single Market, by underpinning the cross-border access objective of the copyright reform, the promotion and prominence requirements of the AVMS Directive and helping build the capacity of industry to operate at a European level. For example, several measures adopted by MEDIA have aimed to strengthen capacity regarding online distribution of and access to European works e.g. through support to catalogues for VOD platforms. On the other hand there is a strong coherence between Creative Europe and the European Agenda for Culture’s objective of promoting culture as a catalyst for creativity is evidenced through Creative Europe’s support for capacity-building and skills development for CCS operators. In particular capacity building and skills development is embedded across Culture sub-programme schemes, most notably Cooperation Projects and Networks. The MEDIA sub-programme has a specific scheme devoted to training. There is less evidence of coherence with the European Agenda for Culture’s objective of promoting culture as a vital element in the EU’s international relations, as the support is focused mostly on facilitating and supporting transnational relationships within the EU. However, the eligibility criteria for some schemes allow participation from non-EU member states as member organisations. There is coherence between the objectives of EU membership to the European Audiovisual Observatory (EAO) and the objectives of the EAO, as well as opportunities to make better use of available data. Lastly, Creative Europe sits alongside a range of sometimes overlapping programmes at the international level but avoids duplication in practice because of the overall shortage of international funding.



5.3.EFFECTIVENESS

Summary box: Key conclusions on effectiveness ·Creative Europe has contributed to the general objective of supporting cultural diversity by increasing access of audiences to a diversity of European works and to the objective of competitiveness by helping cultural operators to scale up at the European level. It generated 3,000 jobs over 2014-2016, contributing to the EU 2020 goals of jobs and growth. ·The MEDIA Sub-programme has extensively supported the development and production of quality content and its distribution across Europe. However, a number of improvements can be made to strengthen the distribution and promotion of European works, including online. ·The Culture Sub-programme has benefitted from the reduction to just four clear strands compared to the previous programme. It has moved from supporting the more traditional creation to innovative projects covering also the private sector, without forgetting the social dimension and intercultural dialogue. Globally, Creative Europe and the predecessor programmes have been or are successful in achieving or progressing towards their objectives, delivering their intended outputs (i.e. from programmed activities), results (outcomes of those activities) and having the anticipated impact. The achievements of the predecessor programmes have to be examined in the light of the Lisbon Strategy, making significant contributions against the EU strategic priorities: - During the predecessor programmes’ period, and in the context of decreasing national spending on CCS, the three predecessor programmes contributed €1.15bn in total to support the CCS. A total of around 7,300 CCS entities benefited from the support of the predecessor programmes, around 2,800 companies in the audiovisual sector and 4,500 cultural sector operators. - The combined financial support offered by the predecessor programmes led to the creation of an estimated 8,000 jobs in European CCS. The predecessor programmes are estimated to have created 1.1 full-time jobs on average in the beneficiaries, which are small enterprises. -The predecessor programmes’ support was essentially oriented towards supporting the CCS and professionals and more could have been done to ‘put the citizen first’ and tap into ‘new’ technologies. Predecessor programmes delivered on many of their general and specific objectives but could have been more effective in some areas: - The predecessor MEDIA programme delivers strongly against its key development and circulation objectives, but could have been more effective in following market developments; - The predecessor Culture programme was effective in increasing the transnational mobility and capacity, but less so in strengthening the operators financially and promoting their work with underrepresented groups; - MEDIA Mundus was effective in improving European and third countries professionals’ knowledge of audiovisual markets, but less so in facilitating access to films from third countries. Concerning key outputs, results and impacts, the MEDIA, MEDIA Mundus and Culture predecessor programmes were overall effective in delivering, while MEDIA Mundus impact was fragmented: - Predecessor MEDIA Programme delivered most of its expected outputs, outcomes and impacts, but less so in smaller, low PCCs; In terms of outputs, the predecessor Programme supported a total of around 10,898 projects (average of 1,550 projects per year), providing support for the development of more than 3,100 European films and 460 TV productions as well as distribution of 2,200 unique European titles. In terms of results, the MEDIA 2007 led to the training of around 1.1% of all European audiovisual professionals. Its development support contributed to the production of 450 quality films per year or 18% of all the annual European films produced. The predecessor MEDIA distribution schemes contributed to the generation of a total of 492 million admissions recoded for the supported films. In terms of impacts, the development support under predecessor MEDIA helped the sector to maintain the scale of its operations, increasing the feasibility of projects and helped to leverage financial support. The development schemes also helped the benefiting companies to develop the scale of their operations. The distribution schemes had a positive impact on increasing investment in distribution and promotion of European audiovisual works. - Predecessor Culture Programme was overall highly successful in delivering its expected outputs and outcomes. In terms of outputs the predecessor Culture Programme supported a total number of 2,138 projects or 305 projects per year on average, including 780 Cooperation projects, between 27 and 42 networks and 640 Literary translation projects. In terms of results, the supported projects brought together cultural and creative operators from 39 countries. A rough estimate suggests that around 260 thousand cultural and creative players were engaged in / by supported projects, amounting to 2.3% of all employed in the sectors in 2010. According to the Culture survey, 98% of predecessor Programme’s projects delivered all or most of their planned outputs and results. The Cooperation projects delivered an estimated 4,200 activities, 89% of which focused on common creation of artworks. Literary translation projects delivered more than 3,100 translations.

In terms of impacts, the cooperation projects reached an estimated 8.83 million people. The strongest reported impacts of all the key predecessor Culture scheme was on increasing the scale and diversity of the participating cultural and creative operators’ activities. The supported networks/cultural bodies had a weaker than anticipated impact on increasing the use of digital technologies for the development, distribution and promotion of cultural and creative works. The predecessor translation scheme contributed to 2.9 million books sold. - With a total budget of €13.8 million, MEDIA Mundus supported around 60 audiovisual operators through a total of 67 projects implemented during the period 2011-2013. The Programme supported a range of measures that included training, access to markets and ‘cross-over activities’ aimed at promoting the circulation of European films in third countries and vice versa. The evidence collected suggests that MEDIA Mundus delivered most of its planned outputs and results. The impact was stronger in relation to the development of market knowledge among professionals from European and third countries and increasing the circulation and sales of European works abroad rather than on the circulation of works of third countries in Europe. The Programme helped to secure funding from other sources outside Europe. Over time, it created a growing network of EU and third countries professionals who participated in the Programme. Creative Europe is making an important contribution towards the EU2020 employment target and the priorities of the current Commission: stimulating investment for the purpose of job creation; and a deeper and fairer internal market with a strengthened industrial base. The increase in Creative Europe spending during the first three years, however, almost ‘matched’ the growth of the sectors (20% increase in employment), with the current programme annual spending on average 18% higher than that of predecessor programmes. During the period 2014-2016, the volume of support provided by Creative Europe to the CCS has amounted to €544 million, subdivided between €327 million and €179 million for the MEDIA and Culture Sub-programmes respectively as well as €38 million through the Cross-sectoral Strand (including the €14.8 million committed for the implementation of the CCS GF). Since the start of the Programme, around 2,580 CCS entities have benefited from the Creative Europe support, including 1,280 audiovisual companies and 1,300 cultural organisations. Around 150 entities and operators received support under the Cross-sectoral Strand. Noting that the GF has only recently been implemented, CCS SMEs are still to benefit from the financial services supported by this instrument. With regard to job creation, the Creative Europe Programmes generated an estimated 3,000 employment positions in the period 2014-2016 directly in the organisations benefiting from the programmes . One fourth (or around 750) of these positions were estimated to be permanent employment positions while the rest were estimated to be temporary positions (around 2,250). The support of the Creative Europe programme has led to the creation of an estimated 0.9 full-time employment places per programme beneficiary on average (1.6 FTEs among the beneficiaries of the MEDIA Sub-programme and 0.3 among the beneficiaries of the Culture Sub-programme). The Culture survey and the focused evaluations confirmed the lower propensity of the Culture Sub-programme to create employment positions as part of the Creative Europe Programme as well as the lower share of permanent positions created. This lower propensity could be partially explained by grant amounts that have been on average 46% lower for Culture operators than they have been for companies supported by MEDIA under the current Programme. Furthermore, this lower capacity could be in large part due to the four times lower Programme support to operators in culture than audiovisual sub-sectors. As for the priority of the current Commission on ‘strengthening the industrial base’, the programmes have strengthened organisations that benefited from funding support, especially in the MEDIA programmes . The majority of respondents reported ‘major’ or ‘moderate’ impact of the programmes’ funding on increased turnover or market position of their organisations. Creative Europe delivers on its general objectives of safeguarding cultural diversity and strengthening competitiveness. The MEDIA Sub-programme has focused in particular on support to transnational circulation of works to enable audiences to have increased access to films from other European countries. Over 40% of the MEDIA Sub-programme budget supports distribution and exhibition, extensively contributing to the cross-border distribution of works. For example, in 2014 the Distribution schemes supported over 400 films, equivalent to over 25% of Europe’s annual film production. For the period 2014-16 it is estimated that films receiving MEDIA distribution support reached an average of over 65 million total admissions per year. The external evaluation shows that support has increased the availability of legal offers in a greater number of territories than would otherwise have been the case.

MEDIA co-finances distribution costs including subtitling, which is key to increasing access to works, particularly as it enables reaching cross-border niche audiences online. However, the costs of subtitling can be an obstacle for small productions. Also, in practice the use of subtitles is restricted to the territories for which they were originally intended, with no economies of scale through sharing with distributors from other territories. Therefore, more efficiency needs to be achieved regarding the costs as well as the use of subtitling, especially when they publicly funded. Support to exhibition is given through the Europa Cinemas network, the MEDIA Sub-programme’s biggest beneficiary. This network spans 33 countries and boosts the theatrical exhibition of non-national European films. It is estimated that 1 euro invested in the network generates €13 for the audiovisual sector through additional audiences. The Online Distribution scheme allocated on average €5.6 million to 19 companies per year, for the period 2014-16. The evaluation finds that overall the supported projects have performed below the market. According to project data the revenue growth of the seven supported SVOD services, at 7%, has been significantly lower than the growth shown by the wider sector overall, at 113%. This shows that the platforms have attracted very limited audiences. The scheme, and notably the action encouraging the development of new models of promotion and distribution, lacks input from tech companies which could offer relevant know-how, including on issues such as data analytics. During this period, no European wide service or strong network of national VOD services has been established. Due to these mixed results the scheme was revised in 2017 to focus on the promotion of European works online. The MEDIA Sub-programme has been effective in building the capacity of audiovisual professionals operating at transnational level, as regards creative, business and digital skills. Approximately 60% of training participants reported improved skills and competences. The Development schemes strengthen the ability of operators to develop works with transnational circulation potential, through seed funding. These schemes provide extensive support, funding over 400 projects per year, representing approximately 25 % of Europe’s annual film production (although not all development projects will lead to production). Nonetheless, the external evaluation shows there is a lack of awareness of stakeholders that the support to development covers works irrespective of their format and platform of distribution or transmedia content. Under the Development schemes only 2% of support has been attributed to projects primarily intended for online exploitation . The MEDIA Sub-programme supported films have achieved international recognition by winning prizes in the world's major film festivals. Success stories include winning the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film from 2013-2016 and winning the Palme d'Or from the Cannes Film Festival 8 times since 2007. In annex more detailed information is given about success stories. Through these results the MEDIA Sub-programme has become recognized as a quality brand in the industry. Culture programmes supported most sub-sectors in balanced way, but concerns are raised about the prioritisation of economic objectives. Overall the cultural operators are more reluctant to embrace the new ‘competitiveness’ general objective of Creative Europe Programme. A minority of stakeholders consulted considered that the greater programme focus on competitiveness is strength of the new Programme. Furthermore the current programme supports 45% less projects, compared to the predecessor Culture Programme and the average size of projects supported by the Culture Sub-programme has more than doubled compared to the predecessor period , but the size of operators benefiting from the Culture programmes has changed very little . The increasing size of the projects can be seen as an aspect of Creative Europe’s increased orientation towards market rationale and is also likely to shift the implementation towards organisations and countries that have more experience in managing larger projects. While many projects supported by the Culture programmes are transdisciplinary, the dominants sectors are: Visual arts, Cultural heritage, Performing arts: music and opera, Performing arts: theatre, street arts, circus arts and puppetry (see table). Estimation of the Culture programmes support by culture sub-sector Culture sub-sectors Participation in sub-sectors of the Culture programmes Culture programmes (million EUR) Culture programmes annual (million EUR) Participation in sub-sectors of Culture 2007-2013 Culture 2007 (million EUR) Culture 2007 annual (million EUR) Participation in sub-sectors of Culture (2014-2015) Culture 2014-2015 (million EUR) Culture 2014-2015 annual (million EUR) Visual arts 17% 79 8.8 15% 53 7.6 19% 21 10.5 Cultural heritage 16% 72 8.0 17% 58 8.3 15% 17 8.5 Design and applied arts and architecture 8% 35 3.9 7% 24 3.4 8% 9 4.5 Literature, books and reading 5% 25 2.8 5% 19 2.7 5% 6 3 Performing arts: music and opera 15% 67 7.4 16% 54 7.7 14% 15 7.5 Performing arts: dance 10% 47 5.2 12% 42 6.0 9% 10 5 Performing arts: theatre, street arts, circus arts and puppetry 18% 83 9.2 18% 62 8.9 18% 20 10 Other 11% 48 5.3 10% 34 4.9 11% 12 6 Total 100% 457 50.8 100% 346 49.4 100% 111 55.5 Source: Culture survey (% of respondents by Culture sub-sector), Programme data (yearly funding) Activities supported by the Culture programmes contribute to the creation of a ‘European cultural space’ and promotion of diversity, as most of the Culture Sub-programme schemes include a specific focus on audience development, aiming to bring European cultural works to non-national audiences and the schemes (especially the Cooperation Projects) contribute strongly to transnational mobility of creative and cultural players. The Creative Europe Sub-programmes have been fairly effective in achieving most of their specific objectives and priorities, particularly in promoting the transnational circulation of cultural and creative / audiovisual professionals and works, as well as and increasing their capacity to operate internationally. However, both sub-programmes have been relatively less effective in pursuing the specific objective of increasing access to European cultural and creative works by underrepresented groups.

The contribution of the Creative Culture Sector Guarantee Facility (CCS GF) to priorities of the Cross-sectoral Strand is limited to date, as the CCS GF started to operate two years after the start of the Creative Europe programme. Nevertheless, in 2016, the implementation of the CCS Guarantee Facility has been very effective as three delegations agreements were signed with financial intermediaries and calls were launched to welcome applications from CCS SMEs. At the end of the first semester 2017, all budgetary allocations were committed for the year. The CCS GF is expected to cover 15% to 20% of the estimated financing gap of the sector. Both MEDIA and Culture currently make significant contributions to the aims of both the Digital Single Market Strategy (DSMS) and the European Agenda for Culture. Because of the separation between the sub-programmes, and the two DGs managing the programmes, the contribution to each strategy may not be effectively integrated. There may therefore be an opportunity to maximise the contribution each sub-programme makes to these strategies. The Culture Sub-programme contributes to all objectives of the European Agenda for Culture, the promotion of: (i) cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue - achieved through encouraging and promoting cross-border mobility, the promotion of mobility and digitisation in the field of cultural heritage, and intercultural dialogue. These elements are effectively supported by all schemes under Culture 2007 and Creative Europe; (ii) culture as catalyst for creativity - achieved through promoting synergies between culture and education, capacity building and skills training, and fostering a favourable environment for the sector’s development. This objective is clearly supported through the Culture Sub-programme schemes’ support to skills training and capacity building; (iii) culture in the EUs international relations - achieved through enhancing the role of culture in the EU’s external relations, promoting diversity of cultural expression, and fostering cooperation with third countries - is supported by the Networks and Cooperation Projects, which enable cooperation between EU and third-country cultural organisations and in a few cases, contribute to activities in the field of cultural diplomacy. The MEDIA Sub-programme also makes a significant contribution to the Agenda for Culture but it requires further recognition. The Digital Single Market Strategy (DSMS) adopted in 2015 is designed to bring the EC’s single market principles to the digital realm with a focus on three pillars: (i) ‘improving access to digital goods and service across the EU’; (ii) ‘creating an environment where digital networks and services can prosper’; and (iii) ‘supporting the use of digital as a driver for growth’. DSMS is increasingly supported by MEDIA as actions under the Sub-programme with a digital focus are expanding in scope and scale. Under Creative Europe, the scope of MEDIA’s digital focus has widened through the introduction of the Online Distribution scheme, which includes support to European VOD services as well as to digital packages of European AV work and to the innovative distribution and promotion of European AV work. In addition, some of the MEDIA schemes covering more ‘traditional’ AV activities – such as Training, Cinema Automatic and film development – also have a significant digital component. These contributed to the DSMS in particular through providing ICT/digital capacity building, and through supporting the online visibility of projects. The DSMS’ new copyright framework includes measures to widen access to online content across the EU, partly funded by MEDIA. In line with this, and to relate Online Distribution further to the DSMS, in 2017 the scheme has been adapted to cover two key objectives: (i) supporting innovation and new distribution/ promotion models to seize the opportunities of online technology; and (ii) increasing European films in catalogues. Support will increase from €5.6 million (2016) to around €9.5 million (2017). These changes are likely to make the MEDIA Sub-programme increasingly efficient in its contribution to the DSMS’s objectives. There is some concern in the wider AV sector that the increasing alignment of MEDIA with the DSMS – and a corresponding increase in the proportion of funding for ‘online’ actions – will result in a decrease in funds for traditional mechanisms for production and exhibition, and that while a clear strategy exists for the expansion of digital activity, there is a lack of strategic consideration about the implications of digital expansion on traditional AV activities. In addition the Culture Sub-programme also contributes to the objectives of the DSMS. This is particularly pertinent given that the new copyright agenda includes cultural heritage as a key focus and includes all ‘online goods’ in its remit, suggesting that the culture sector will become increasingly relevant to the objectives of the DSMS. Creative Europe overall delivers it planned outputs, results and impacts: 56% of the Creative Europe Programme is to be spent on MEDIA Sub-programme, 31% on Culture Sub-programme and further 13% on the measures supported under the Cross-sectoral Strand of the Programme.

During the first three years of operations, 39% of the total Programme budget has been appropriated. The total budget of the Creative Europe Programme represents a 28% increase compared to the combined budgets of the predecessor MEDIA, MEDIA Mundus and Culture programmes. It also needs to be noted that only around one quarter of the Creative Europe projects were completed by the time of the evaluation. This needs to be considered when examining the extent the Programme has delivered its anticipated results, and especially in relation to impacts that can be expected at this mid-term review stage. In terms of outputs Creative Europe has delivered or delivers a total of 6,286 projects during its first three years of implementation or on average 2,095 projects per year. This is exactly 15% more projects than yearly averages of the predecessor programmes combined, hence the performance of Creative Europe in terms of outputs is aligned with the relative increase in annual budgets. CREATIVE EUROPE Positive factors influencing outputs, results and impacts - Increasing clarity of the Programme composition, in terms of schemes’ outlines under Sub-programmes as well as their individual objectives. - Regularity of the funding calls and the predictability of the grant size awarded. - Easier and more transparent application processes due to online applications. - Improved project management experience due to continued EACEA support to projects after the selection. Negative factors influencing outputs, results and impacts -The increased level of competitiveness and the greater quality of the proposals of the MEDIA Development Single scheme and Culture Cooperation scheme cause dissatisfaction among the applicants. - Some schemes (e.g. MEDIA training, Sales Agents and Single Projects) are too small budget wise to produce the intended structuring impact on the sector. - Programme is perceived by a few national organisations as more bureaucratic in terms of application and reporting burdens compared to national funding schemes. Inadvertent effects of the Programme - Increasing competition under Creative Europe has helped the participants to develop skills in application writing, development of strategies for project implementation as well as long-term organisational strategies and partnerships. - The Creative Europe Programme is increasingly seen by national, regional and local officials as means to encourage development on local level through combination of European, national, regional or local funds.

The MEDIA Sub-programme is overall effective in the way its training, development, distribution and promotion schemes deliver its outputs and impact. In terms of outputs, the current MEDIA Sub-programme shows a 26% increase in terms of number of projects supported, with an average annual budget that is almost the same as for the predecessor Programme. The current MEDIA also supports the same number of titles each year (580) across various schemes as the Predecessor (571). Concerning key impacts, it is too early to assess the impact of the current MEDIA Sub-programme but the comparative assessment of the effectiveness in generating impacts tends to favour the current MEDIA Sub-Programme MEDIA Positive factors influencing outputs, results and impacts - The shift of Sub-programme management to DG CNECT and the European Film Forum have improved dialogue with the audiovisual industry, helping to better address its concerns and needs. - Greater recognition and emphasis on promoting coproduction is reinforcing the Sub-programme rationale. Negative factors influencing outputs, results and impacts - Rigidity of the legal basis leads to fragmentation of support into 14 separate schemes which do not facilitate collaboration between actors in the value chain and flexibility in responding to new business models. - Support to VOD services has attracted very limited audiences. - Training activities supported by the current Sub-programme do not cover the aspect of transition between education and work. This may have an adverse effect of retaining European young talent (due to global mobility for training purposes). Cumulative / long-term impacts of the Sub-programme - Training and development schemes have created informal networks of producers, notably in the animation and documentary genres i.e. have produced a structuring effect in these sub-sectors. -Support to co-productions under MEDIA training and development schemes has increased the number of co-productions and developed long-term partnerships between co-producing companies. - Distribution and development schemes enabled the development of long lasting international partnership and fostered the ability to engage in international and transnational cooperation. The Culture Sub-programme delivers against most of its planned outputs and impacts. In terms of outputs, the current Culture Sub-programme shows a 45% decrease in terms of number of projects supported (from 264 to 146 on average per year) and 33% less operators. About key impacts, even if it is too early to assess the impact of the current Culture Sub-programme, a comparative assessment of the effectiveness in generating impacts seems to indicate that the current effectiveness of the Culture Sub-Programme is on par with its predecessor.

CULTURE SUB-PROGRAMME Positive factors influencing outputs, results and impacts - The integration Culture Sub-programme in the EU cultural policy has had an impact on driving national cultural policy making and also allows the Sub-programme to evolve together with the policy objectives. - Sub-programme support to the publishing sector has a strong intervention rationale and is an example of culture economic benefits. - There is a recognised need to extend the Sub-programme support through schemes designed specifically to address the needs of individual Culture sub-sectors e.g. music, architecture or design, similarity to the current targeted support to the European publishing sector through – Literary translation scheme (but no flexibility to achieve this with the current legal basis) . Negative factors influencing outputs, results and impacts - Small size organisations from small countries report difficulties in accessing the Sub-programme support for bigger projects or as lead partners. - Support measures to the publishing industry, although effective policy wise, involve disproportionate administrative burden relative to their size of the scheme and are not geographically well balanced (number of applications suggests that the scheme is of lower relevance for publishers operating in larger countries e.g. UK, Spain, France and Germany). - The Cross-sectoral Strand overall delivers on its expected outputs and results under transnational policy cooperation and support provided by CEDs. Outputs, outcomes and impacts of the CCS GF The CCS GF has been implemented from 2016 onwards and therefore its results are commensurate to the one and a half year period of its implementation. As of the first semester 2017, the CCF GF led to the following outputs: ■ A planned budgetary contribution form the EC of €121 million in guarantees across from 2016 to 2020 ■ The full commitment of € 14.8 million of the 2016 budget, ■ One delegation agreement with the European Investment Fund; ■ The signature of three guarantee agreements with 3 financial intermediaries in 2016 (ES, FR, RO)

■ One additional guarantee was under approval ■ Expressions of interests for other financial intermediaries located in ten additional Member States ■ Awareness raising activities have been conducted including info days on access to finance, presentation in film festivals where financial institutions are present (e.g. Cannes and Venice film festivals). The promotion of transnational policy cooperation In terms of the outputs of the transnational policy cooperation priority area, a total of €7.6 million has so far been awarded to the following actions from 2014 to 2016: ■ €2.4 million to support 12 Refugee Integration projects (seven led by applicants based in high PCC countries), ■ €0.6 million to support to eight Presidency Conferences, ■ €1.1 million to the EU membership of the EAO (for three years), ■ €2.3 million to three Policy development activities, ■ €0.6 million to three actions under Studies and evaluations, ■ €0.6 million to one action under Communication and valorisation activities. The Creative Europe Desks (CEDs) are active in each Member State and in all other countries participating in the programme. Since 2014, CEDs were established as fully merged desks covering the whole programme or organised in offices according to the sub-programmes. Their number and structure is decided at national level on the basis of different factors such as sectors dimension and policy priorities. While this flexibility allows countries to adapt to the specific needs of national contexts, it could also cause an unbalance between resources allocated to MEDIA and Culture desks. Creative Europe spent around €15 million (or 40% of the total budget of the Cross-sectoral Strand) on the services of Desks between 2014 and 2016. The annual spending on CEDs has increased by 6%, comparable to the predecessor Programmes spending on MEDIA desks and antennae and the Cultural Contact Points (from €4.75 million to €5.05 million per year on average). The CEDs provide a wide range of services that span from promoting the programme (mostly through their website, social media, paper based advertisement and promotional merchandise) and the schemes to assisting organisations with their applications. Overall stakeholders are strongly satisfied with CEDs’ support and the way they reached out to potential applicants, although some smaller stakeholders (e.g. small culture organisations or micro companies in the audiovisual sector) feel that not enough efforts are done in order to reach them. The unification of the predecessor programmes under Creative Europe encouraged the development of cross-sectoral initiatives, bringing together audiovisual players and culture organisation. However, it seems that less than a fifth of the total events organised in 2015 by the CEDs were joint initiatives, showing that more could be done in this area. Nevertheless CEDs should do more on transnational cooperation for instance supporting co-productions and collaborative distribution projects, sharing success stories and best practices between different countries.

Creative Europe is open to a diversity of participants, including smaller operators and companies. Overall, the organisations participating to the analysed schemes are well spread across Europe. The Culture pool of beneficiaries is composed mostly of Public organisation (24%) and Non-profit association (61%), while the MEDIA one is mostly composed of private companies (78%).



5.4.EFFICIENCY Summary box: Key conclusions on efficiency ·The application processes of Creative Europe have been simplified compared to predecessor programmes, through digitisation, clearer templates and guidelines. Beneficiaries nonetheless noted the heaviness of auditing and verification procedures. Overall efficiency is perceived as satisfactory. ·The Creative Europe budget is significantly below the needs of the sectors concerned, as shown by the size of the challenges at European level and the high number of quality project proposals which cannot be supported. Creative Europe funds for 2014-16 were € 544 million, equivalent to an annual support of 0.03 % of the value of the sector, estimated at € 560 billion. ·Existing indicators are regularly monitored at applications level. However the indicators in the legal base are not sufficiently related to the outcomes of the schemes and projects of the Programme. In this regard the Commission services prepared a concrete proposal to strengthen the monitoring framework system. It will result in the adoption of supplementary performance indicators by a "Delegated Act", in line with Article 20 of the Creative Europe Regulation. ·The introduction of lump sums under the MEDIA Sub-programme streamlined the payments process. However, the underlying real costs need to be monitored and the lump sums should be updated as required. Considering the huge size and range of the audiovisual and cultural sectors and the geographic areas covered, the limited budgets allocated to the programme were not sufficient to create a major impact on a European scale and/or at sectoral level. However, the actions implemented contributed to such impacts for specific schemes and in specific sectors. EUR 1.1 billion were channelled to the sectors by the three predecessor programmes from 2007 to 2014 whilst the Creative Europe Programme has a budget of €1.46 billion for 2014-20. Creative Europe funds for 2014-16 were € 544 million, equivalent to an annual support of 0.03 % of the value of the sector, estimated at € 560 billion. Creative Europe was implemented efficiently with the absorption rate for the programme reaching 86.7% of the planned budget from 2014 to 2016. Annual amounts awarded represent less than 0.1% of the estimated annual contribution of the sectors to the EU GDP. Given the programme budget, Creative Europe and predecessor programme could only have been expected to somewhat contribute to generate impacts at sector and/or EU level. Amounts awarded (in EUR million) under Creative Europe at mid-term (2016 data incl.) and under the predecessor programmes Predecessor programmes Under Creative Europe, at mid-term Amounts awarded (Eur million) Total organisations supported Average amount awarded per organisation supported (EUR thousand) Amounts awarded (EUR million) Total organisations supported Average amount awarded per organisation supported (EUR thousand) MEDIA programme 768.9 2,800 272 326 1,300 255 Media Mundus 13.8 60 229 Culture programme 364.4 4,550 80 179 1,280 138 Cross-sectoral strand 37.8 150 (incl. committed to CCS GF) 252 (incl. CCS GF support) Total programmes 1,147 7,410 155 544 2,730 199 ICF analysis of EC provided databases with financial data (Maximum grant awarded) Shortcomings at different stages of the implementation of the Programme were identified, and although improvements materialised over time, there is room for further improvement. The application process and reporting requirements are perceived as burdens by the beneficiaries, but have been improved from predecessor programmes to Creative Europe. The application processes were clear to the applicants but slightly burdensome and management processes are more bureaucratic than for some of the Member States funds. Simplification of the application process took place from one programming period to another concerning, inter alia, the digitisation of the application process (and kick-off for the reporting process), clearer templates and guidelines; higher selection threshold; and more focused selection criteria.

Simplified grants in the form of lump sums were introduced for MEDIA in 2014 to simplify the programme management. This has sped up payment procedures and has simplified application and reporting requirements for beneficiaries. However, the amounts of the lump sums need to be updated to realign them with the real costs incurred by beneficiary projects, as these have decreased, notably because of digitisation. The nature of the grants under the Culture sub-programme did not allow for an efficient introduction of lump sums. MEDIA accounts for 40% of total number of payment transactions processed by the EAC Executive Agency and only contributes to about 25% of the overall spent budget, on a yearly basis. Furthermore, the Sub-programme entails over 1,500 commitments for about 2,000 projects per year. This leads to quite high administrative costs. The scope of the MEDIA Sub-programme was widened without a corresponding increase in the budget. For example, the Video Games scheme has an annual budget of € 2 million and can only play a modest role vis à vis the video games industry which had a value of USD 110 billion in 2015. The level of competitiveness and the quality of the proposals increased from one programming period to another reflecting that the schemes are insufficiently funded compared to the potential interest they generate; a large number of good applications are rejected and at the same time a relevant number continue to be of low quality / ineligible. While an indication of its highly competitive nature and high level of demand, the very low rate of projects selected undermines the reputation of the programme and leads to frustration among many rejected applicants. The MEDIA sub-programme has higher selection rates in closely targeted schemes such as Cinema Automatic. However, the Development schemes have a lower selection rate of 15% because of high demand. While an indication of the highly competitive nature of the schemes, low selection rates represent a waste of resources for rejected applicants and leads to frustration. Creative Europe confronts important challenges on the monitoring of the programme, mainly related with the implementation of the indicators as established by "Creative Europe" legal basis: - The hierarchy of general and specific objectives listed in the Regulation applies uniformly to the three strands of the Programme; however there are numerous (15) and repetitive (for MEDIA and Culture) priorities that could be easily generalised to apply to the whole CCS; - Several of the objectives and priorities of the programme and sub-programme don't have the correspondent indicators; - Some indicators specified in the Regulation are not appropriate for the purpose of monitoring of the Programme’s progress and performance against intended objectives; These limitations were the main reason for the restricted monitoring practices at programme level, namely the lack of systematic reporting from the Commission on the indicators provided in Article 18 of the Regulation and to the fact that data has not been aggregated to assess the Programme’s progress in reaching planned results. Furthermore due to the duration of the projects just a limited number of projects were closed at the time of the evaluation (2016 data). In order to deal with the complexity of indicators implementation, during the external evaluation a seminar was organised, to reflect on "performance monitoring framework", involving Commission services (EAC, CONNECT) and EACEA. As a result, the external evaluators prepared a note with a proposal of a new performance indicators framework, including a revision of the indicators existing in the Regulation 1295/2013. Based on the proposition and its own assessment the Commission services already prepared a a concrete proposal to strengthen the monitoring framework system, processes and indicators for the Creative Europe Programme. It will result in the adoption of supplementary performance indicators by a "Delegated Act", in line with Article 20 of the Creative Europe Regulation. At the same time the EACEA is adapting the reporting templates and processes, accordingly. Reporting requirements varied across schemes and sub-Programmes. The majority survey respondents agreed that reporting requirements are reasonable given the grant provided. Qualitative evidence collected from the interviews shows that on average organisations devoted more than one month of a full time employee to comply with reporting requirements. Beneficiaries also noted the heaviness of audit and verification processes (and their duplication when co-funding applied). This being said reporting arrangements and associated burden have also improved from predecessor programmes to Creative Europe .



5.5.SUSTAINABILITY

Summary box: Key conclusions on Sustainability ·The networks and partnerships created through Creative Europe enable collaboration beyond the life of funded projects. ·The MEDIA Sub-programme supports audiovisual companies in taking higher risks in tough international markets and enables their sustained activity. ·The sharing of knowledge and best practice through collaborative projects and through the European Film Forum contributes to a common understanding and experience which has a sustained effect. ·Concerning Culture sub-programme schemes the sustained impact is found in permanent partnerships and in the peer learning that is facilitated by the projects. Largely the actions of the programme are continued in some form after the end of EU financing support and its effects remain. The sustainability of the results lies primarily in the continuation of partnerships that were started under Creative Europe and the predecessor programmes and that largely is continued in some form beyond the projects’ lifecycle . Under MEDIA, the sustainability of audiovisual companies has been strengthened as the support helps them to compete in tough international markets. Beneficiaries state that there are activities which would have been implemented only to a limited extent without the Creative Europe MEDIA Sub-programme support. In Distribution Automatic half of the funded companies would have invested less in European non-national films without the funding. Therefore, MEDIA support is addressing market failures. This is underpinned by the public consultation, where 61 % of MEDIA Sub-programme respondents indicated that they improved their market position due to Programme support. This translates into the continued intention of organisations to continue European filmmaking i.e. a sustained interest to develop, co-produce or distribute works with a European dimension. Collaboration on transnational projects can additionally lead to sharing of best practice and development of new approaches. Moreover, the European Film Forum (EFF) has established a structured dialogue with stakeholders to share knowledge and understanding about the challenges facing the industry and possible solutions. These exchanges of best practice, innovations and understanding have sustainable effects which last beyond the duration of the activities themselves. Concerning Culture sub-programme schemes, the sustained impact is found in partnerships and in the exchange of peer learning that is facilitated by the projects. Across all Culture schemes, beneficiaries developed stronger relationships with project partners and learnt from their respective experiences. Participants also gained greater awareness of their sector at an international level. Reported sustainable benefits relates to professionalization and internationalisation of careers, skills development, and building capacity which were often developed thanks to the international dimension of the projects given by Creative Europe support. For some schemes (notably Cooperation Projects, Networks and Platforms), dissemination is an important mechanism for achieving the desired wider effects on the sectors, in helping to share what is learnt at an international level. Beneficiaries of these schemes are overwhelmingly positive about the impact of their dissemination activities, although these generally appear to be relatively passive forms of communication, such as websites or social media. Given the importance of dissemination, however, partners could have placed more focus on engaging with on their national audiences, and also have made more use of the CEDs as a mechanism for further sharing of results. Through the Cross-sectoral Strand, Creative Europe Desks play a valuable role in sharing knowledge and disseminating best practices across the sectors. However, the evaluation shows that partners and beneficiaries could also have promoted results more and made more use of the Desks as a mechanism for further sharing of results. Only around a third of survey respondents consider their outputs ‘fully exploited’. Programme-level dissemination events have to date focused on either Culture or MEDIA, rather than integrating the two strands. For Culture, the project showcase conference which used to be held annually under Culture has now been restarted under Creative Europe. The conference mainly showcases beneficiaries of the Culture sub-programme, and there may be scope to enhance the synergies between the programmes by having shared conferences or networking events which address cross-sectoral issues.



5.6.EU ADDED VALUE Summary box: Key conclusions on European added value ·Creative Europe has added value due to the unique transnational character of its actions which complements the national focus of Member States. ·The MEDIA Sub-programme has developed durable networks for transnational cooperation for example through the European Film Promotion network. It has had a scaling and structuring effect on companies by helping them face the commercial risks inherent with business at a European level. ·Furthermore, MEDIA has adopted measures for a "level-playing field" to facilitate the participation of companies from lower capacity countries, thus strengthening diversity. ·For the Culture sub-programme the largest share of organisations would not have implemented or have implemented a significantly reduced number of activities, without the EU support. In general, the value resulting from Creative Europe is additional to the value that could result from interventions which would have been carried out at national or regional levels alone. The main EU added value comes from the strong international dimension of the programmes. There are few international funds that support transnational cooperation and those that do it, are of significantly smaller scale. Projects and activities undertaken without Creative Europe support would therefore have been of a largely national/ regional/local focus and of a reduced size and scope, if they were delivered at all. Some partnerships, created at application stage, were even maintained despite the project not having been awarded funding. Established networks and partnerships furthermore facilitate subsequent transnational operation, as they reduce the costs of identifying, contacting and vetting partners.

Concerning the MEDIA Sub-programme, several activities are unique and fill gaps in the national support programmes. For example, the Development scheme with its European dimension is not replicated at national level and plays a significant role in facilitating productions which appeal to cross-border audiences. This is also true for the Training scheme, whose transnational dimension is not covered by the Member States. More than 1800 professionals are trained annually through transnational and international projects. Transnational networks and cross-border partnerships, such as the European Film Promotion network of European promotion bodies, provide durable EU added value by facilitating transnational operations as they reduce the costs of identifying partners and defining joint activities. 82% of the beneficiaries say they have continued collaboration with their project partners. As shown in the external evaluation, the MEDIA Sub-programme helps to scale up size and scope from a largely national focus to an international one. Thus MEDIA has supported a genre called 'European cinema', but also by creating an appetite for diverse 'European' content and supporting the distribution of films that would otherwise have found it more difficult to travel and be screened in cinemas. The support from Cinema Automatic and Cinema Selective schemes provides an important source of revenue for cross-border film distribution. Without this funding, many films would not have been released outside their home countries, as companies would not have taken the risk to distribute them. Distribution of films made in one EU Member State to another is thus enabled because of the funding. The TV Programming scheme has allowed companies to increase their production capacity and take part in more ambitious projects capable of appealing to cross-border audiences. 64% of respondents to the public consultation believe that the MEDIA Sub-programme has complemented existing actions at national level by supporting audiovisual subsectors or operators that would not have received support. For MEDIA, there is evidence of this structuring effect through knowledge-sharing across those schemes which have a focus on transnational partnerships, for example a peer learning effect around how other countries have used the scheme the TV Programming scheme, or on Distribution schemes, beneficiaries saw one of the main benefits of the funding as bringing professionals together and collectively supporting their capacity to collaborate and operate transnationally. The MEDIA Sub-programme has applied positive discrimination measures to increase the participation of companies from low and medium capacity countries in the programme. Several Member States raised concerns about unintended consequences of these measures which led to some distortion of the results of the schemes. Therefore a rebalanced set of measures was adopted within the 2018 Creative Europe Work Programme. The external evaluation indicates that it remains nonetheless necessary to define more clearly the needs of lower capacity countries and the role of the Creative Europe MEDIA Sub-programme in addressing them, in full respect of subsidiarity. For Culture, even if activities funded are less closely embedded in existing processes, estimates suggest that the largest share of organisations would have not implemented or have implemented a significantly reduced number of activities without EU support. Only a minority of Cooperation Projects are likely to have happened without the funding received through the scheme, and if they were delivered it would be with significantly reduced scope or different focus. Similarly for Network project activities and Platform projects would not have taken place without support from the scheme or alternatively, activities would be of a much smaller scale or depth. For Literary Translation, the difference between supported and unsupported projects is less significant. Without the funding, publishers are likely to translate around two-thirds of the books that they would have translated with EU funding but these works would have been translated to a less diverse range of languages; the scheme therefore supports the objective of cultural diversity. There is evidence of the consolidation or strengthening of cultural operators for the Culture sub-programme in a certain sub-sector (structuring effects) over time across Networks, Platforms, and Cooperation Projects. For instance Network projects were able to take best practice, for Platforms, this consisted primarily of consolidation within a sector and Cooperation Project beneficiaries were supported to develop an international profile and to operate in non-national contexts. Nevertheless when projects are smaller it appears less likely to result in a structuring effect. Under the Cross-sectoral strand, the added value is difficult to assess at this stage as most activities have only recently been launched. However, the Guarantee Facility has high potential EU added value because it fills a gap in Member State support policies which do not have a dedicated instrument to address the financing gap of the cultural and creative sectors. Moreover, the Guarantee Facility will allow for sharing of knowledge and data across territories as well as the diversification of risk.



6. CONCLUSIONS

The results of this evaluation will help improve the implementation of the Creative Europe from 2018-2020 and will inform the design of the successor programme. This section of the SWD outlines the key conclusions. The evidence presented in the evaluation shows that, overall, the Creative Europe programme has performed well, with a high level of demand and participation from stakeholders. During the first 3 years of implementation (2014-2016) Creative Europe supported 2,580 beneficiaries, including 1,280 audiovisual companies and 1,300 cultural organisations. Beneficiaries are small and medium sized companies, non-profit organisations or public bodies. Stakeholders are very supportive of the programme. As the EU programme for the cultural and creative industries, Creative Europe remains highly relevant. The programme addresses ongoing challenges in the sector, such as fragmentation of markets and the digital shift. It has contributed to the EU 2020 goals on growth and jobs. By supporting the circulation of diverse content it has also contributed to spreading and defending European values. Creative Europe was also found relevant to the changing priorities of the sectors, to the strategies pursued by the Member States and to EU policy priorities. However, despite positive achievements, more needs to be done to fully reap the opportunities that the digital shift presents, taking into account new audience and consumption patterns and how cultural and creative works are made, produced, accessed and monetised in the digital economy. MEDIA schemes have adapted to changes induced by the digital revolution, which adds to their relevance. Training increasingly focuses on digital. Distribution schemes have also integrated this component. A specific scheme was created to address the increasingly important issue of the presence of European content on VOD services. However, the current fragmentation of MEDIA into 14 separate schemes limits flexibility and weakens the capacity to achieve collaboration across the industry. In particular, collaboration between distributors across territories and with producers to promote films, which is a key challenge, is not addressed. The flagship Cultural and Creative Sectors Guarantee Facility has had a strong start. Three Guarantee Agreements were signed in the first year, showing the relevance of this innovative market instrument. The Creative Europe programme is broadly internally (among the different programme strands and the actions within these) and externally coherent (with other EU interventions and policies) The schemes are internally coherent as they are designed to cover the traditional value chain of the audiovisual industry and avoid overlaps and gaps. MEDIA has a strong link to audiovisual policy. Today, its objectives coincide with the objectives of wider access across borders of the Digital Single Market strategy. It provides for measures accompanying the copyright reforms and supporting industry’s adaptation to the future AVMS Directive on the promotion of European works in VOD services. MEDIA impact would be further strengthened through greater coherence with national film support programmes, which provide the bulk of the support to the audiovisual sector (approximately € 2 billion per annum compared to approximately 115 million for MEDIA). To this end, a dialogue was launched in 2015 with the European Film Agency Directors (EFADs) in order to develop a common, strategic vision for the industry. Furthermore, the Open Method of Coordination Group of Member States’ Experts on Improving the Circulation of European Films was established in July 2017. There is a strong coherence between Creative Europe and the European Agenda for Culture’s objective of promoting culture as a catalyst for creativity is evidenced through Creative Europe’s support for capacity-building and skills development for CCS operators. The Guarantee Facility in the Cross-sectoral strand has strengthened the coherence of the Programme. It has established terms and conditions which ensure the eligibility of all relevant stakeholders. A number of other cross-cutting projects have been undertaken, such as on Refugee Integration and the Module on Masters in Arts and Sciences. However, the design and the limited budget of the Cross-sectoral strand have not allowed for significant projects other than the Guarantee Facility. Concerning effectiveness, Creative Europe and the predecessor programmes have been or are successful in achieving or progressing towards their objectives, delivering their intended outputs (i.e. from programmed activities), results (outcomes of those activities) and having the anticipated impact. The Programme made an important contribution towards the EU2020 employment objective by generating an estimated 3,000 jobs in the period 2014-2016, directly in the beneficiaries. The MEDIA Sub-programme has been effective in facilitating the cross-border circulation of works. It has provided extensive support to the creation of works which could have cross-border appeal and to the distribution of films and TV series across Europe, including online. Distribution schemes supported over 400 films per year, equivalent to 25% of Europe's annual film production, and these films went on to reach a total of over 65 million admissions per year. However, the share of non-national European works in cinema admissions remains weak, at 10 %, compared to the share of US films of 65%. Also, US films are more present and are more visible on VOD than European films. In this context there are a number of weaknesses as regards MEDIA support to the distribution and promotion of works. The Distribution schemes are still highly focused on theatrical release and, for example, do not provide for "straight to VOD" release strategies; the beneficiaries of the online distribution scheme have a limited audience; VOD platforms with a cross-border appeal or a strong European network of VOD services have not been established. Moreover, MEDIA has grown in scope over the years without an equivalent increase in budget and as a result, the funding is spread too thinly among many beneficiaries. The thin spread of funding from the Culture sub-programme has created some frustration, as many good projects are rejected every year. At the same time the structuring and leverage effect of the funded (and in some cases also the non-funded) projects is way above their real financial value. The Guarantee Facility has a budget of €121 million from Creative Europe and is expected to leverage €692 million in loans, which is a very effective way of increasing access to finance. Given the strong market take up, the Commission has topped up the budget of the Guarantee Facility by 50% with funds from the European Fund for Strategic Investment.

Overall efficiency of Creative Europe is satisfactory, with support being delivered smoothly. But, considering the size and range of the audiovisual and cultural sectors at European level and the geographical areas covered by the Programmes evaluated, the size of the budgets of Creative Europe and its predecessor programmes were not sufficient to create major impact of a European scale and/or at sectoral level. Creative Europe funds for 2014-16 were € 544 million, equivalent to an annual support of 0.03 % of the value of the sector, estimated at € 560 billion. The cost effectiveness of the programmes was satisfactory and overall improved from one programming period to another. The efficiency of most of the schemes reviewed has improved or remained stable. The increase in the cost per projects was usually compensated either by a higher level of outputs and or contributions to higher levels of outcomes and or impacts. Beneficiaries have nonetheless noted the heaviness of audit and verification processes. The indicators in the legal basis are not sufficiently related to the outcomes of the schemes and projects of the Programme. A better monitoring framework would help to assess the efficiency of the programme. The Commission services already presented a concrete proposal to strengthen the monitoring framework system. It will result in the adoption of supplementary performance indicators by a "Delegated Act", in line with Article 20 of the Creative Europe Regulation The Programme budget is modest compared to the size of the sectors and national programmes. For MEDIA, efficiency has been pursued, for example through digitisation of the application process. The introduction lump sum payments has sped up the payment and application procedures, although the average real costs of the projects need to be monitored. The administrative cost of implementation is quite high due to the processing of a high number of small contracts with single beneficiaries. The Cultural and Creative Sectors Guarantee Facility has been rapidly implemented since its launch in 2016. Whilst the Commission and the Agency have closely monitored the delivery of outputs, there has not been sufficient monitoring of progress in reaching planned results. The sustainability of Creative Europe support has been ensured in particular through the development of durable partnerships and networks that go beyond the life of individual projects. The MEDIA Sub-programme has had sustainable effects by enabling the sustained activities of companies competing in tough international markets. Half of the funded companies reported that they would have invested less in distribution of non-national films without MEDIA funding. Also, the sharing of knowledge and best practices through collaborative projects and through the European film Forum have had a sustained effect by developing a common vision. Some of the beneficiaries under Culture have become major players in European cultural landscape. Creative Europe has had clear EU added value in line with the intentions of the Programme: the creation of international networks and cross-border partnerships, which constitute the main and the most durable structuring elements of Creative Europe; transnational networks that increase the capability of CCS operators overall and especially for those working in niche fields and in the Member States where such capabilities are less developed; the support of organisations in taking (calculated) risks, which allows them to focus on operating with a European dimension; the reputational effect for programmes’ beneficiaries that increases the potential interest of partners and financial intermediaries and their trust in supported projects. This reputational aspect was also reported to facilitate access to additional funding. The EU added value of the MEDIA Sub-programme has been demonstrated in the establishment of networks for European cooperation, such as Europa Distribution or Europa International, which have allowed distributors