EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 7.11.2008 
SEC(2008) 2750 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
ACCOMPANYING THE REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 
AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 
 
on the financial instrume nts of the multiannual progr amme for enterprise and 
entrepreneurship, and in particular for sm all and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) 
(2001-2006) 
 
End report as at 31.12.2006 
 
(including key results as at 31.12.2007) 
 
(pursuant to Article 5(1) of Council Deci sion 2000/819/EC, as amended by Decisions 
593/2004/EC and 1776/2005/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council) 
{COM(2008)708 final} 
 
EN 2   EN Table of contents 
1. Section I  Tables and Figures  4 
1.1 SME Guarantee Facility 4 Figure 1 Cumulative evolution of  EIF operations (per year) 4 
Figure 2 Commitments to Financia l Intermediaries (per year) 5 
Table 1 Leverage effect (gearing) and Note: Estima tion of enhanced access 
to finance for SMEs 6 
Table 2 Calls received and recoveries 9 
Table 3 Financial Intermediaries 10 
3.1 Loan Guarantee Window 10 
3.2 Micro-credit and Equity Guarantee Windows 12 
Table 4 Beneficiary SMEs  – Breakdown by country 13 
Table 5 Beneficiary SMEs – Brea kdown by country and size class 14 
Figure 3 Beneficiary SMEs  – Breakdown by sector 15 
3.1 All windows 15 3.2 Loan Guarantee 15 3.3 Micro-credit 16 3.4 Equity 16 
Table 6 Estimated investment volume by window 16 
1.2 ETF Start-up Facility 17 
Figure 4 Cumulative evolution of  EIF operations (per year) 17 
Table 7 VC funds with contractua l agreements with the EIF  18 
1.3 Seed capital action 22 
Figure 5 Cumulative evolution of  EIF operations (per year) 22 
Table 8 VC Funds with contractual agreements with the EIF 22    
2 Section II
 Maps 23 
 
EN 3   EN 3 Section III  SME Guarantee Facility, ETF Start-up Facility, 
Seed Capital Action: description and specific conclusions 27 
4 Section IV  Joint European Venture (JEV) programme: 
specific information 31 
5 Section V  Successor Programme CIP 35 
 
EN 4   EN 1. S ECTION I T ABLES AND FIGURES  
1.1. SME Guarantee Facility   
Figure 1: SME Guarantee Facility - Cumu lative evolution of EIF operations  
(per year), data referring to the la st quarter of the corresponding year 
Total budget reached nearly EUR 300 million
0,0050,00100,00150,00200,00250,00300,00
Q4/2001 Q4/2002 Q4/2003 Q4/2004 Q4/2005 Q4/2006EUR million
Total budget EIF commitments to FIs
Guarantee call payments pursuant to defaulted loans Budget available for commitments to FIs (net of EIF fees)
EIF signatures to FIs Interest and other income 
Source: PMS/Report/Strategic /Commitment Overview/SMEG01 
Data extraction: 30.05.2007 
 
EN 5   EN Figure 2: SME Guarantee Facility – Commitm ents to Financial Intermediaries  
(per year) 
Still commitments at the end of the programme
4158
4290
35
0102030405060708090
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
EIF commitments to Financial Intermediaries EUR million
 
Source: PMS/Report/Strategic /Commitment Overview/SMEG01 
Data extraction: 04.04.2007 
 
EN 6   EN Table 1: SME Guarantee Facility - Leverage effect (gearing) 
Leverage effect achieved at 31.12.2006 with the Community funds in the terms of: 
(a) Estimated volume of loans 
(b) Guaranteed amounts 
  
Cap Amounts1 Estimated 
underlying loan 
volume 
supported Maximum EIF 
Guarantee 
Amount Leverage 
effect Leverage 
effect 
  EUR million EUR million EUR million (a) (b) 
Loan 
guarantee window 208.1 16827.1 4619.0 80.9 22.2 
Micro-credit window 36.2 314.0 200.3 8.7 5.5 
Equity guarantee window 17.3 308.2 89.4 17.8 5.2 
Total 261.6 17,449.3 4,908.7 66.7 18.8 
Source: EIF Quarterly Report – 31 December 2006 – SM EG 2001 Facility 
Report issued: 28.03.2007 
 
Note: Estimation of enhanced access to finance for SMEs  
(a) Methodological background 
Basic approach Under the SME Guarantee Facility ("SMEG"), the EU provides guarantees to Financial 
Intermediaries ("EU Guarantees") with a view  to increasing and improving access to finance 
for SMEs. This is referred to here as "enhanced acce ss to finance" ("EAF"). EAF is a complex 
issue that can rarely be studied directly. Looki ng back, it is impossible to know with precision 
what would have happened in the absence of the programme. In the literature, this is referred 
to as the “counterfactual problem of measurement”.  
A detailed analysis of the EA F can only be carried out in the context of an evaluation (see 
point 3 on the planned evaluation) . The purpose of this report is  to provide an estimate that 
can serve as an input to such an analysis. Here a quantitative approach is taken, based on data 
available from EIF. This approach is subject to certain constraints and limitations set out below. 
                                                
 
1 Corresponds to cap amounts signed between the EIF and Financial Intermediaries. 
 
EN 7   EN It should be noted that EAF can also be esti mated by other methods, for example surveys that 
ask beneficiary SMEs about the loans they would have received/not received with/without 
support by the SMEG.2 
The basis for calculations 
The following definitions, considerations and assu mptions have been used in order to estimate 
the EAF achieved under the SMEG as at the reporting date: 
The EAF should be measured by comparing the actual volumes (AV)3 of financing, 
guarantees and counter-gua rantees provided for the benefit of  SMEs against a baseline, called 
the Reference Loan or Guarantee Volume (RLV):  
EAF = AV – RLV (1) 
The RLV represents an estimate of the amount of  guarantees or financin g that the Financial 
Intermediary could reasonably be expected to achieve during the availability period in the 
absence of the EU Guarantee, having regard to  comparable products, and subject to, inter alia, 
prevailing market conditions, where applicable.  
The RLV and the EAF are established by the EIF using its professi onal judgement and 
experience. There are however certain limita tions that should be kept in mind: 
EAF is based on the EIF ex-ante estimate  of the funding that Interm ediaries could reasonably 
have been expected to provide in the absence of an EU Guarantee, 
there are limitations to a simple extrapolation of past finance volumes : hi storic data could be 
incomplete, market conditions can change, a modified or entirely new lending product offered by an intermediary in response to the EU guarantee is likely to result in a different level of 
credit risk from that previously covered by the Intermediary, etc.  
figures reflect the situation as at the reporting date; actual volumes can still change until the 
end of the latest availa bility period (usually 31.12 .2007), thus impacting EAF. 
Gearing is then calculated by comparing EAF to the total cap
4 amounts: 
Gearing = EAF/total cap amounts actually paid (2) 
Regarding formula (2), it should be kept in mind that the denominator will be known with 
precision only once all the EU Guarantees ha ve expired and all payments due under the 
Facility will have been made.  
Taking into account these consid erations, the estimation of EA F has been made using the 
approach set out below.  
(b) Calculations 
All calculations are based on figures provided by the EIF. 
EAF 
Calculation of the difference between the actual volume of loans and guarantees extended 
with the EU support, and the Reference Loan Volume: 
                                                 
2 These other methods will also be taken into acco unt in the context of the planned evaluation. 
3 Actual volume: means the volume of financing, guarantees and counter-guarantees included in the 
portfolios benefiting from the EU Guarantee. 
4 The cap amount is the maximum aggregate amount which the EC is liable to pay to the financial 
intermediary under the SMEG.  
 
EN 8   EN Reference Loan Volume (RLV) 2,100 million EUR 
Actual Portfolio Volume (AV) of fi nancial intermediaries extended with 
EU support5 8,359 million EUR 
 
Difference 6,259 million EUR 
It is therefore estimated, that thanks to the EU intervention, an addi tional volume of loans, 
guarantees and counter-guarantees of n early EUR 6.3 billion has been created by financial 
intermediaries  to support final beneficiaries. 
Extrapolation of the loan volume 
Taking into account the risk shar ing arrangements between the EIF and intermediaries, EIF's 
reported data on the total loan volume supported and EIF's calculations of RLV, the following 
extrapolations can be made, based on the ratio resulted from th e calculation under 2.1: 
Extrapolated loan volume that woul d have been extended by financial 
intermediaries without EU support (estimate) 4,384 million EUR  
Loan volume to final beneficiaries extended with EU support6 (estimate) 17,449 million EUR 
Difference 13,065 million EUR 
Based on these figures and assumptions, the EU intervention helped to  support an estimated 
additional financing volume to final beneficiaries (SMEs) of more than 13 billion EUR . 
Gearing 
Based on the EIF figures, the gearing attribut ed to this additional loan volume can be 
estimated as follows: 
(a) Additional loan (b) Cap amounts Gearing: (a)/(b) 
13,065 million EUR 261.6 million EUR 507 
 
(c) Planned evaluation 
The Terms of Reference prepared for the inte rim evaluation of the "Entrepreneurship and 
Innovation Programme" under the successor programm e CIP foresee a more detailed analysis 
by the external evaluators of the results and impacts of the previous MAP programme, 
including an assessment of the financial instruments, which will cover the gross and net results achieved in terms of enhanced access to finance. This evaluation is scheduled to be 
completed in December 2008.  
                                                
 
5 Actual Portfolio Volume extended with EU support. This volume could further increase up to the 
Maximum Portfolio Volume (MPV - EUR 10,666 million), which under MAP will stabilize at the end of the latest availability period. It follows that the ratio of Actual used Portfolio Volume/Reference 
Loan Volume could further increase in the next few years. 
6 Estimate at the end of 2006. This estimated volume might still slightly increase until the end of the last 
availability period (usually 31.12.2007). 
7 In case the payments actually made are below the total cap amounts, the gearing would increase. 
 
EN 9   EN  
Table 2: SME Guarantee Facility - Calls received and recoveries  
 Amount (EUR) 
Calls received 46,843,834 
Recoveries received - 6,819,064 
Net called guarantees (*) 40,024,770 
(*) Calls received less recoveries received 
Source: EIF Quarterly Report – 31 December 2006 – SM EG 2001 Facility 
Report issued: 28.03.2007 
 
EN 10   EN Table 3: SME Guarantee Facility – Financial Intermediaries  
Overview by window and by country; approvals as of 31.12.2006 
(3.1) Loan Guarantee Window 
Cap amount  Max EIF 
guarantee 
amount  Name  Country  
EUR million  EUR million  FIs with contract 
under previous 
Growth and 
Employment 
initiative  
LOAN 
Austria Wirtschaftsservice (A WS) Austria 6.4 163.2 Yes 
Fonds de Participation (FdP) Belgium 6.5 43.5 Yes 
Encouragement Bank Bulgaria 2.5 21.0 No 
Raiffeisen Bank Bulgaria Bulgaria 0.6 10.0 No 
Cyprus Development Bank Cyprus 0.2 1.5 No 
Czech Moravian Bank C zech Rep 3.6 54.5 No 
Ceska Sporitelna Czech Rep 3.2 80.0 No 
The Danish Investment Fund Denmark 4.7 44.6 Yes 
KredEx Estonia 1.2 16.0 No 
Finnvera  Finland 5.9 117.0 Yes 
Siagi France 1.0 19.3 No 
SOCAMA France 13.0 482.2 No 
Sofaris  France 11.7 124.4 Yes 
KfW (ex DtA) Germany 26.4 176.0 Yes 
TEMPME Greece 1.6 22.5 No 
HVB Bank Hungary 1.2 30.0 No 
Rural Credit Guarantee Foundation Hungary 0.3 6.0 No 
Artigiancredit Lombardia Italy 0.5 17.5 Yes 
ATI Allenza di Garanzia Italy 22.7 710.0 No 
ATI Controgaranzia /APEROL Italy 9.0 450.0 No 
ATI Garanzia Diretta Italy 2.7 135.0 No 
 
EN 11   EN (3.1 continues) 
Cap amount  Max EIF 
guarantee 
amount  Name  Country  
EUR million  EUR million  FIs with contract 
under previous 
Growth and 
Employment 
initiative  
LOAN 
ATI Sistema Garanzia Umbria 
Marche Italy 3.1 157.5 No 
Mediocredito Centrale  Italy 12.8 321.0 Yes 
Mortgage and Land Ban k 
(Hipoteku B.) Latvia 1.6 22.5 No 
INVEGA Lithuania 2.6 40.0 No 
Malta Enterprise Corporation Malta 0.4 6.0 No 
BBMKB Netherlands 8.0 320.0 Yes 
Innovation Norway Norway 1.5 7.5 No 
Bank BPH SA Poland 8.0 133.1 No 
Polfund Poland 0.2 2.4 No 
SPGM Portugal 4.0 79.0 Yes 
BRD  Romania 1.8 31.0 No 
Raiffeisen Bank Romania 1.3 22.2 No 
Tatra Banka AS Slovakia 1.8 45.0 No 
VUB Slovakia 0.2 5.0 No 
Slovene Enterprise Fund Slovenia 1.0 9.5 No 
Banco Santander Central Hispano Spain 1.2 40.0 No 
CERSA Spain 21.5 500.0 No 
Almi  Sweden 11.5 143.7 Yes 
KGF Turkey 0.6 9.4 No 
Total  208.1 4619.0   
 
EN 12   EN (3.2) Micro-credit and Equity Guarantee Windows 
Cap 
amount  Max EIF 
guarantee amount
Name  Country  
EUR 
million  EUR million  FIs with contract under previous 
Growth and Employment initiative  
MICROCREDIT 
Fonds de Participation (FdP) Belgium 2.4 12.0 Yes 
ADIE France 2.6 24.7 No 
KfW (ex DtA) Germany 17.2 85.8 Yes 
First Step Ireland 0.1 1.1 No 
Cultura Sparebank Norway 0.1 0.9 No 
ICO  Spain 1.6 10.5 No 
La Caixa Spain 1.7 11.3 No 
The Enterprise Fund Spain 0.2 1.8 No 
The Prince's Trust and Prince's Scottish 
Youth Business Trust  UK 10.3 52.2 Yes 
Total  36.2 200.3   
EQUITY 
Austria Wirtschaftsservice 
(AWS) Austria 1.9 12.5 Yes 
Sofaris France 15.4 76.9 Yes 
Total   17.3 89.4   
Sources: PMS/Reports/Report/Project; Data extraction: 02.05.2007 
 EIF quarterly report - SMEG 2001 Facility, 31 12 2006 
 
EN 13   EN Table 4: SME Guarantee Facility – Beneficiary SMEs – Breakdown by country 
Number of SMEs, Average loan amount 
All windows: Loan Guarante e, Micro-credit, Equity 
As of 31.12.2006 
Country Number of  
beneficiary SMEs Average loan amount  
in EUR 
Austria 3,029 139,910.01
Belgium 2,140 40,755.93
Bulgaria 355 108,934.58
Cyprus 5 85,641.70
Czech Republic 2,146 126,515.18
Denmark 582 194,978.38
Estonia 293 181,754.02
Finland 2,350 214,752.75
France 43,977 27,737.50
Germany 15,770 26,295.82
Greece 509 64,941.24
Hungary 165 233,698.52
Ireland 96 10,778.28
Italy 69,964 76,377.73
Latvia 230 133,302.26
Lithuania 532 138,896.33
Malta 18 178,823.38
Netherlands 3,340 152,198.85
Norway 50 123,655.84
Poland 5,662 27,639.67
Portugal 627 295,591.34
Romania 824 117,528.62
Slovakia 203 193,600.20
Slovenia 83 176,493.06
Spain 20,088 106,877.49
Sweden 7,110 46,685.12
Turkey 147 143,794.74
United Kingdom 13,495 3,864.95
All 193,790 62,960.21
Source: EIF; data extraction: 02.05.2007  
 
EN 14   EN Table 5: SME Guarantee Facility – Beneficiary SMEs – Breakdown by country and size 
 class 
Number of SMEs 
All windows: Loan Guarante e, Micro-credit, Equity 
As of 31.12.2006 
Country 0-10 11-50 51-100 Total 
Austria 2,675 314 40 3,029 
Belgium 2,120 20 - 2,140 
Bulgaria 260 86 9 355 
Cyprus 1 2 2 5 
Czech Republic 1,652 400 94 2,146 
Denmark 503 76 3 582 
Estonia 204 78 11 293 
Finland 2,020 300 30 2,350 
France 42,705 1,246 26 43,977 
Germany 15,657 109 4 15,770 
Greece 459 50  509 
Hungary 92 61 12 165 
Ireland 96 - - 96 
Italy 62,963 6,237 764 69,964 
Latvia 157 61 12 230 
Lithuania 289 213 30 532 
Malta 10 6 2 18 
Netherlands 2,699 601 40 3,340 
Norway 43 5 2 50 
Poland 4,202 1,295 165 5,662 
Portugal 180 342 105 627 
Romania 372 345 107 824 
Slovakia 88 92 23 203 
Slovenia 50 32 1 83 
Spain 18,077 1,794 217 20,088 
Sweden 6,472 590 48 7,110 
Turkey 85 57 5 147 
United Kingdom 13,494 1 - 13,495 
All 177,625 14,413 1,752 193,790 
Source: EIF; data extraction: 02.05.2007  
 
EN 15   EN Figure 3: SME Guarantee Facility – Bene ficiary SMEs – Breakdown by sector 
as of 31.12.2006 
Source: EIF, data extraction: 29.06.2007 
Figure 3.1: All windows: Loan Guaran tee, Micro-credit, and Equity 
 in %; total number: 193,790 SMEs 
SMEG- all windows
Wholesale and 
retail trade; repair ; 
21.59%Community, social 
and personal 
service activities; 
9.72%
Financial 
intermediation; 
0.29%
Hotels and 
restaurants; 6.43%Manufacturing; 
22.19%Real estate, 
renting, other 
businesses 
activities; 8.05%Transport, storage 
and 
telecom m unications 
6,02%
Activities of 
households; 3.35%Electricity, gas and 
w ater supply; 
0.27%Others; 0.10%Agriculture, hunting 
and forestry, 
fishing, mining and 
quarrying; 2.64% Construction; 
17.01%
Education; Health 
and social w ork; 
2.33%
 
 
Figure 3.2 Loan Guarantee  
 in %; total number: 162,939 SMEs 
SMEG - Loan Guarantee
Construction; 
18.48%Education; Health 
and social w ork; 
2.22%
Electricity, gas and 
w ater supply; 
0.25%
Financial 
intermediation; 
0.28%Manufacturing; 
24.86%
Hotels and 
restaurants; 6.70%Activities of 
households; 2.79%Transport, storage 
and 
telecom m unications 
6,66%Com m unity, social 
and personal 
service activities; 
8.26%Agriculture, hunting 
and forestry, 
fishing, mining and 
quarrying; 2.15%
Real estate, 
renting, other 
businesses 
activities; 7.54%Others; 0.105%Wholesale and 
retail trade; repair ; 
19.69%
 
 
EN 16   EN Figure 3.3: Micro-credit ( in %; total number: 30,552 SMEs) 
SMEG - Micro-credit
Activities of 
households; 6.33%Real estate, 
renting, other 
businesses 
activities; 10.38%Transport, storage 
and 
telecommunications 
2,64%Wholesale and 
retail trade; repair; 
31.83%
Education; Health 
and social w ork; 
2.92%
Electricity, gas and 
w ater supply; 
0.37%
Manufacturing; 
7.94%Financial 
intermediation; 
0.37%Hotels and 
restaurants; 5.04%Construction; 
9.31%Com m unity, social 
and personal 
service activities; 
17.54%Agriculture, hunting 
and forestry, 
fishing, mining and 
quarrying; 5.29%
Others; 0.05%
 
 
Figure 3.4: Equity ( in %; total number: 299 SMEs) 
MAP - EQUITY
Others; 4,35%Construction; 
2,34%Education; Health 
and social w ork; 
0,67%Electricity, gas and 
w ater supply; 
0,33%Community, social 
and personal 
service activities; 
1,34%Wholesale and 
retail trade; repair ; 
11,71%
Transport, storage 
and 
telecom m unications 
4,348%Financial 
intermediation; 
0,33%
Manufacturing; 
22,07%
Real estate, 
renting, other 
businesses 
activities; 52,51%
 
 
Table 6: SME Guarantee Facility - Investment volume by window 
As of 31.12.2006 
 Investment 
EUR million 
Loan Guarantee 22 676 
Micro credit 437 
Equity Guarantee 270 
Total SMEG 23 383 
Source: EIF Quarterly Report – 31 D ecember 2006 – SMEG 2001 Facility  
Report issued: 28.03.2007  
 
EN 17   EN 1.2. ETF Start-up Facility 
Figure 4: ETF Start-up Facility – Cumulati ve evolution of EIF operations (per year) 
 Data referring to the last qua rter of the corresponding year  
Total budget more than EUR 220 m illion
050100150200250
Q4/2001 Q4/2002 Q4/2003 Q4/2004 Q4/2005 Q4/2006EUR millio n
Total budget Budget available for commitments to FIs (net of EIF fees)
EIF Commitment to FIs EIF Signatures to FIs
Disbursements to FIs Interest and other income 
Source: PMS/Report/Strategic /Commitment overview/ESU01 
Data extraction: 10.04.2007 
 
EN 18   EN Table 7: ETF Start-up Facility – Venture Ca pital funds with contractual agreements  
 with the EIF 
Situation as of 31.12.2006 
(*) Projects approved bu t still to be signed. 
(**) Legal seat may differ 
Fund size 
(EUR million) Name Country of 
headquarters 
(**) Geographical 
orientation Sector focus Establishment 
year Duration 
(years)  
Current Target
Adara 
Ventures 
SICAR Spain Spain Communications, 
Computer related 2005 10+2 49.9 49.9 
Aescap 
Venture Netherlands Northern 
Europe with 
emphasis on 
Benelux and 
Germany Biotechnology, 
Medical/health 
related 2006 10+3 54.9 150.0 
Auriga 
Ventures 
III France France (50%) 
EU countries 
(25%), 
Switzerland, 
USA, Israel 
(25%) Biotechnology, 
Communications, 
Computer related, Medical/health 
related, Othe
r 
Electronics related2006 10+2 144.3 150.0 
Big Ban g 
Ventures II Belgium Flander region 
(60-80%), 
remaining part 
in the Benelux 
countries Communications, 
Computer Related2006 10 + (*)   
Capital-E Belgium Flander region 
(60), remaining 
part in the rest 
of Europe Microelectronics 2006 12+1 (*)   
Creandum 
II L.P. Sweden Sweden (70-
80%) and near-
by Nordic 
countries 
including 
Denmark, 
Finland and 
Norway Communications, 
Computer related 2007 10+ (*)   
 
 
EN 19   EN (Table 7, continued) 
Fund size 
(EUR million) Name Country of 
headquarters 
(**) Geographical 
orientation Sector focus Establishment 
year Duration 
(years)  
Current Target
Creathor Germany Germany (70%), 
France (20%, 
other European 
countries (10%) 
incl. small 
percentage to 
Switzerland Communications, 
Computer related, 
Optics, Micro-
and Nanotech an d 
new materials 2006 10+ 59.4 59.4 
Crescent 
Capital II UK UK Technology 
related sector 2004 10+2 33.5 33.5 
Debaeque II 
FCR Spain Primarily in 
Spain (80%) and 
opportunistically 
in other countries 
(20%) which 
may include non-
participating 
countries on an 
exceptional basisCommunications, 
Computer related 
(85 %(, life science (15%)     (*)   
Eden One 
LP UK UK Communications, 
Computer related, Other Electronic 
related 2004 10+3 66.7 66.7 
EMBL 
Technology 
Fund Germany EMBL member 
states Biotechnology, 
Medical/health 
related 2001 10+2 26.4 26.4 
Gilde 
Healthcare II Netherlands Multi-regional 
orientation: 
Benelux, France, 
United Kingdom, 
Spain and 
Germany Biotechnology, 
Medical/health related 2006 10+2 70.7 125.0 
 
 
EN 20   EN (Table 7, continued) 
Fund size 
(EUR million) Name Country of 
headquarters 
(**) Geographical 
orientation Sector focus Establishment 
year Duration 
(years)  
Current Target
Innogest 
Capital Italy Northern Italy Innovation driven 
technology sector2006 10+3 50.5 60.0 
IP Venture 
Fund United 
Kingdom United 
Kingdom and 
pan-EuropeanBiotechnology, 
Chemicals and 
Materials, Communications, 
Energy, Industrial 
Automation, Medical/health 
related 2006 10+2 23.1 30.0 
New Tech 
VCF II Luxembourg Multi-country Communications, 
Computer related2005 10+2 120.0 120.0 
Pontis 
Venture 
Partners I 
Beteiligungs-
Invest AG Austria Austria Biotechnology, 
Communications, 
Computer Related, Industrial 
Automation, 
Industrial Products and 
Services, 
Medical/health 
Related, Othe
r 
Electronics Related 2005 10+2 30.4 30.4 
Talde Capital 
II Spain Spain Generalist, 
Biotechnology, 
Communications, Computer Related2005 10+2 60.0 60.0 
The 
Environment 
Technologies 
Fund UK EU, 
predominantly 
UK, D, Nordic 
countries, 
Benelux and 
CH Clean 
technologies and 
services 2006 10+3 51.6 150.0 
 
EN 21   EN (Table 7, continued) 
Fund size 
(EUR million) Name Country of 
headquarters 
(**) Geographical 
orientation Sector focus Establishment 
year Duration 
(years)  
Current Target
T-Source France France Communications, 
Computer related, 
Other Electronic 
Related 2000 10+2 38.3 38.3 
VIVES Belgium Belgium Biotechnology, 
Communications, Computer related 2003 12+2 15.0 15.0 
Wellington 
Partners III 
Life 
Sciences Fund L.P. Germany Mainly 
Germany and 
German 
speaking 
countries and 
on a co-
investment 
basis in other 
European 
countries Biotechnology 2006 12+1 
 
 
  
 15.0 100.0 
TOTAL      909.7 1,264.6
Sources:  
PMS/Reports/VC; extraction date: 11.05.2007 
EIF, Quarterly Report ETF Start-up, 31.12.2006; issued 04.05.2007 
 
EN 22   EN 1.3. Seed capital action 
Figure 5: Seed capital action – Cumulati ve evolution of EIF operations (per year) 
 Data referring to the last qua rter of the corresponding year  
Performance remains low
0,001,002,003,004,005,006,00
Q4/2001 Q4/2002 Q4/2003 Q4/2004 Q4/2005 Q4/2006EUR million
Total budget Budget available for commitments to FIs (net of EIF fees)
EIF Commitment to FIs EIF signatures to FIs
Disbursements to FIs
 
Source: PMS/Report/Strategic /Commitment/Overview/SCA01 
Data extraction: 16.04.2007 
 
Table 8: Seed Capital Action – Venture Capi tal Funds with contractual agreements with 
the EIF 
As of 31.12.2006 
Fund size 
(EUR million) Name Country of 
headquarters Geographical 
orientation Sector focus Establishment 
year Duration 
(years)  
Current Target
EMBL 
Technology Fund Germany EMBL member 
states Biotechnology, 
Medical/health related 2001 10+2 26.4 26.4 
Pentech 
Fund I United 
Kinddom United 
Kingdom Computer 
related 2001 10+0 33.4 33.4 
Total     59.8 59.8 
Source:  EIF, Quarterly Report, Seed Capital Action, 31.12.2006; issued 04.05.2007 
 
EN 23   EN 2. S ECTION II: MAPS 
 
Map 1, page 18 
Shows the geographical coverage of the MAP, based on the EC net commitments as at 
31.12.2006, all three financial instruments include d. In addition, map 1 shows the relation of 
the EC net commitment to the GDP for each participating country.  
 
Map 2, page 19 
Shows the relation between EC net commitment s and the population figures per country. It 
also indicates both the amounts spent from the SMEG facility and from the ETF + SCA, for 
each country.  
 
Map 3, page 20 
Illustrates the number of beneficiary SMEs pe r country, also in relation to the population.
  
 
EN 24   EN 
 
 
EN 25   EN 
 
 
EN 26   EN 
 
 
EN 27   EN 3. S ECTION III: DESCRIPTION OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS  
3.1. SME Guarantee Facility 
3.1.1. Description The objective of this Facility was to promote entrepreneurship and to enhance growth and 
competitiveness, by improving the financial environment for business, especially for SMEs. The Facility provided support for higher volume s of guarantees for the existing guarantee 
products of the Financial Intermediaries (FIs)
8 and guarantees for riskier loans, thus 
facilitating access to financing for a larger num ber of small companies for a wider variety of 
investments. It also supporte d the creation and development of new guarantee schemes, by 
covering part of the losses incurred under th e guarantees, up to a pre-determined amount 
(the “cap"9). 
The Facility is managed by the EIF on beha lf of the European Commission. The EIF 
identified, evaluated and selected potential FIs for the Facility in accordance with the relevant Guarantee Policy. Some FIs may employ stricter SME eligibility criteria, depending on their specific guarantee or loan products. In all cases,  the origination and risk  assessment as well as 
monitoring and recovery actions with regard to  the final SME beneficiaries remain the full 
responsibility of the selected  Financial Intermediaries. 
The following windows  were available under the SME Guarantee Facility: 
• Loan Guarantees: aimed at enterprises with growth potential and with 100 or 
fewer employees. Under this window, the EIF issues partial guarantees or counter-
guarantees to cover portfolios of loans or guarantees. 
• Micro-credit Guarantees: supports micro-lo ans for very small en terprises with 10 
or fewer employees. Here, the EIF issues partial guarantees to cover portfolios of 
micro-loans. 
• Equity Guarantees: counter- or co-guara ntees offered to guarantee schemes to 
cover equity investments in SMEs (no dire ct guarantees to Venture Capital funds). 
• ICT Guarantees: this window was inte nded to cover portfolios of loans 
specifically dedicated to the financing of IT equipment,  software and training to 
promote the use of the internet and e-commerce. No projects have been approved under the ICT window. There was no demand for this window, since ICT loans 
can also be guaranteed under the Loan  Guarantee window, so the ICT window 
was discontinued for the CIP programme. 
3.1.2. Conclusions for the SME Guarantee Facility 
The SME Guarantee Facility has had a strong impact over the entire programme period and 
has undoubtedly improved access to finance for SMEs. 
                                                
 
8 Direct lending provided by commercial and promotional banks was also supported. 
9 The cap is a pre-set amount, fixed both in Euro and as a percentage, and defines EIF’s maximum 
liability towards a FI. The cap is based on expected losses. The financial risk to the Community’s 
budget is limited in the first inst ance by the cap and in the second by  the guarantee rate approved by the 
Commission for a given intermediary (typically 50%). 
 
EN 28   EN The entire budget has b een used and nearly 194,000 enterprises , representing about 1 % of 
existing European enterprises, have benefited10. This figure also represents more than 10 % of 
newly created enterprises11. 
The SME Guarantee Facility allowed Financial Intermediaries  to increase substantially the 
volume of loans they granted to SMEs and to take on higher risk. There is further added 
value, particularly in the Micro-credit Wi ndow, where "disadvantaged" groups have also 
benefited from the programme. 
The Facility has a high leverage effect , especially under the Loan Guarantee Window, where 
for each EUR 1,000 of EC money committed, there is more than EUR 80,000 of loan volume. (cf. chapter 3.2.3 of the main report and Section I, Table 1,  of this Staff Working Document). 
The rather flexible, market-driven structure of the SME Guarantee Facility has meant it could 
be easily adapted to different market, nationa l and regional conditions, allowing it to achieve 
both a wide range of application a nd a broad geographical distribution. 
A higher level of transparency has been ach ieved by increased monitoring and reporting 
requirements, which must be carried through a ll the way down to the final beneficiaries. 
Visibility of the EU contribu tion was ensured through a requireme nt for the FIs to mention the 
EU support in the loan agreements with SMEs.  
The Loan Guarantee window  proved to be an appropriate  scheme for most Financial 
Intermediaries, allowing them to significantly incr ease their financing to SMEs. It is by far the 
most used of all windows in  terms of monies committed. 
The Micro-credit window  allowed some of the Financial Intermediaries to enter into the field 
lending to micro-enterprises, which may have  been previously excluded from access to 
finance. It also improved access to finance fo r the self-employed and some disadvantaged 
groups. 
The Equity Guarantee window  was little used. It guarantees larger investments for fast-
growing high-tech companies, which means that th e target group is similar to that of Venture 
Capital funds and therefore limited overall. Ther e were also some technical constraints.  
The ICT Loan Guarantee window , designed as a sectoral window, did not attract any demand, 
due to its narrow focus. It is assumed that pa rt of such ICT investments are covered by the 
"general" Loan Guarantee window. 
3.2. ETF Start-up Facility 
3.2.1. Description The objective of ETF Start-up wa s to increase the availability of risk capital to innovative 
SMEs during their creation and th eir early stage development. 
Under ETF Start-up, the EIF inve sts EU money in specialised Venture Capital (VC) funds 
established to provide equity or other forms of  risk capital to SMEs . The funds considered 
under this Facility are typical ly small or newly establishe d, including funds operating at 
regional level, those focusing on specific industri es or technologies and funds that finance the 
commercialisation of R&D results. 
                                                
 
10 According to Eurostat there are about 18.8 million enterprises in EU-27 (figures for 2004), and 99.98 % 
of these are SMEs. 
11 According to Eurostat: Statistics in Focus 48/2007, the ne wly created enterprise s accounted for 9.2 %, 
on average, of the total of active enterprises (figures for 2003) 
 
EN 29   EN The EIF examines the fund proposals based on crite ria that include size, level of involvement 
from the private sector, investment strategy,  target market, deal flow, proposed terms, 
expected rate of return, management team and the extent to which the EIF investment in the 
VC fund is expected to have a ca talytic effect in raising funds.  
The ETF Start-up investments in risk capital funds are made  on equal terms (‘pari passu’) 
with private investors. The ETF Start-up Inve stment Guidelines specify that investments 
under the Facility must represent between 10% and 25% of the total cap ital of a VC fund or 
business incubator, or 50% in exceptional cases, such as ne w funds where a particularly 
strong catalytic role in the de velopment of VC  markets for a specific technology or in a 
specific region is probable. Investments can be made up to a maximum amount of EUR 10 
million. In exceptional, duly substantiated cases the amount committed may be higher, but will not in any case exceed EUR 15 million. 
Where the investment policy of a VC fund fores ees investments outside the eligible countries, 
the EIF's participation is reduced by the appropr iate corresponding percentage. In all cases the 
majority of the capital fund must be  invested in eligible countries. 
3.2.2. Conclusions for the ETF Start-up Facility 
The facility is tailored to the strategically important area of seed and early stage investments 
in mainly high tech enterprises with high grow th potential, where there is a are generally 
accepted market failure. ETF Start-up thus played an important role in contributing to the implementation of the Lisbon strategy. The de mand for early stage funding remains strong 
and European technology centres (especially res earch centres and universities) continue to 
generate valuable results in terms of concepts and intellectual property rights. 
The entire budget allocated to  ETF Start-up has been used. 
ETF Start-up has often had a catalytic effect in the establishment of  early stage VC funds 
making it possible to attract more investors an d thereby allowing funds  to invest larger 
amounts, to have more resources available for follow-on investments in selected SMEs and to 
achieve a more commercially viable size. In  several cases, VC funds would not have 
materialised without the investment made unde r the ETF Start-up Facility since the minimum 
size for a viable fund would not have been reached. 
The improved market cycle in 2006 resulted in  the recovery of the venture capital market, 
with a significant impact on the number of new investments under ETF-Start-up, although 
investors remained much more reluctant to invest  in early stage enterprises than later those in 
later stages of development. 
The EIF’s investment in VC funds under ETF St art-up also gave a degree of reassurance 
regarding the quality of the funds, thus  helping to attract  other investors. 
3.3. Seed Capital Action 
3.3.1. Description The Seed Capital Action (SCA) aimed to stimul ate the supply of capital for the creation of 
innovative new businesses with growth and job-creation potential, including those in 
traditional economic sectors, through support for seed funds, incubators and similar schemes.  
The SCA is managed by the EIF on behalf of the European Commission. The action provides 
support for the long-term recru itment of additional investment  managers to reinforce the 
capacity of the venture capital industry to cater  for investments in seed capital. SCA provides 
grants covering management costs up to EU R 100,000 per newly recru ited manager and for a 
maximum of 3 new staff per beneficiary.  
 
EN 30   EN 3.3.2. Conclusions for the Seed Capital Action 
The demand for this instrument was significantly below expectations. Constraints in terms of 
eligibility criteria and difficult market conditio ns for seed capital meant that demand was 
limited. Based on this experience,  the instrument will theref ore be modified under the CIP 
programme. 
 
EN 31   EN 4. S ECTION IV: JOINT EUROPEAN VENTURE (JEV)  PROGRAMME  
4.1. Description of the JEV programme 
The JEV programme aimed to encourage joint ventures between European SMEs in the 
European Economic Area12, thereby helping them to benefi t from the opportunities offered by 
the single market. Following the decision (593/ 2004/EC) of the European Parliament and the 
Council of 21 July 2004 to pha se out the JEV programme, no new submissions have been 
accepted since 29 December 2004. 
The contribution was intended to cover some of the expenses related to the setting up of a 
joint venture (Facility for preparatory work  and investment). The amount (maximum EUR 
100,000 per project) and the terms of this contribu tion were as follows: 
• The first part of the contribution covered up to 50 % of the eligible expenses with a 
maximum ceiling of EUR 50,000. Eligible expenses  included the expens es of the market 
survey, the preparation of the legal framework and the busine ss plan, the analysis of the 
environmental impact, and any other expenses that are essential for the setting up of the 
joint venture. 
• The second part of the cont ribution covered up to 10 % of the total amount of the 
investment made. 
In addition, initially JEV supported actions pr omoting the programme (Promotion Facility). 
The maximum amount of a contribution for the Promotion Facility was EUR 10,000 for 
promotional action material and EUR 20,000 for ev ents intended to stim ulate co-operation. It 
consisted of 50% of all eligible expenses and was in the form of a grant. Entities which were eligible to apply for a JEV Promotion Facility  contribution were financial intermediaries, 
European, national or regional associations of SMEs, Chambers of Commerce, Euro-Info-
Centres, the Business & Innovati on Centres, and all other non- profit entities from European 
Union, such as trade and industr y associations, public agencies and other entities, promoting 
investments eligible for the JEV Programme. 
In autumn 2001, the Commission suspended support for the Promotion Facility as the JEV 
Programme was undergoing a review  and internal evaluation. 
4.2. Budgetary situation 
The budgetary allocations for the JEV program me totalled EUR 57 million, including EUR 5 
million allocated in 1997 for the JEV pilot action. Due to the very low utilisation of the programme, EUR 37.2 million were decommitted during the operational  period of JEV in 
budgetary terms. 
With regard to the projects, at the end of  2006, the Commission services had committed EUR 
19.8 million of the available budgetary resources to final beneficiary SMEs on the basis of 
approved applications. The total disbursement s to beneficiary SMEs amounted to EUR 3.7 
million. 
4.3. Financial Intermediaries 
The JEV programme was implemented through a network of financial institutions. This 
network, constituted following a call for expressions  of interest (Official Journal S 42 of 28 
February 1998), comprised in total 31 financial intermediaries.  
                                                
 
12 Decision of the EEA Joint Committee n°72/1999 of 15 June 1999 
 
EN 32   EN The table below gives an overview of th e financial intermediaries by country: 
Table 1: Breakdown of financial intermediaries by country 
Country Number of financial 
intermediaries 
Austria 3 
Belgium 1 
Finland 1 France 1 
Germany 6 
Italy 11 Luxembourg 2 
Portugal 2 
Spain 3 Sweden 1 
Total 31 
 
An SME that wished to submit an application under this scheme had to contact one of the 
financial intermediaries in the network. This intermediary was entrusted with evaluating the 
application and passing it on to the Commission services. The latter then verified the eligibility of the application and the possible impact on employment.  
Out of the 31 financial intermediaries that re mained in the network at  the end of 2005, about 
one third never submitted an application for a joint venture project. Of the active financial intermediaries, one quarter a ccounted for more than three- quarters of the joint venture 
projects. 
4.4. Review of the projects 
From the start of the programme in 1998 until 31 December 2006, after an in-depth 
assessment of potential projects by the financia l intermediaries, 323 proj ects were received by 
the Commission services, of which 230 were a pproved. Of these, 54 were promotion projects 
and 176 were preparatory work and investment projects.  
The first year of the JEV programme (1998) wa s used by the Commission services to build 
the network of financial intermediaries and to implement the scheme. By the second year of 
the programme 104 projects had been receiv ed. In 2000 and in 2001 the number of new 
applications received re mained at about the same level as th e year before. This was lower than 
expected. In 2003 the number of new applica tions being received was on average one per 
month. In 2004, a 300% in crease was seen but this was proba bly due to a “last minute rush” 
after the announcement of the closure of the programme. 
Almost one in three projects was refused by the Commission or  withdrawn by the financial 
intermediary. Most refusals were due to non-co mpliance with the eligib ility criteria or to 
insufficient impact as regards the setting-up of new economic activitie s involving investment 
 
EN 33   EN and job creation. Most of the withdrawals were du e to the level of admi nistrative requirements 
related to the processi ng of the files and the resulting delays. 
Table 2: Employment in lead and partner SMEs 
Number of SMEs (cumulative figures) Number 
of 
Employees 1998-
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005/2006 
<10 135 119 144 172 185 210 
10-49 89 70 93 102 106 111 
50-249 49 35 42 45 48 49 
Total 273 224 279 319 339 370 
 
Out of the 370 partner SMEs, 57 % had fewer th an 10 employees, while 30 % had between 10 
and 49 employees and 13% had more than 50 employees. 
4.5. Employment 
With only 45 joint ventures cr eated and reported so far, the effect on employment has been 
limited.  
At the end of 2006 only 19 applications had resu lted in the investment grant being awarded 
based on investments realised in the newly created joint ventures. 
In each of the grant request cases, only about 20%  of the job creation fo reseen in the initial 
application forms had been real ised. However, it should be take n into account that the job 
creation figures given in the grant application only reflect the current situation. Creation of, 
and investment in a joint venture is often a long process and it may be that further jobs will be 
created as the business progresses. There is al so no information availa ble on any jobs that 
may have been created within the partners’ en terprises as a result of the joint venture. 
The great majority of the joint ventures create d and reported so far opted not to apply for the 
investment grant. The general opinion is that the procedures were too lengthy and 
complicated. Another reason for not applying fo r the investment grant is that the joint 
ventures have invested only limited amounts in fixed assets, so the 10% support has not been 
considered as incentive enough to justify the ad ministrative effort. It can reasonably be 
assumed that jobs have also been created in th e joint ventures that ha ve decided not to apply 
for an investment grant but, in view of the act ual job creation figures available for the four 
grants submitted, the numbers are probably rather limited.  
4.6. Conclusions 
Demand for JEV from the market was much lowe r than originally expected. The programme 
was originally conceived, par tly in response to requests from SME representative 
organisations, to complement the (then) ex isting ECIP (European Community Investment 
Partners) and JOP (Joint Ventur e Programme – Phare/Tacis) jo int venture programmes, which 
covered the ALAMEDSA and CEEC/NIS countries respectively. ECIP was closed at the end 
of 1999 and JOP during 2000. One effect of this wa s that some financial intermediaries who 
had offered ECIP, JOP and JEV to their SME c lients scaled down or ceased their activities, 
 
EN 34   EN since JEV alone did not provide them with a sufficient volum e of projects to justify dedicated 
staff. The remuneration paid to financial inte rmediaries for submitting files was regarded by 
many as insufficient in view of the administrativ e obligations that the financial intermediaries 
have assumed when concluding the Framework Agreement with the Commission. 
Although the logic behind the JEV programme wa s considered sound, time has shown that 
there was in fact relatively little dema nd from SMEs for support for the creation of 
transnational joint ventures in the EU. In reality, SMEs investing in other Member States often preferred to create subsidiaries rather than joint ventures, or to enter into looser cooperation agreements wit hout the obligation to cr eate a new legal entity. 
Take-up of the programme may also have be en affected by the need to impose thorough 
controls on the processing of applications in order to ensure sound financial management and 
reduce the risk of irregularities to the minimum. As a result, f ile processing times were longer 
than expected by the SME target group.  
 
EN 35   EN 5. S ECTION V: SUCCESSOR PROGRAMME CIP 
The Competitiveness and Innovation Fram ework Programme (2007 to 2013) ( CIP), successor 
programme of the MAP, is a coherent respons e to the objectives of the growth and jobs 
strategy. The legal base for the CIP entered into force on 29 November 200613. 
The CIP brings together into a single fr amework specific Community support programmes, 
and relevant parts of other Community programme s, in the fields most critical to boosting 
European productivity, innovation capacity and su stainable growth, whils t also addressing 
environmental concerns. It combines Community actions in the fields of entrepreneurship, SMEs, industrial competitiveness, innovation, ICT development and use, environmental 
technologies and intelligent energy. 
The CIP will help enterprises to grow and in novate, including by sup porting private equity 
and loan guarantee schemes; improving th e conditions for innovation, including eco-
innovation; stimulating the new converging mark ets for electronic networks, media content 
and digital technologies, and encouraging th e uptake of new and renewable energies and 
promoting energy efficiency. 
The CIP comprises three speci fic programmes: the Entrep reneurship and Innovation 
Programme (EIP), which includes the CIP fi nancial instruments; the ICT Policy Support 
Programme (ICTP); and th e Intelligent Energy Europe Programme (IEEP).  
The CIP financial instruments further streng thens support for SMEs investing in ICT and 
innovation, including eco-innovation, as well as  supporting SMEs in traditional sectors. A 
particular aim is to help SMEs, especially high-growth innovative companies in their early 
and expansion stages of development, to have  easier access to finance. The CIP financial 
instruments build on those of the MAP and furt her extend support for access to finance. New 
elements have been introduced to reflect mark et developments, such as the possibility to 
support the provision of mezzanine finance fo r SMEs, and a window for securitisation. 
The instruments are: 
• The High Growth and Innovative SME Facility  (GIF): this instrument includes 2 
windows: GIF1 for early stage investme nts (which already existed under ETF 
Start-up) and a new GIF2 window for expa nsion stage investments. Particular 
attention is also paid to VC funds whose main investment focus is on eco-
innovation. 
• The SME Guarantee (SMEG) Facility: In  the area of financial guarantees, the 
Loan and Micro-credit windows have b een retained. Mezzanine financing is 
eligible under an ex tended Equity & Quasi-Equity window and there is also a new 
Securitisation window. 
• The Capacity Building Scheme: This covers both the Seed Capital Action and the 
Partnership Action. The revised, more fl exible Seed Capital Action provides 
grants to VC funds to cover start-up cost s and costs related to  the recruitment of 
additional staff. 
                                                
 
13 Decision No 1639/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 2006 
establishing a Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (2007 to 2013), OJ L310/15, 
9.11.2006. 
 
EN 36   EN The financial instruments are  managed by the EIF on behalf of the Commission, except for the 
Capacity Building Scheme, which may also be implemented by other international financial 
institutions, including the European Bank fo r Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the 
European Investment Bank (EIB) and the C ouncil of Europe Development Bank (CEB).