Commission staff working document accompanying the Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the financial instruments of the multiannual programme for enterprise and entrepreneurship, and in particular for small 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 Decision 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}
Date: 2008-11-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, activity report, aid to undertakings, entrepreneurship, financial aid, financial management, small and medium-sized enterprises

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN 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 instruments of the multiannual programme for enterprise and 
entrepreneurship, and in particular for small 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 Decision 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 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table of contents 

1. 

1.1 

Section I Tables and Figures   

SME Guarantee Facility 

Figure 1 

Cumulative evolution of EIF operations (per year) 

Figure 2 

Commitments to Financial Intermediaries (per year) 

Table 1 

Leverage effect (gearing) and Note: Estimation of enhanced access 
to finance for SMEs 

Table 2 

Calls received and recoveries 

Table 3 

Financial Intermediaries 

3.1  Loan Guarantee Window 

3.2  Micro-credit and Equity Guarantee Windows 

Table 4 

Beneficiary SMEs – Breakdown by country 

Table 5 

Beneficiary SMEs – Breakdown by country and size class 

Figure 3 

Beneficiary SMEs – Breakdown by sector 

3.1  All windows 

3.2  Loan Guarantee 

3.3  Micro-credit 

3.4  Equity 

Table 6 

Estimated investment volume by window 

1.2 

ETF Start-up Facility 

Figure 4 

Cumulative evolution of EIF operations (per year) 

Table 7 

VC funds with contractual agreements with the EIF  

1.3 

Seed capital action 

Figure 5 

Cumulative evolution of EIF operations (per year) 

Table 8 

VC Funds with contractual agreements with the EIF 

2 

Section II Maps 

4 

4 

4 

5 

6 

9 

10 

10 

12 

13 

14 

15 

15 

15 

16 

16 

16 

17 

17 

18 

22 

22 

22 

23 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
3 

4 

5 

Section  III  SME  Guarantee  Facility,  ETF  Start-up  Facility, 
Seed Capital Action: description and specific conclusions 

Section  IV  Joint  European  Venture  (JEV)  programme: 
specific information 

Section V Successor Programme CIP 

27 

31 

35 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
1. 

SECTION I  TABLES AND FIGURES 

1.1. 

SME Guarantee Facility  

Figure 1: SME Guarantee Facility - Cumulative evolution of EIF operations  

(per year), data referring to the last quarter of the corresponding year 

Total budget reached nearly EUR 300 million

300,00

250,00

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
R
U
E

200,00

150,00

100,00

50,00

0,00

Q4/2001

Q4/2002

Q4/2003

Q4/2004

Q4/2005

Q4/2006

To tal budget

EIF co mmitments to  FIs

Guarantee call payments pursuant to  defaulted lo ans

B udget available fo r co mmitments to  FIs (net o f EIF fees)

EIF signatures to  FIs

Interest and o ther inco me

Source: PMS/Report/Strategic/Commitment Overview/SMEG01 

Data extraction: 30.05.2007 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
Figure 2: SME Guarantee Facility – Commitments to Financial Intermediaries  

(per year) 

Still commitments at the end of the programme

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
R
U
E

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

35

2002

90

58

42

41

2003

2004
EIF commitments to Financial Intermediaries 

2005

2006

Source: PMS/Report/Strategic/Commitment Overview/SMEG01 

Data extraction: 04.04.2007 

EN 

5 

   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 

Estimated 
underlying loan 
volume 
supported 

Maximum EIF 
Guarantee 
Amount 

Cap Amounts1 

Leverage 
effect 

Leverage 
effect 

EUR million 

EUR million 

EUR million 

(a) 

(b) 

208.1 

16827.1 

4619.0 

80.9 

22.2 

36.2 

314.0 

200.3 

8.7 

17.3 

308.2 

89.4 

17.8 

5.5 

5.2 

261.6 

17,449.3 

4,908.7 

66.7 

18.8 

Loan 
guarantee 
window 

Micro-credit 
window 

Equity 
guarantee 
window 

Total 

Source: EIF Quarterly Report – 31 December 2006 – SMEG 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 access to finance" ("EAF"). EAF is a complex 
issue that can rarely be studied directly. Looking 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  EAF  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 

6 

   EN 

 
  
  
 
                                                 
It should be noted that EAF can also be estimated 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 assumptions 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-guarantees 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 financing 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  professional  judgement  and 
experience. There are however certain limitations that should be kept in mind: 

EAF is based on the EIF ex-ante estimate of the funding that Intermediaries 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 : historic 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 availability period (usually 31.12.2007), thus impacting EAF. 
Gearing is then calculated by comparing EAF to the total cap4 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  have  expired  and  all  payments  due  under  the 
Facility will have been made.  

Taking  into  account  these  considerations,  the  estimation  of  EAF  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 
3 

4 

These other methods will also be taken into account in the context of the planned evaluation. 
Actual  volume:  means  the  volume  of  financing,  guarantees  and  counter-guarantees  included  in  the 
portfolios benefiting from the EU Guarantee. 
The  cap  amount  is  the  maximum  aggregate  amount  which  the  EC  is  liable  to  pay  to  the  financial 
intermediary under the SMEG.  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Reference Loan Volume (RLV) 

Actual  Portfolio  Volume  (AV)  of  financial  intermediaries  extended  with 
EU support5 

Difference 

2,100 million EUR 

8,359 million EUR 

6,259 million EUR 

It  is  therefore  estimated,  that  thanks  to  the  EU  intervention,  an  additional  volume  of  loans, 
guarantees  and  counter-guarantees  of  nearly  EUR  6.3  billion  has  been  created  by  financial 
intermediaries to support final beneficiaries. 

Extrapolation of the loan volume 

Taking into account the risk sharing 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 the calculation under 2.1: 

Extrapolated  loan  volume  that  would  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  attributed  to  this  additional  loan  volume  can  be 
estimated as follows: 

(a) Additional loan 

13,065 million EUR 

(c) Planned evaluation 

(b) Cap amounts 

Gearing: (a)/(b) 

261.6 million EUR 

507 

The  Terms  of  Reference  prepared  for  the  interim  evaluation  of  the  "Entrepreneurship  and 
Innovation Programme" under the successor programme 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 

6 

7 

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. 
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). 
In case the payments actually made are below the total cap amounts, the gearing would increase. 

EN 

8 

   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 – SMEG 2001 Facility 

Report issued: 28.03.2007 

EN 

9 

   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 

Name 

Country 

Austria Wirtschaftsservice (AWS) 

Austria 

Fonds de Participation (FdP) 

Belgium 

Encouragement Bank 

Raiffeisen Bank Bulgaria 

Bulgaria 

Bulgaria 

Cyprus Development Bank 

Cyprus 

Czech Moravian Bank 

Czech Rep 

Ceska Sporitelna 

Czech Rep 

The Danish Investment Fund 

Denmark 

KredEx 

Finnvera  

Siagi 

SOCAMA 

Sofaris  

KfW (ex DtA) 

TEMPME 

HVB Bank 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

France 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Rural Credit Guarantee Foundation 

Hungary 

Artigiancredit Lombardia 

ATI Allenza di Garanzia 

ATI Controgaranzia /APEROL 

ATI Garanzia Diretta 

Italy 

Italy 

Italy 

Italy 

Cap amount 

Max EIF 
guarantee 
amount 

EUR million 

EUR million 

FIs with contract 
under previous 
Growth and 
Employment 
initiative 

LOAN 

6.4 

6.5 

2.5 

0.6 

0.2 

3.6 

3.2 

4.7 

1.2 

5.9 

1.0 

13.0 

11.7 

26.4 

1.6 

1.2 

0.3 

0.5 

22.7 

9.0 

2.7 

163.2 

43.5 

21.0 

10.0 

1.5 

54.5 

80.0 

44.6 

16.0 

117.0 

19.3 

482.2 

124.4 

176.0 

22.5 

30.0 

6.0 

17.5 

710.0 

450.0 

135.0 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

Yes 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
(3.1 continues) 

Name 

Country 

ATI  Sistema  Garanzia  Umbria 
Marche 

Mediocredito Centrale  

Italy 

Italy 

Mortgage 
(Hipoteku B.) 

and 

Land  Bank 

Latvia 

INVEGA 

Lithuania 

Malta Enterprise Corporation 

Malta 

BBMKB 

Netherlands 

Innovation Norway 

Bank BPH SA 

Polfund 

SPGM 

BRD  

Raiffeisen Bank 

Tatra Banka AS 

VUB 

Slovene Enterprise Fund 

Norway 

Poland 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Banco Santander Central Hispano 

Spain 

CERSA 

Almi  

KGF 

Total 

Spain 

Sweden 

Turkey 

Cap amount 

Max EIF 
guarantee 
amount 

EUR million 

EUR million 

FIs with contract 
under previous 
Growth and 
Employment 
initiative 

LOAN 

3.1 

12.8 

1.6 

2.6 

0.4 

8.0 

1.5 

8.0 

0.2 

4.0 

1.8 

1.3 

1.8 

0.2 

1.0 

1.2 

21.5 

11.5 

0.6 

157.5 

321.0 

22.5 

40.0 

6.0 

320.0 

7.5 

133.1 

2.4 

79.0 

31.0 

22.2 

45.0 

5.0 

9.5 

40.0 

500.0 

143.7 

9.4 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

Yes 

No 

208.1 

4619.0 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
 
  
(3.2) Micro-credit and Equity Guarantee Windows 

Name 

Country 

Cap 
amount 

Max EIF 
guarantee amount

EUR 
million 

EUR million 

MICROCREDIT 

FIs with contract under previous 
Growth and Employment initiative 

Fonds de Participation (FdP) 

Belgium 

2.4 

ADIE 

France 

2.6 

KfW (ex DtA) 

Germany 

17.2 

First Step 

Ireland 

0.1 

Cultura Sparebank 

Norway 

0.1 

ICO  

La Caixa 

Spain 

1.6 

Spain 

1.7 

The Enterprise Fund 

Spain 

0.2 

The  Prince's  Trust  and  Prince's  Scottish 
Youth Business Trust  

UK 

10.3 

12.0 

24.7 

85.8 

1.1 

0.9 

10.5 

11.3 

1.8 

52.2 

Total 

Austria 
(AWS) 

Sofaris 

Total 

36.2 

200.3 

EQUITY 

Wirtschaftsservice 

Austria 

1.9 

12.5 

France 

15.4 

17.3 

76.9 

89.4 

Sources: PMS/Reports/Report/Project; Data extraction: 02.05.2007 
 EIF quarterly report - SMEG 2001 Facility, 31 12 2006 

Yes 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
 
  
  
  
Table 4: SME Guarantee Facility – Beneficiary SMEs – Breakdown by country 

Number of SMEs, Average loan amount 

All windows: Loan Guarantee, Micro-credit, Equity 

As of 31.12.2006 

Country 

Number of  
beneficiary SMEs 

Average loan amount  
in EUR 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Cyprus 

Czech Republic 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Norway 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

Turkey 

United Kingdom 

All 

3,029 

2,140 

355 

5 

2,146 

582 

293 

2,350 

43,977 

15,770 

509 

165 

96 

69,964 

230 

532 

18 

3,340 

50 

5,662 

627 

824 

203 

83 

20,088 

7,110 

147 

13,495 

193,790 

139,910.01

40,755.93

108,934.58

85,641.70

126,515.18

194,978.38

181,754.02

214,752.75

27,737.50

26,295.82

64,941.24

233,698.52

10,778.28

76,377.73

133,302.26

138,896.33

178,823.38

152,198.85

123,655.84

27,639.67

295,591.34

117,528.62

193,600.20

176,493.06

106,877.49

46,685.12

143,794.74

3,864.95

62,960.21

Source: EIF; data extraction: 02.05.2007 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
Table 5: SME Guarantee Facility – Beneficiary SMEs – Breakdown by country and size 

class 

Number of SMEs 

All windows: Loan Guarantee, Micro-credit, Equity 

0-10 

2,675 

2,120 

260 

1 

1,652 

503 

204 

2,020 

42,705 

15,657 

459 

92 

96 

11-50 

314 

20 

86 

2 

400 

76 

78 

300 

1,246 

109 

50 

61 

- 

62,963 

6,237 

As of 31.12.2006 

Country 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Cyprus 

Czech Republic 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Norway 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

Turkey 

United Kingdom 

All 

157 

289 

10 

2,699 

43 

4,202 

180 

372 

88 

50 

18,077 

6,472 

85 

13,494 

177,625 

61 

213 

6 

601 

5 

1,295 

342 

345 

92 

32 

1,794 

590 

57 

1 

14,413 

14 

Source: EIF; data extraction: 02.05.2007 

EN 

51-100 

40 

- 

9 

2 

94 

3 

11 

30 

26 

4 

12 

- 

764 

12 

30 

2 

40 

2 

165 

105 

107 

23 

1 

217 

48 

5 

- 

1,752 

Total 

3,029 

2,140 

355 

5 

2,146 

582 

293 

2,350 

43,977 

15,770 

509 

165 

96 

69,964 

230 

532 

18 

3,340 

50 

5,662 

627 

824 

203 

83 

20,088 

7,110 

147 

13,495 

193,790 

   EN 

 
 
 
Figure 3: SME Guarantee Facility – Beneficiary SMEs – Breakdown by sector 

as of 31.12.2006 

Source: EIF, data extraction: 29.06.2007 

Figure 3.1: All windows: Loan Guarantee, Micro-credit, and Equity 

in %; total number: 193,790 SMEs 

SMEG- all windows

Others; 0.10%

Agriculture, hunting 
and forestry, 
fishing, mining and 
quarrying; 2.64%

Community, social 
and personal 
service activities; 
9.72%

Construction; 
17.01%

Education; Health 
and social w ork; 
2.33%

Financial 
intermediation; 
0.29%

Manufacturing; 
22.19%

Hotels and 
restaurants; 6.43%

Electricity, gas and 
w ater supply; 
0.27%

Wholesale and 
retail trade; repair ; 
21.59%

Transport, storage 
and 
telecommunications 
6,02%

Real estate, 
renting, other 
businesses 
activities; 8.05%

Activities of 
households; 3.35%

Figure 3.2 Loan Guarantee  

in %; total number: 162,939 SMEs 

SMEG - Loan Guarantee

Agriculture, hunting 
and forestry, 
fishing, mining and 
quarrying; 2.15%

Community, social 
and personal 
service activities; 
8.26%

Others; 0.105%

Construction; 
18.48%

Wholesale and 
retail trade; repair ; 
19.69%

Transport, storage 
and 
telecommunications 
6,66%

Real estate, 
renting, other 
businesses 
activities; 7.54%

Manufacturing; 
24.86%

Education; Health 
and social w ork; 
2.22%

Electricity, gas and 
w ater supply; 
0.25%

Activities of 
households; 2.79%

Hotels and 
restaurants; 6.70%

Financial 
intermediation; 
0.28%

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 3.3: Micro-credit (in %; total number: 30,552 SMEs) 

Wholesale and 
retail trade; repair; 
31.83%

Transport, storage 
and 
telecommunications 
2,64%

Real estate, 
renting, other 
businesses 
activities; 10.38%

SMEG - Micro-credit
Agriculture, hunting 
and forestry, 
fishing, mining and 
quarrying; 5.29%

Community, social 
and personal 
service activities; 
17.54%

Others; 0.05%

Construction; 
9.31%

Education; Health 
and social w ork; 
2.92%

Activities of 
households; 6.33%

Manufacturing; 
7.94%

Hotels and 
restaurants; 5.04%

Electricity, gas and 
w ater supply; 
0.37%

Financial 
intermediation; 
0.37%

Figure 3.4: Equity (in %; total number: 299 SMEs) 

MAP - EQUITY

Construction; 
2,34%

Education; Health 
and social w ork; 
0,67%

Community, social 
and personal 
service activities; 
1,34%

Others; 4,35%

Wholesale and 
retail trade; repair ; 
11,71%

Transport, storage 
and 
telecommunications 
4,348%

Real estate, 
renting, other 
businesses 
activities; 52,51%

Electricity, gas and 
w ater supply; 
0,33%

Financial 
intermediation; 
0,33%

Manufacturing; 
22,07%

Table 6: SME Guarantee Facility - Investment volume by window 

As of 31.12.2006 

Loan Guarantee 
Micro credit 
Equity Guarantee 
Total SMEG 

Investment 
EUR million 
22 676 
437 
270 
23 383 

Source: EIF Quarterly Report – 31 December 2006 – SMEG 2001 Facility  
Report issued: 28.03.2007 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1.2. 

ETF Start-up Facility 

Figure 4: ETF Start-up Facility – Cumulative evolution of EIF operations (per year) 

Data referring to the last quarter of the corresponding year  

Total budget more than EUR 220 million

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
R
U
E

250

200

150

100

50

0

Q4/2001

Q4/2002

Q4/2003

Q4/2004

Q4/2005

Q4/2006

Total budget
EIF Commitment to FIs
Disbursements to FIs

Budget available for commitments to FIs (net of EIF fees)
EIF Signatures to FIs
Interest and other income

Source: PMS/Report/Strategic/Commitment overview/ESU01 

Data extraction: 10.04.2007 

EN 

17 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
Table 7: ETF Start-up Facility – Venture Capital funds with contractual agreements  

with the EIF 

Situation as of 31.12.2006 

(*) Projects approved but still to be signed. 

(**) Legal seat may differ 

Name 

Country of 
headquarters 
(**) 

Geographical 
orientation 

Sector focus 

Establishment 
year 

Duration 
(years) 

Fund size 
(EUR million) 

Current  Target

Adara 
Ventures 
SICAR 

Spain 

Spain 

Communications, 
Computer related 

2005 

10+2 

49.9 

49.9 

Aescap 
Venture 

Netherlands 

Auriga 
Ventures 
III 

France 

Biotechnology, 
Medical/health 
related 

Northern 
Europe with 
emphasis on 
Benelux and 
Germany 

France (50%) 
EU countries 
(25%), 
Switzerland, 
USA, Israel 
(25%) 

Biotechnology, 
Communications, 
Computer  related, 
Medical/health 
related, 
Other 
Electronics related

2006 

10+3 

54.9 

150.0 

2006 

10+2 

144.3 

150.0 

Big 
Bang 
Ventures II 

Belgium 

Flander region 
(60-80%), 
remaining part 
in the Benelux 
countries 

Communications, 
Computer Related

2006 

10 + 

(*) 

Capital-E 

Belgium 

Microelectronics 

Flander region 
(60), remaining 
part in the rest 
of Europe 

2006 

12+1 

(*) 

Communications, 
Computer related 

2007 

10+ 

(*) 

Creandum 
II L.P. 

Sweden 

Sweden (70-
80%) and near-
by Nordic 
countries 
including 
Denmark, 
Finland and 
Norway 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
 
  
  
  
 
(Table 7, continued) 

Name 

Country of 
headquarters 
(**) 

Geographical 
orientation 

Sector focus 

Establishment 
year 

Duration 
(years) 

Fund size 
(EUR million) 

Current  Target

Creathor 

Germany  Germany (70%), 

France (20%, 
other European 
countries (10%) 
incl. small 
percentage to 
Switzerland 

Communications, 
Computer  related, 
Optics,  Micro-
and Nanotech and 
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 

Communications, 
Computer  related 
(85  %(, 
life 
science (15%) 

Primarily in 
Spain (80%) and 
opportunistically 
in other countries 
(20%) which 
may include non-
participating 
countries on an 
exceptional basis

(*) 

Eden  One 
LP 

UK 

UK 

Communications, 
Computer  related, 
Other  Electronic 
related 

2004

10+3 

66.7 

66.7 

EMBL 
Technology 
Fund 

Gilde 
Healthcare 
II 

Germany 

EMBL member 
states 

Biotechnology, 
Medical/health 
related 

2001

10+2 

26.4 

26.4 

Netherlands  Multi-regional 

2006

10+2 

70.7 

125.0 

Biotechnology, 
Medical/health 
related 

orientation: 
Benelux, France, 
United Kingdom, 
Spain and 
Germany 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
  
  
  
 
(Table 7, continued) 

Name 

Country of 
headquarters 
(**) 

Geographical 
orientation 

Sector focus 

Establishment 
year 

Duration 
(years) 

Fund size 
(EUR million) 

Current  Target

Innogest 
Capital 

Italy 

Northern Italy Innovation  driven 

2006

10+3 

50.5 

60.0 

IP  Venture 
Fund 

United 
Kingdom 

United 
Kingdom and 
pan-European

2006

10+2 

23.1 

30.0 

technology sector

and 

Biotechnology, 
Chemicals 
Materials, 
Communications, 
Energy,  Industrial 
Automation, 
Medical/health 
related 

New 
VCF II 

Tech 

Luxembourg  Multi-country Communications, 
Computer related

2005

10+2 

120.0 

120.0 

2005

10+2 

30.4 

30.4 

Austria 

Austria 

Pontis 
Venture 
Partners I 

Beteiligungs-
Invest AG 

Biotechnology, 
Communications, 
Computer 
Related, Industrial 
Automation, 
Industrial 
Products 
Services, 
Medical/health 
Related, 
Electronics 
Related 

Other 

and 

Talde  Capital 
II 

Spain 

Spain 

UK 

The 
Environment 
Technologies 
Fund 

EU, 
predominantly 
UK, D, Nordic 
countries, 
Benelux and 
CH 

Generalist, 
Biotechnology, 
Communications, 
Computer Related

Clean 
technologies  and 
services 

2005

10+2 

60.0 

60.0 

2006

10+3 

51.6 

150.0 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
(Table 7, continued) 

Name 

Country of 
headquarters 
(**) 

Geographical 
orientation 

Sector focus 

Establishment 
year 

Duration 
(years) 

Fund size 
(EUR million) 

Current  Target

T-Source 

France 

France 

Communications, 
Computer  related, 
Other  Electronic 
Related 

2000

10+2 

38.3 

38.3 

VIVES 

Belgium 

Belgium  Biotechnology, 

2003

12+2 

15.0 

15.0 

Germany 

Wellington 
Partners  III 
Life 
Sciences 
Fund L.P. 

Mainly 
Germany and 
German 
speaking 
countries and 
on a co-
investment 
basis in other 
European 
countries 

TOTAL 

Sources:  

Communications, 
Computer related 

Biotechnology 

2006

12+1 

15.0 

100.0 

909.7 

1,264.6

PMS/Reports/VC; extraction date: 11.05.2007 

EIF, Quarterly Report ETF Start-up, 31.12.2006; issued 04.05.2007 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.3. 

Seed capital action 

Figure 5: Seed capital action – Cumulative evolution of EIF operations (per year) 

Data referring to the last quarter of the corresponding year  

Performance remains low

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
R
U
E

6,00

5,00

4,00

3,00

2,00

1,00

0,00

Q4/2001

Q4/2002

Q4/2003

Q4/2004

Q4/2005

Q4/2006

To tal budget

EIF Co mmitment to  FIs

Disbursements to  FIs

B udget available fo r co mmitments to  FIs (net o f EIF fees)

EIF signatures to  FIs

Source: PMS/Report/Strategic/Commitment/Overview/SCA01 

Data extraction: 16.04.2007 

Table 8: Seed Capital Action – Venture Capital Funds with contractual agreements with 
the EIF 

As of 31.12.2006 

Name 

Country of 
headquarters 

Geographical 
orientation 

Sector focus 

Establishment 
year 

Duration 
(years) 

Fund size 
(EUR million) 

Current  Target

EMBL 
Technology 
Fund 

Germany 

EMBL member 
states 

Biotechnology, 
Medical/health 
related 

2001

10+2 

26.4 

26.4 

Pentech 
Fund I 

Total 

United 
Kinddom 

United 
Kingdom 

Computer 
related 

2001

10+0 

33.4 

33.4 

59.8 

59.8 

Source: EIF, Quarterly Report, Seed Capital Action, 31.12.2006; issued 04.05.2007 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2. 

SECTION 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 included. 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  commitments  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  per  country,  also  in  relation  to  the  population.

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EN 

24 

EN 

 
  
 
EN 

25 

EN 

 
  
 
EN 

26 

EN 

 
  
 
3. 

SECTION 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  volumes  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 number of small companies for a wider variety of 
investments.  It  also  supported  the  creation  and  development  of  new  guarantee  schemes,  by 
covering part of the losses incurred under the guarantees, up to a pre-determined amount 
(the “cap"9). 

The  Facility  is  managed  by  the  EIF  on  behalf  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-loans for very small enterprises with 10 
or fewer employees. Here, the EIF issues partial guarantees to cover portfolios of 
micro-loans. 

•  Equity  Guarantees:  counter-  or  co-guarantees  offered  to  guarantee  schemes  to 
cover equity investments in SMEs (no direct guarantees to Venture Capital funds). 

•  ICT  Guarantees:  this  window  was  intended  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 
9 

Direct lending provided by commercial and promotional banks was also supported. 
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 instance by the cap and in the second by the guarantee rate approved by the 
Commission for a given intermediary (typically 50%). 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  entire  budget  has  been  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  Window,  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, national and regional conditions, allowing it to achieve 
both a wide range of application and a broad geographical distribution. 

A  higher  level  of  transparency  has  been  achieved  by  increased  monitoring  and  reporting 
requirements,  which  must  be  carried  through  all  the  way  down  to  the  final  beneficiaries. 
Visibility of the EU contribution was ensured through a requirement 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 increase 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  for  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 the target group is similar to that of Venture 
Capital funds and therefore limited overall. There 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 part 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  was  to  increase  the  availability  of  risk  capital  to  innovative 
SMEs during their creation and their early stage development. 

Under  ETF  Start-up,  the  EIF  invests  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  typically  small  or  newly  established,  including  funds  operating  at 
regional level, those focusing on specific industries or technologies and funds that finance the 
commercialisation of R&D results. 

10 

11 

According to Eurostat there are about 18.8 million enterprises in EU-27 (figures for 2004), and 99.98 % 
of these are SMEs. 
According to Eurostat: Statistics in Focus 48/2007, the newly created enterprises accounted for 9.2 %, 
on average, of the total of active enterprises (figures for 2003) 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The EIF examines the fund proposals based on criteria 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 catalytic 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  Investment  Guidelines  specify  that  investments 
under the Facility must represent between 10% and 25% of the total capital of a VC fund or 
business  incubator,  or  50%  in  exceptional  cases,  such  as  new  funds  where  a  particularly 
strong  catalytic  role  in  the  development  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 foresees investments outside the eligible countries, 
the EIF's participation is reduced by the appropriate 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  growth  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  demand  for  early  stage  funding  remains  strong 
and  European  technology  centres  (especially  research  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  and  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 under 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  Start-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  stimulate  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  recruitment  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 EUR 100,000 per newly recruited manager and for a 
maximum of 3 new staff per beneficiary.  

EN 

29 

   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  conditions  for  seed  capital  meant  that  demand  was 
limited.  Based  on  this  experience,  the  instrument  will  therefore  be  modified  under  the  CIP 
programme. 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
4. 

SECTION 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 benefit 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  phase  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 contribution 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 expenses of the market 
survey,  the  preparation  of  the  legal  framework  and  the  business  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  contribution  covered  up  to  10  %  of  the  total  amount  of  the 

investment made. 

In  addition,  initially  JEV  supported  actions  promoting  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 events intended to stimulate 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 & Innovation Centres, and all other non-profit entities from European 
Union, such as trade and industry 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 programme 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  disbursements  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 

31 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The table below gives an overview of the financial intermediaries by country: 

Table 1: Breakdown of financial intermediaries by country 

Country 

Number of financial 
intermediaries 

Austria 

Belgium 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

Portugal 

Spain 

Sweden 

Total 

3 

1 

1 

1 

6 

11 

2 

2 

3 

1 

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 remained 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  accounted  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 financial intermediaries, 323 projects were received by 
the Commission services, of which 230 were approved. Of these, 54 were promotion projects 
and 176 were preparatory work and investment projects.  

The first year of the JEV programme (1998) was 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  received.  In  2000  and  in  2001  the  number  of  new 
applications received remained at about the same level as the year before. This was lower than 
expected.  In  2003  the  number  of  new  applications  being  received  was  on  average  one  per 
month. In 2004, a 300% increase was seen but this was probably 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-compliance  with  the  eligibility  criteria  or  to 
insufficient impact as regards the setting-up of new economic activities involving investment 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
 
and job creation. Most of the withdrawals were due to the level of administrative requirements 
related to the processing of the files and the resulting delays. 

Table 2: Employment in lead and partner SMEs 

Number 
of 
Employees 

1998-
2000 

Number of SMEs (cumulative figures) 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005/2006 

<10 

135 

119 

144 

10-49 

50-249 

89 

49 

70 

35 

93 

42 

Total 

273 

224 

279 

172 

102 

45 

319 

185 

106 

48 

339 

210 

111 

49 

370 

Out of the 370 partner SMEs, 57 % had fewer than 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 created and reported so far, the effect on employment has been 
limited.  

At the end of 2006 only 19 applications had resulted 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 foreseen in the initial 
application  forms  had  been  realised.  However,  it  should  be  taken  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  also  no  information  available  on  any  jobs  that 
may have been created within the partners’ enterprises as a result of the joint venture. 

The great majority of the joint ventures created 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  for  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  administrative  effort.  It  can  reasonably  be 
assumed that jobs have also been created in the joint ventures that have decided not to apply 
for an investment grant but, in view of  the actual 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 lower than originally expected. The programme 
was  originally  conceived,  partly  in  response  to  requests  from  SME  representative 
organisations,  to  complement  the  (then)  existing  ECIP  (European  Community  Investment 
Partners) and JOP (Joint Venture Programme – Phare/Tacis) joint 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 was that some financial intermediaries who 
had offered ECIP, JOP and JEV to their SME clients scaled down or ceased their activities, 

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
 
since JEV alone did not provide them with a sufficient volume of projects to justify dedicated 
staff. The remuneration paid to financial intermediaries for submitting files was regarded by 
many as insufficient in view of the administrative obligations that the financial intermediaries 
have assumed when concluding the Framework Agreement with the Commission. 

Although  the  logic  behind  the  JEV  programme  was  considered  sound,  time  has  shown  that 
there  was  in  fact  relatively  little  demand  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 without the obligation to create a new legal entity. 

Take-up  of  the  programme  may  also  have  been  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, file processing times were longer 
than expected by the SME target group. 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
5. 

SECTION V: SUCCESSOR PROGRAMME CIP 

The Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (2007 to 2013) (CIP), successor 
programme  of  the  MAP,  is  a  coherent  response  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  framework  specific  Community  support  programmes, 
and  relevant  parts  of  other  Community  programmes,  in  the  fields  most  critical  to  boosting 
European  productivity,  innovation  capacity  and  sustainable  growth,  whilst  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  innovate,  including  by  supporting  private  equity 
and  loan  guarantee  schemes;  improving  the  conditions  for  innovation,  including  eco-
innovation;  stimulating  the  new  converging  markets  for  electronic  networks,  media  content 
and  digital  technologies,  and  encouraging  the  uptake  of  new  and  renewable  energies  and 
promoting energy efficiency. 

The  CIP  comprises  three  specific  programmes:  the  Entrepreneurship  and  Innovation 
Programme  (EIP),  which  includes  the  CIP  financial  instruments;  the  ICT  Policy  Support 
Programme (ICTP); and the Intelligent Energy Europe Programme (IEEP).  

The  CIP  financial  instruments  further  strengthens  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 further extend support for access to finance. New 
elements  have  been  introduced  to  reflect  market  developments,  such  as  the  possibility  to 
support the provision of mezzanine finance for 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  investments  (which  already  existed  under  ETF 
Start-up)  and  a  new  GIF2  window  for  expansion  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  been  retained.  Mezzanine  financing  is 
eligible under an extended 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  flexible  Seed  Capital  Action  provides 
grants to VC funds to cover start-up costs 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 

35 

   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 for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the 
European Investment Bank (EIB) and the Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB). 

EN 

36 

   EN