Financial instruments under the European structural and investment funds : summaries of the data on the progress made in financing and implementing the financial instruments for the programming period 2014-2020 in accordance with Article 46 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council : situation as at 31 December 2020.
Date: 2021-12-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy
Subjects: Cohesion Fund, EAFRD, EU financial instrument, European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund, European Structural and Investment Funds, distribution of EU funding, financial instrument, financial management

Financial instruments under the European 

Structural and Investment Funds

Summaries of the data on the progress made in financing and implementing 

December 2017

the financial instruments for the programming period 2014-2020 

in accordance with Article 46 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 

of the European Parliament and of the Council

Situation as at 31 December 2020

November 2021

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers
to your questions about the European Union.

Freephone number (*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

  (*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls  
may be billed.

DISCLAIMER
“This is a working document prepared by the Commission services. On the basis of applicable 
EU law, it provides technical guidance for colleagues and bodies involved in the monitoring, 
control or implementation of the European Structural and Investment Funds on how to interpret 
and apply the EU rules in this area. The aim of this document is to provide Commission services’ 
explanations and interpretations of the said rules in order to facilitate the programme imple-
mentation and to encourage good practice(s). This guidance is without prejudice to the interpre-
tation of the Court of Justice and the General Court or decisions of the Commission.”

European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional and Urban policy REGIO 
DG 02 - Communication
Mrs Agnès Monfret
Avenue de Beaulieu 1
1160 Brussels
BELGIUM

E-mail: regio-publication@ec.europa.eu
Internet: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/index_en.cfm

 PDF ISBN 978-92-76-45605-6  doi:10.2776/384395   KN-01-21-522-EN-N

© European Union, 2021
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Financial instruments under the European 
Structural and Investment Funds 

Summaries of the data 
on the progress made in financing and implementing the 
financial instruments for the programming period  
2014-2020 in accordance with Article 46 of Regulation 
(EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the 
Council 

Situation as at 31 December 2020 

 
 
Contents 

PART I: Overview .............................................................................. 6 

PART II: Chapters by funds ............................................................ 10 

ERDF and CF .................................................................................... 11 

1.
2.

Key figures and trends ......................................................................... 11 
Summary  of  data  collected  on  FIs  implemented  under  ERDF  and
CF ........................................................................................................ 13 
3.
Conclusions ......................................................................................... 45 
Annex 1: Methodological assumptions ......................................................... 47 

ESF and YEI ...................................................................................... 50 

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Executive summary ............................................................................. 51 
Reporting exercise 2020 ...................................................................... 56 
Summary of data collected on FIs implemented under ESF and YEI . 58
Reporting by thematic objectives ........................................................ 68 
Conclusions ......................................................................................... 69 

EAFRD ............................................................................................... 71 

1.
2.
3.

Executive summary ............................................................................. 72 
2020 reporting exercise ....................................................................... 73 
Summary of data collected on the set-up of financial instruments under
EAFRD ................................................................................................ 74 
3.1  Progress  in  set-up  of  FInancial  instruments  and  in  selection  of  the 
implementing bodies ........................................................................... 74 
3.2 
Investments in final recipients, performance of financial instruments 80 
3.3  Contribution  of  Financial  Instruments  to  Focus  areas  and  objectives 
under the cap ........................................................................................ 93 
Conclusions ....................................................................................... 101 

4.

EMFF ............................................................................................... 102 

2 

List of Tables 

Table 1 Amounts committed in the funding agreements and paid to the FIs at the end of 
2020, in million EUR (programme contributions out of which ESIF) ....................... 8 

Table 2 Key progress indicators reported by managing authorities as of the end of 2020 
(financial figures in EUR million) ............................................................................ 11 

3 

 
List of Figures (Overview and ERDF+CF) 

Figure 1 Commitments to FIs in the funding agreements as percentage of total commitment 
by thematic objective (TO) at the end of 2020 (all ESIF) .......................................... 9 

Figure 2 Overall progress from the beginning of the 2014-2020 period, EUR million ... 12 

Figure 3 ERDF and CF allocated to FIs as percent of the ERDF and CF allocated to the 
Member States .......................................................................................................... 13 

Figure  4  Indicative  FI  programme  allocation:  change  2019-2020  (only  MS  reporting  a 
difference)................................................................................................................. 15 

Figure 5 Amounts  committed to  FIs (% of indicative programme allocation), as of end 
2020 .......................................................................................................................... 17 

Figure 6 Ten largest OPs by amount committed to FIs as of end 2020 ........................... 18 

Figure 7 Overview of programme resources committed by type of FI, as of end 2020 ... 19 

Figure 8 ERDF and CF committed in the funding agreements and paid to FIs as of end 
2020, EUR million.................................................................................................... 22 

Figure 9 Programme amounts committed to FIs by product, as of end 2020, percent ..... 23 

Figure 10 Payments to FIs, commitments and payments to final recipients, as of end 2020, 
EUR million.............................................................................................................. 25 

Figure 11 ERDF and CF paid to final recipients as of end 2020, percent of ERDF and CF 
committed to FIs ....................................................................................................... 26 

Figure  12  ERDF  and  CF  paid  to  final  recipients  in  2020  as  percent  of  ERDF  and  CF 
committed to FIs ....................................................................................................... 27 

Figure 13 ERDF and CF paid to final recipients as of end 2019 and in 2020, EUR million
 .................................................................................................................................. 28 

Figure 14 Number of final recipients supported, 2015-2020 (main types) ...................... 30 

Figure 15 ERDF and CF committed by TO and financial product, percent ..................... 31 

Figure 16 ERDF and CF amounts paid to final recipients as percentage of commitments, 
per TO ....................................................................................................................... 32 

Figure 17 Amount of reimbursable financing provided to final recipients as of end 2020, 
EUR million.............................................................................................................. 33 

Figure 18 Private contribution mobilised at the level of final recipients by financial product 
and Member State as of end 2020, EUR million ...................................................... 36 

Figure 19  Breakdown  of FIs by type of financial  instrument  and financial  product,  and 
MCFs paid cummulatively as a share of programme resources committed to FIs .. 40 

4 

Figure 20 Amounts attributable to ESIF repaid by end 2020 (loan products), EUR million
 .................................................................................................................................. 42 

Figure 21 Reporting FIs by value of equity participations as a share of investment value
 .................................................................................................................................. 43 

5 

PART I: Overview 

The summaries present data on the progress made in financing and implementing financial 

instruments (FIs) supported by European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) in the 

2014-2020 programming period as of 31 December 2020. They are based on data reported 

by  the  managing  authorities  in  accordance  with  Article  46  of  Common  Provisions 

Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (CPR), the 

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 821/2014, and Fund-specific regulations. 

This  edition  of  Annual  Summaries  follows  the  standard  regulatory  schedule  set  out  in 

Article 46(4) CPR – managing authorities submitted the data on FIs as of 31 December 

2020  in  the  annual  implementation  reports  by  the  end  of  May  2021,  and  the  actual 

publication of the Summaries takes place within six months after this date i.e., by the end 

of November 2021.  

FIs are implemented using all ESI Funds in 25 Member States (MSs) including the UK1. 
By  the  end  of  2020,  the  total  programme  contributions  committed  to  FIs  were  nearly 

EUR 29 billion (EUR 23.5 billion at the end of 2019) of which EUR 21.6 billion was ESIF.  

From  the  beginning  of  the  2014-2020  period,  almost  EUR 18.5  billion  of  programme 

contributions  had  been  paid  to  FIs  (EUR 11.1  billion  at  the  end  of  2019),  including 

EUR 14.2 billion  of  ESIF  (two  thirds  of  all  committed  amounts).  This  means  that  the 

committed amount increased by two thirds within one year. Around EUR 13.8 billion (of 

which EUR 10.3 billion was ESIF) had been invested in or committed to final recipients 

(EUR 6.3 billion at the end of 2019), leveraging EUR 38.2 billion of investments (154% 

year-on-year change) at the level of final recipients (EUR 15 billion at the end of 2019). 

The  total  disbursement  rate  of  all  ESI  Funds  has  thus  jumped  from  55%  to  72%.  This 

increase  illustrates  the  effectiveness  of  ESIF  FIs  for  the  real  economy,  especially  with 

regard  to  the  constrained  access  to  finance  during  the  covid-19  crisis.  It  is  worth 

highlighting that with about 365.000 SMEs supported across Europe during the crisis year, 

ERDF FIs reached about one thousand recipients per day. 

Key messages: 

  The data for 2020 show that the European Union achieved the target set out in the 

Investment Plan for Europe to double the use of ESIF FIs in the programming period 

from 2014 to 2020. The crucial acceleration came in 2020. Nevertheless, in order to 

1   All  MSs  except  for  DK,  IE, LU.  In  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  United  Kingdom  was  no  longer  an  EU 
Member State during the reporting year, we refer to the UK as a a Member State without any distinction 
in the text for the sake of readability and consistency of this document.    

6 

 
 
                                                 
maximize the benefits of ESIF FIs for the real economy, it is necessary to maintain 

the momentum and to further speed up in their implementation.  

  The  accelerated  deployment  of  ESIF  FIs,  enabled  by  the  rapid  legislative 

simplifications  introduced  by  Coronavirus  Response  Investment  Initiative  Plus 

(CRII+),  demonstrated  that  ESIF  FIs  are  able  to  adapt  in  a  flexible  way  to  the 

changing needs of the Member States. ESIF FIs should remain an important tool 

for the recovery and the green and digital transition of the European economy. For 

this purpose, support to investments in these policy areas should be prioritised for the 

next generation of FIs.  

  ESIF FIs prove to  be a cost-efficient delivery mechanism of Union policies as  the 

reported  management  costs  and  fees  (MCFs)  (1.7%  of  amounts  paid 

cumulatively as a share of programme resources committed to FIs, or 7.4% of 

the payment to final recipients) lie below the regulatory ceilings defined in the 

ESIF legal framework as well as in the legal framework of centrally managed 

financial  instruments.  Moreover,  some  10%  of  the  funds  have  already  been  paid 

back in reflows and can thus be reused in accordance with the CPR.  

Upon the coronavirus outbreak, timely adoption of CRII+ allowed managing authorities to 

deploy FIs in all EFI Funds to tackle the unexpected crisis for all ESI Funds: 

-  European  Regional  Development  Fund  (ERDF)  FIs  allocated  EUR  7  billion  for 
working capital for SMEs in the COVID-19 context, which is double to what the MSs 
allocated to working capital grants2. In total, ERDF FIs supported 478,000 SMEs, of 
which 375,000 qualified as microenterprises;   

-  Despite  the  COVID-19  crisis,  European  Social  Fund  (ESF)  FIs  impressively 
progressed by more than doubling the amounts committed and paid to final recipients. 

Of the total 7.964 final recipients supported, 4.047 were microenterprises and 3.557 

individuals. The number of MSs reporting ESF FIs grew from 10 to 11, with 78 FIs 

set up or already operational; 

-  As at August 2021, 13 Rural Development Programmes (RDP) in 8 MSs offer support 
for stand-alone working capital, an option that was introduced by the CRII+. In total, 

RDP  amendments  added  a  total  of  EUR  94.1  million,  covering  also  non-COVID 

needs. The implementation of EAFRD financial instruments is progressing well. 26 

FIs  are  committing  and  paying  programme  contributions  to  final  recipients,  an 

increase of almost 50% in 2020 compared to 2019; 

2   Sum of target values of COVID-19 indicators CV21 in programmes approved by the Commission in 

2020.  

7 

 
                                                 
-  Following the coronavirus outbreak, the managing authority for the sole FI supported 
by EMFF made it possible for the final recipients to benefit from decreased interest 

rates  from  April  2020.  In  addition,  a  second  Member  State  is  now  establishing  a 

financial instrument under the EMFF.  

Information on financing and implementing FIs under each of the ESI Funds is presented 

in Table 1.  

Table 1 Amounts committed in the funding agreements and paid to the FIs at the end of 2020, in million 
EUR (programme contributions out of which ESIF) 

ERDF 
and CF 

ESF  
and YEI 

EAFRD 

EMFF 

8 

11.120 

18.489  +7.369 

+66% 

All ESIF 

2019 

2020 

Change 

Change 
in % 

25 

25 

0  

-  

23.486 

28.947  +5.461 

+23% 

17.180 

21.610  +4.430 

+26% 

8.524 

50% 

14.223  +5.700 

+67% 

66%  +16 p.p. 

- 

15.031 

38.190  +23.159  +154% 

8.370 

17.312  +8.942 

+107% 

6.092 

12.237  +6.145 

+101% 

6.332 

13.808  7.476 

+118% 

4.701 

10.254  5.553 

+118% 

11 

785 

543 

331 

255 

11 

701 

536 

366 

281 

1 

10 

8 

6 

47% 

52% 

78% 

186 

560 

234 

228 

155 

162 

182 

201 

120 

150 

5 

5 

4 

5 

4 

47% 

53% 

62% 

55% 

72% 

+17 
p.p. 

- 

25 

67% 

17.784 

20.523 

27.451 

of  MSs 

Number 
reporting on FIs 
Programme amounts 
committed to FIs 
out of which ESIF  
Programme amounts 
paid to FIs  
out of which ESIF (A)  13.681 
Percentage  of  ESIF 
commitments paid 
Financing  disbursed 
to final recipients3 
Programme amounts 
committed  to  final 
recipients 
out of which ESIF  
Programme amounts 
invested 
final 
recipients 
out of which ESIF (B)   9.980 
Disbursement rate of 
ESIF 
contribution 
(B)/(A) 

16.845 

37.439 

11.916 

13.420 

73% 

in 

The reporting  on ESIF  FIs by  commitments to  thematic objectives  (Figure  1)4 shows a 
considerable increase in the support for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) which 

soared from 57.3% in 2019 to 70.3% in 2020. The total committed amounts to TO3 now 

equal to almost EUR 15 billion. This increase is attributable to the rapid deployment of 

ESIF FIs to support European SMEs affected by the coronavirus outbreak.  

3   The  full  amount  of  loans,  guaranteed  loans  and  equity  support  provided  to  final  recipients  with  the 

support of ESIF (including non-programme resources, when reported).  

4   There are 11 thematic objectives, which are defined in Article 9 of CPR. FIs are used in 10 of them. 
Where a FI addresses multiple thematic objectives, in the reported data the breakdown by TO was not 
provided in all cases. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
The  two  other  thematic  objectives  that  typically  account  for  important  shares  of  FI 

allocations  –  TO1  in  research  and  innovation  investment  and  TO4  including  energy 

efficiency support – reported a decrease compared to the previous year as TO1 dropped 

from 14.5% to 10.3% and TO4 from 15.6% to 11%. This decrease was also recorded in 

absolute terms as the overall commitments to TO1 dropped by EUR 296 million and to 

TO4 by EUR 336 million.  

Figure  1  Commitments  to  FIs  in  the  funding  agreements  as  percentage  of  total  commitment  by 
thematic objective (TO) at the end of 2020 (all ESIF) 

TO1 -   Research and Innovation 
TO2 -   Information and communication 

technologies 
TO3 -   SME competitiveness 
TO4 -   Low carbon economy  
TO5 -   Climate change and risk prevention 
TO6 -   Environment and resource efficiency 
TO7 -   Transport and energy networks 
TO8 -   Employment and labour market 
TO9 -   Social inclusion 
TO10 -  Education and training 

The following chapters present detailed information for each of the ESI Funds. 

9 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
PART II: Chapters by funds

10 

 
ERDF and CF 

1.  Key figures and trends 

Table 2 Key progress indicators reported by managing authorities as of the end of 20205 (financial figures 
in EUR million) 

Number of MSs reporting on FIs 

Number of programmes reporting on FIs 

2020 

2019 

Change 

25 

158 

25 

154 

- 

+4 

Programme amounts committed to FIs 

27,451 

22,002 

+5,449 

Of which ERDF or Cohesion Fund 

20,523 

16,107  +4,416 

Programme amounts paid to FIs 

17,784 

10,561 

+7,223 

Of which ERDF or Cohesion Fund 

13,681 

8,100 

+5,581 

Programme amounts committed to final recipients 

16,843 

8,127 

+8,716 

Of which ERDF or Cohesion Fund 

11,916 

5,924 

+5,992 

Programme resources invested in final recipients 

13,420 

6,131 

+7,289 

Of which ERDF or Cohesion Fund 

9,980    

4,558 

+5,422 

Of which loans 

Of which guarantees 

Of which equity 

Of which other 

6,855 

3,140 

+3,715 

3,987 

1,502 

+2,485 

2,045 

1,281 

+764 

312 

208 

+104 

Financing  (loans,  guaranteed  loans  and  equity)  disbursed  to 
final recipients6 

37,439 

14,665 

+ 22,774 

Programme resources paid as management costs and fees 

663 

Amount attributable to ERDF or Cohesion Fund repaid to FIs  948 

393 

484 

+270 

+464 

Final recipients supported 

Of which SMEs 

556,427  143,000  +413,427 

477,915  111,000  +366,915 

5   This  summary  is  based  on  information  submitted  by  managing  authorities  on  the  progress  made  in 
implementing FIs by the end of 2020. Programme contributions refer to ERDF, CF and related national co-
financing. ESF and ESF-related national co-financing are considered in the respective section. 

6    Due to additional funding attracted by the FIs (see footnote 54 for FIs included in the calculation). 

11 

 
 
                                                 
 
The overall progress since 2015 is shown in Figure 2. 

Figure 2 Overall progress from the beginning of the 2014-2020 period, EUR million 

More  detailed  data  about  specific  instruments  as  reported  by  the  managing  authorities  is 

available on https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu. 

12 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
2.  Summary of data collected on FIs implemented under ERDF and CF 

2.1 Planned use and commitments to financial instruments. 

As at the end of 2020, indicative ERDF and Cohesion Fund allocation for FIs in the submitted 

programmes  was  EUR  22.4  billion7  or  about  9%  of  the  total  ERDF  and  Cohesion  Fund 

envelope in the 2014-2020 period.  

The share of FIs varies, with the highest allocation planned in the UK and GR (22% and 20% 

respectively), and no allocations in DK, IE and LU (Figure 3). No FIs were planned under the 

European Territorial Cooperation (TC) goal. 

Figure 3 ERDF and CF allocated to FIs as percent of the ERDF and CF allocated to the Member States8 

Looking at the different uptake of FIs among Member States in the 2014-2020 programming 

period, this cannot be explained solely by differences in the fields of intervention, the level of 

7   The amount submitted to the Commission on 31 December 2020 was EUR 20.6 billion. This was corrected to 

reflect higher commitments to FIs than indicatively planned in some Member States.  

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
development or the size of allocations, as similar Member States have very different shares of 

FIs. Lessons learned from the Member States allocating more of their resources to FIs should 
be used to explore the potential for increased use of FIs in the 2021-2027 programming period9. 

The  COVID-19  crisis  had  significant  impact  on  the  allocation  planned  for  FIs  in  the 

programmes, as the amount increased by almost EUR 4.0 billion by the end of 2020 compared 

with a year earlier. This net shift from other forms of support, primarily grants, towards FIs is 

remarkable given  the  late  stage  of  the  programming  period and  the  fact  that most  of  the 

allocation  had  already  been  committed.  GR  and  IT  reported  the  largest  increase  of  planned 

allocations to FIs (almost EUR 1.4 billion each, see Figure 4), while CZ, HR, PL and SK also 

reported  a  significant  increase  (above  EUR  100  million  each).  Most  additional  resources 

supported working capital of the SMEs in the view of the liquidity crisis caused by the covid-

19 outbreak and the measures that followed. Some other resources were redirected to that same 

purpose, given the intention of the Member States to provide EUR 7.0 billion of COVID-19 
related working capital support through FIs10.  

9      See fi-compass (2020), Stocktaking study on financial instruments by sector, for an analysis of the five sectors 

having a greater potential for use of FIs in the future. 

10    This is the total target value of programme-specific indicator ‘CV21 – FI support to SMEs for working capital’ 
included  in  approved  programmes,  as  retrieved  on  cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu  on  September  9,  2021.  This 
compares to EUR 27.5 billion of ERDF, CF and related national co-financing committed to FIs. CV21 target 
value is over two times the value of the respective indicator (CV20) for grants. About EUR 1.5 billion of FI 
support to SMEs for working capital was targeted under REACT-EU. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 4 Indicative FI programme allocation: change 2019-2020 (only MS reporting a difference) 

Programme amounts committed to FIs operations11 reached EUR 27.5 billion12, covering 92% 

of the ERDF and CF planned in the programmes for this form of finance13. Figure 5 shows how 

each Member State performed. The amounts allocated to forms of finance in the programmes 

are  only  indicative,  so  the  managing  authorities  could  commit  funds  without  waiting  for 

amendment of the programmes. Thus, shares that are significantly lower than 100% might be a 

sign of delay or they might indicate that decrease in planned allocation has not yet been included 

in submitted programme amendments. However, the figures should converge when the relevant 

priority axes are amended in the future. 

11   ‘Programme  contributions  committed  to  FIs’  means  the  programme  resources  committed  in  the  funding 
agreements. "Committed in funding agreements" describes the total amount of payment obligation to the fund 
of funds or specific fund. It includes both EU and national co-financing but excludes any expenditure which 
is not to be declared as eligible. The term "committed in funding agreement" should not be confused with 
budgetary commitments from the EU budget.  

12     Overall, EUR 29.3 billion of eligible cost of selected projects for the relevant forms of finance was reported 

by the programmes based on Article 112 CPR requirements. 

13    Both indicative amounts planned for FIs and resources committed to FIs  increased significantly compared 
with a year earlier. Hence, any percentages for end 2020 calculated in this report based on such higher amounts 
are not fully comparable with the respective figures provided in the earlier editions of the ERDF/CF annual 
summaries. 

15 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
A substantial increase of about EUR 5.5 billion of programme resources committed to FIs was 

reported compared to the end of 2019. IT (almost EUR 1.9 billion) and GR (EUR 1.7 billion) 

had the largest additional programme amount committed to FIs, accounting for about two thirds 

of the total. HR also reported a significant increase (over EUR 400 million). 

Financial instruments as part of the COVID-19 response  

In last year’s edition, we introduced the AntiCorona Guarantee implemented by the Slovak 
Investment Holding (SIH) as an example of a FI, which was set up to overcome the liquidity 
constraints caused by the COVID-19 crisis. It was one of the first FI introduced by a national 
promotional bank and institution  (NPBI) in the EU upon the coronavirus outbreak, which 
employed ESIF and made use of the simplified regulatory framework (CRII+) for FIs.  

The SIH Anti-Corona Guarantee was implemented in two phases. The first contract with a 
commercial bank was signed on 17 April 2020 for the first phase, less than 6 weeks since the 
first confirmed occurrence of COVID-19 virus in Slovakia. The very first loan agreement 
with an SME was signed in the beginning of May 2020.  

SIH AG 1 loan volume:          
SIH AG 1 supported SMEs:   
SIH AG 2 loan volume:         
SIH AG 2 supported SMEs:   

311.9 mil. 
2.185 
205.7 mil. 
3.281  

SIH Anti-Corona Guarantee 1 

The SIH Anti-Corona Guarantee 1 was implemented in cooperation with 8 banks operating 
in  Slovakia.  This  financial  instrument  was  designed  to  provide  a  50%  capped  portfolio 
guarantee with an 80% loan coverage. It also includes an interest rate subsidy up to 4% p.a., 
conditional on the client preserving existing jobs 12 months after the loan disbursement. The 
underlying loans have a 12-month grace period, during which supported enterprises repay 
neither the principal nor the interest.  

SIH Anti-Corona Guarantee 2 

The  SIH  Anti-Corona  Guarantee  2,  based  on  the  COVID-19  State  Aid  Temporary 
Framework,  is  implemented  by  11  banks.  This  instrument  offers  an  uncapped  guarantee 
instrument with a 90% loan coverage. Same as in the case of the Anti-Corona Guarantee 1, 
there is a 12-month grace period for the client. SIH introduced an interest cap on this FI which 
represents  3.9%  p.a.  for  micro  enterprises  and  1.9%  for  all  other  enterprises.  Since  the 
Temporary  Framework  required  a  guarantee  premium  payable  by  the  final  recipient,  SIH 
included a possibility of a guarantee fee subsidy, as long as the supported enterprise retains 
the previous level of employment within 12 months following the loan disbursement. 

16 

 
  
 
 
 
Figure 5 Amounts committed to FIs (% of indicative programme allocation), as of end 2020 

Programme contributions were committed to FIs in funding agreements in 25 Member States, 

including EUR 20.2 billion of ERDF and EUR 0.4 billion of the Cohesion Fund. The ten largest 

programmes  committed  over  EUR  600  million  each,  and  EUR  14.1  billion  of  programme 

resources in total (see Figure 6). This was more than half of the EU aggregate figure. 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 6 Ten largest OPs by amount committed to FIs as of end 2020 

Member 
State 

CCI 

OP name 

OP  amount 
committed 
to FI 

GR 

IT 

HU 

PL 

UK 

HR 

SK 

CZ 

ES 

LT 

2014GR16M2OP001 

Ανταγωνιστικότητα  Επιχειρηματικότητα  και 
Καινοτομία 

2,568.0    

2014IT16RFOP003 

2014HU16M0OP001 

PON Imprese e competitività 
Gazdaságfejlesztési  és  Innovációs  Operatív 
Program 

2,446.8    

2,101.1    

2014PL16RFOP001 

Program operacyjny Inteligentny rozwój 

1,593.8    

2014UK16RFOP001  United Kingdom -ERDF England 

2014HR16M1OP001 

Operational  programme  competitiveness  and 
cohesion 2014 - 2020  

1,440.6    

1,011.8    

2014SK16M1OP001 

2014CZ16RFOP001 

2014ES16RFSM001 

2014LT16MAOP001 

Integrovaná infraštruktúra 
 Operační  program  podnikání  a  inovace  pro 
konkurenceschopnost 

834.5    

759.5    

Iniciativa PYMEs FEDER 2014-20 PO 
2014-2020 metų Europos Sąjungos struktūrinių 
fondų investicijų veiksmų programa 

735.0    

646.2    

Managing authorities in 19 Member States committed EUR 14.3 billion to funds of funds, or 

52%  of  programme  commitments  to  FIs.  Of  these,  EUR 10.5  billion  is  from  ERDF  and 

EUR 320 million  from  the  Cohesion  Fund.  Programme  resources  committed  in  funding 

agreements  with  specific  funds  under  a  fund  of  funds,  which  is  the  necessary  next  step  to 

provide  financing  to  final  recipients,  was  EUR 12.5  billion  or  88%  of  programme  funding 

committed to funds of funds14 (70% in 2019). Most programme resources yet to be committed 

to financial intermediaries by the funds of funds were in PL (EUR 790 million), PT (EUR 200 

million) and SK (EUR 190 million). The entire amount committed to funds of funds was yet to 

be committed to financial intermediaries in CY (EUR 40 million), CZ (EUR 115 million) and 

DE  (EUR  22  million).  Compared  with  a  year  earlier,  most  additional  programme  resources 

committed to FIs reported in 2020 were for specific funds without a fund of fund i.e., EUR 4.2 

billion of EUR 5.5 billion.  

14   This includes possible programme resources committed at the level of financial intermediaries. 

18 

 
                            
                            
                            
                            
                            
                            
                               
                               
                               
                               
 
 
 
                                                 
Ten programmes in  DE, ES, FR, and  IT reported undertaking implementation  tasks directly 

according to Article 38(4)(d) CPR. 

Figure 7 Overview of programme resources committed by type of FI, as of end 2020 

Almost EUR 3.5 billion of programme resources - or 13% of the total - was committed to FIs 

managed by the EIB (EUR 1.3 billion) or the EIF (EUR 2.2 billion) in 14 Member States. In 

RO, CY and MT all FIs are managed by the EIB or EIF. Six Member States contributed to the 

SME  Initiative  option  under  Article  39  (BG,  ES,  FI,  IT,  MT  and  RO)  for  a  total  of  EUR 

1.5 billion of committed programme amounts. 

The contribution of financial instruments to climate/low carbon and digital priorities 

EU Member States provide information  on the ERDF and CF support for climate  change 

objectives  using  a  methodology  based  on  the  categorisation  of  investment  action.  The 

methodology  consists  of  assigning  a  specific  ‘climate  weighting’  to  the  ERDF  and  CF 

provided at a level which reflects the contribution to climate change mitigation and adaptation 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
goals15. As investment categories can also be broken down by forms of finance, support to 

climate action provided through financial instruments can also be identified. 

Based on this methodology, the decided amount16 of ERDF and CF support for climate action 

through financial instruments was over EUR 3 billion as of end 2020. The largest decided 

amount was for energy efficiency renovation of existing housing stock (EUR 1.4 billion), 

while considerable resources were also decided for energy efficiency renovation of public 

infrastructure (over EUR 570 million) and energy efficiency in SMEs (EUR 535 million). 

Overall, financial instruments accounted for 4% of ERDF and CF support decided for climate 

action, with the highest share of support decided for energy efficiency renovation of existing 

housing stock (18%) and energy efficiency in SMEs (17%). 

SK reported the largest decided ERDF and CF amount for climate action through financial 

instruments (almost EUR 520 million), while considerable resources were also reported for 

LT (EUR 410 million) and HU (EUR 390 million). Where SK and LT focused on energy 

efficiency renovation of existing housing stock, substantial resources were decided for solar 

energy  in  HU  (EUR  220  million).  PL  reported  the  largest  decided  amount  for  energy 

efficiency in SMEs (EUR 120 million) and the UK for energy efficiency renovation of public 

infrastructure (EUR 110 million). LT and SE had the largest proportion of ERDF and CF for 

climate action provided through FIs, respectively 24% and 21%.  

By using the categorisation data submitted by the EU Member States it is equally possible to 
identify the ERDF and CF support decided for digital investments through FIs17. By the end 

of 2020, this was about EUR 470 million in total. The largest amount (EUR 270 million) was 

for high-speed broadband, of which EUR 260 million in PL. Considerable resources were 

also decided for ICT services & applications for SMEs (EUR 160 million), most of which in 

HU (almost EUR 120 million) and SK (almost EUR 40 million). Additionally, a considerable 

amount  of  ERDF  and  CF  was  decided  for  FI  support  to  e-government  services  and 

applications in ES (EUR 32 million). BG, GR and IT also decided to use FIs to support digital 

investments, although the amount involved was limited. 

15 For more details, see cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu 
16 The term decided amount is used for eligible cost based on Article 112 CPR - Transmission of financial data, 

implying a different amount than committed/allocated.  

17 For the intervention fields considered, see cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu 

20 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Overall, FIs accounted for 2% of ERDF and CF decided support for digital investments, with 

the  highest  share  for  ICT  services  and  applications  for  SMEs  (12%)  and  high-speed 

broadband  (8%).  Overall,  seven  Member  States  decided  to  use  financial  instruments  to 

support digital investments, with HU reporting the largest proportion of ERDF and CF digital 

investment support provided through FIs (15%). 

2.2 Payments to financial instruments 

The current reporting exercise shows a substantial increase of payments to FIs. At the end of 

2020, EUR 17.8 billion - of which EUR 13.7 billion of ERDF and CF - had been paid to FIs. 

OP resources paid to funds of funds over the 2014-2020 programming period were EUR 8.0 

billion, while payments to fund of funds specific funds reached EUR  6.4  billion, or 80% of 

payments to funds of funds (62% in 2019). 

ERDF and CF paid to FIs was 67% of the respective committed amount (50% in 2019). If SME 
Initiative, for which different payment schedule is applied (Article 39(7) CPR)18 is excluded, 

the payment progress amounts to 65%. 

National co-financing paid to FIs was almost EUR 4.1 billion, of which EUR 3.2 billion was 

from public sources and over EUR 900 million from private sources, especially in the UK (over 

EUR 495 million) and PL (over EUR 200 million). 

18   Such  payment  applications  are  based  on  the  amounts  requested  by  the  EIB  deemed  necessary  to  cover 
commitments  under  guarantee  agreements  or  securitisation  transactions  to  be  finalised  within  the  three 
following months. 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 8 ERDF and CF committed in the funding agreements and paid to FIs as of end 2020, EUR million 

amount 
OP 
committed to FI 

ERDF&CF 
committed to FI 

OP  amount 
paid to FI 

ERDF&CF  paid 
to FI 

Percentage  of 
commitments 
paid 
(ERDF&CF) 

MS 

AT 

BE 

BG 

CY 

CZ 

DE 

EE 

ES 
FI 
FR 
GR 
HR 
HU 
IT 
LT 
LV 
MT 
NL 
PL 
PT 
RO 
SE 
SI 
SK 

UK 

9.0 

312.2 

689.2 

40.0 

832.8 

1,646.1 

162.7 

1,547.4 
43.0 
981.6 
2,691.3 
1,011.8 
2,178.0 
5,001.7 
646.2 
158.2 
44.0 
185.6 
3,855.2 
938.0 
383.3 
255.2 
422.6 
1,260.9 

2,154.7 

3.0 

126.3 

601.2 

33.5 

813.7 

1,047.6 

117.5 

1,352.9 
21.5 
470.6 
2,334.4 
822.1 
2,139.6 
3,378.0 
645.3 
114.5 
41.0 
66.0 
3,143.4 
500.9 
362.8 
124.5 
318.0 
999.2 

945.7 

9.0 

261.1 

241.7 

10.0 

545.8 

1,176.3 

64.8 

1,154.1 
43.0 
728.7 
2,107.2 
537.7 
1,386.4 
3,831.8 
452.1 
96.9 
37.0 
68.7 
2,319.4 
210.3 
347.3 
186.2 
211.3 
511.2 

1,246.5 

3.0 

105.8 

219.6 

8.5 

532.3 

756.3 

58.8 

1,027.0 
21.5 
343.1 
1,818.7 
497.6 
1,364.7 
2,537.8 
451.9 
78.4 
34.0 
26.9 
2,055.6 
189.8 
332.2 
92.8 
159.0 
410.0 

556.2 

100% 

84% 

37% 

25% 

65% 

72% 

50% 

76% 
100% 
73% 
78% 
61% 
64% 
75% 
70% 
68% 
83% 
41% 
65% 
38% 
92% 
75% 
50% 
41% 

59% 

67% 

Total 

27,450.8 

20,523.1 

17,784.4 

13,681.5 

Before being invested into final recipients, resources paid to financial instruments are subject 

to treasury management, with any gains increasing the amount available for investment. By the 

end of 2020, as a result of such treasury operations, FIs had accrued net gains attributable to 

ERDF  and  CF19  of  about  EUR 88 million.  FIs  to  which  EUR  6.6  billion  of  ERDF  and  CF 

19   Article 43 of the CPR clarifies how interest or other gains from the investment of ERDF and CF contributions 

to FIs should be handled. 

22 

 
 
                                                 
resources were paid either did not report on gains or losses from treasury operations or reported 

that the treasury operations had generated neither gains nor losses. 

2.3 Products offered  

Member States provided information about products offered by 839 specific funds20, with or 

without  a  fund  of  fund  structure,  and  FIs  managed  directly  by  the  managing  authority.  The 

largest amount of programme resources - EUR 10.9 billion - was committed to FIs providing 

loans,  while  EUR  6.5  and  EUR  4.5  billion  was  committed  to  FIs  providing  guarantees  and 

equity, respectively. Most resources of multi-product FIs were committed to provide loans and 

equity (EUR 1.6 billion). Compared with a year earlier, additional committed resources were 

reported especially for guarantee and loan FIs - EUR 3.6 and EUR 3.1 billion, respectively.  

Loan  FIs  were  especially  important  in  HU  and  HR,  representing  over  two  thirds  of  their 

respective programme amounts committed to FIs. AT and SE only provided equity or quasi-

equity and MT only guarantees. The average programme amount committed ranged between 

EUR 21 million for equity FIs and about EUR 59 million for guarantee FIs.  

Figure 9 Programme amounts committed to FIs by product, as of end 2020, percent 

20   Information on the products an FI offers is not provided at the level of funds of funds, but only at the level of 

the specific fund that makes payments to final recipients. 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Fifteen Member States reported other support21 combined with FIs in one FI operation in the 

sense of Article 37(7) CPR. At the end of 2020, EUR 5.7 billion of programme resources were 

committed to FIs providing other support combined within the FI, compared to EUR 3.5 billion 

as of the end of 2019. The largest amount committed to FIs providing other support combined 

within the FI was in HU (over EUR 1.4 billion) and GR (almost EUR 1.1 billion). 

In most cases, other support combined within the FIs provided interest rate or guarantee fee 

subsidies. In CZ, a loan instrument was combined with an energy audit subsidy. Subsidies to 

technical support were provided in combination with equity in FR and loans in LT. 

2.4 Support to final recipients 

By the end of 2020, all reporting Member States except CY had committed some programme 

resources in loan and guarantee agreements or equity to final recipients.  

Since the beginning of the 2014-2020 period, EUR 13.4 billion of programme resources had 

been used to support final recipients i.e., financing either paid to final recipients or to the benefit 

of final recipients, or set aside for guaranteed loans disbursed to final recipients. This is well 

over twice the programme amount used to support final recipients by the end of 2019, with an 

increase  of  EUR  7.3  billion.  Almost  EUR 10.0  billion  of  ERDF  and  CF  was  paid  to  final 

recipients i.e., 73% of ERDF and CF paid to FIs - it was 56% as of the end of 2019. 

By the end of 2020, ERDF and the Cohesion Fund disbursed to final recipients covered 49% 

of the respective amount committed to FIs22 (28% in 2019). The total co-financing paid to 

final recipients was EUR 3.6 billion, of which EUR 1.0 billion from private sources. At least 

EUR 245 million23 of private co-financing was paid at the level of the final recipients. 

21  Other  support  combined  with  FIs  in  one  FI  operation  is  a  grant  support  in  the  form  of  an  interest  rate  or 

guaratnee fee subsidy or technical support 

22   Programme contributions effectively paid to final recipients or, in the case of guarantee, committed for loans 
paid  to  final  recipients,  contribute  to  eligible  expenditure  at  closure,  together  with  other  expenditure  as 
stipulated in Article 42 CPR. 

23   As national co-financing can come at the level of final recipients, OP resources committed and paid to the final 
recipients  can  be  larger  than  to  the  FI.  However,  due  to  the  different  timing  of  these  commitments  and 
payments,  co-financing  at  the  level  of  the  final  recipients  only  becomes  apparent  in  the  reported  data  with 
implementation progress. 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Figure 10 Payments to FIs, commitments and payments to final recipients, as of end 2020, EUR million  

ERDF&CF 
paid to FI 

OP 
amounts 
committed 
to 
final 
recipients 

ERDF&CF 
committed 
final 
to 
recipients 

OP 
amounts 
to 
paid 
final 
recipients 

ERDF&CF 
paid 
to 
final 
recipients 

ERDF&CF 
disbursement 
rate  

OP 
amount 
paid  to 
FI 

9.0 

261.1 

241.7 

10.0 

545.8 

3.0 

105.8 

219.6 

8.5 

532.3 

1,176.3 

756.3 

64.8 

58.8 

1,154.1 
43.0 
728.7 
2,107.2 
537.7 
1,386.4 
3,831.8 
452.1 
96.9 
37.0 
68.7 
2,319.4 
210.3 
347.3 
186.2 
211.3 
511.2 

1,027.0 
21.5 
343.1 
1,818.7 
497.6 
1,364.7 
2,537.8 
451.9 
78.4 
34.0 
26.9 
2,055.6 
189.8 
332.2 
92.8 
159.0 
410.0 

1,246.5 

556.2 

MS 

AT 

BE 

BG 

CY 

CZ 

DE 

EE 

ES 
FI 
FR 
GR 
HR 
HU 
IT 
LT 
LV 
MT 
NL 
PL 
PT 
RO 
SE 
SI 
SK 

UK 

7.8 

228.7 

159.2 

- 

1,065.7 

1,069.9 

81.0 

993.5 
38.4 
625.7 
1,769.8 
456.0 
1,337.1 
3,634.9 
389.6 
222.1 
24.9 
123.4 
1,682.9 
465.2 
259.9 
103.4 
135.7 
619.4 

1,348.9 

2.6 

88.6 

149.6 

- 

598.2 

652.0 

80.6 

872.5 
19.2 
278.6 
1,553.0 
416.0 
1,216.3 
2,367.0 
389.6 
78.7 
23.9 
30.9 
1,401.7 
207.9 
252.2 
49.9 
101.1 
496.3 

589.8 

7.5 

214.6 

126.5 

- 

212.8 

957.3 

29.8 

958.1 
38.4 
536.5 
1,531.9 
399.9 
1,272.6 
2,788.9 
301.0 
73.4 
21.1 
102.0 
1,533.6 
287.5 
256.6 
103.4 
116.3 
556.2 

994.1 

2.5 

86.5 

121.8 

- 

397.3 

598.3 

28.1 

862.6 
19.2 
239.5 
1,352.2 
336.8 
1,253.0 
1,783.9 
300.3 
47.7 
24.9 
23.8 
1,282.1 
108.0 
252.2 
49.9 
86.6 
306.3 

416.6 

83% 

82% 

55% 

0% 

75% 

79% 

48% 

84% 
89% 
70% 
74% 
68% 
92% 
70% 
66% 
61% 
73% 
89% 
62% 
57% 
76% 
54% 
54% 
75% 

75% 

Total  17,784.4  13,681.5 

16,843.2 

11,916.0 

13,419.8 

9,980.0 

73% 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Programme resources committed and not yet paid to final recipients were EUR 3.4 billion or 

20% of the amounts committed to final recipients.  

The amount committed to final recipients exceeds the amount invested in final recipients, as 

there is a time lag between signing a loan, guarantee or equity participation and the actual 

investment. Payments are sometimes made in tranches according to the progress of project 

implementation.  This  can  be  seen  with  instruments  which  started  investments  under  each 

signed contract but paid out only part of the committed amounts.  

There is a large variation as regards the share of funds committed to FI which reached final 

recipients. SME Initiative progress was considerably faster, as 79% of the ERDF committed to 

FIs already reached final recipients compared to an overall figure of 46% for the remaining FIs. 

Figure 7 shows how each MS performed.  

Figure 11 ERDF and CF paid to final recipients as of end 2020, percent of ERDF and CF committed to 
FIs 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
Overall, the amount of ERDF and CF disbursed to final recipients more than doubled in 2020 

(from EUR 4.6 to EUR 10.0 billion) compared with the year earlier. IT and GR had the largest 

increases, each reporting over EUR 1.2 billion of additional ESIF paid to final recipients. PL 

also reported a substantial increase (EUR 935 million). 

In some Member States with substantial ERDF and CF committed to FIs still to be spent as 

eligible expenditure, payments to final recipients showed little increase compared to the end of 

2019 (see Figure 12 and Figure 13). This was the case in particular in BG (EUR 23 million 

increase with EUR 600 million committed to FIs), LT (EUR 36 and EUR 645 million) and PT 

(EUR 38 million and EUR 500 million). Small increases in some other Member States are due 

to a faster implementation in the years before, implying that very little or no resources were left 

to be paid. 

Figure 12 ERDF and CF paid to final recipients in 2020 as percent of ERDF and CF committed to FIs 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 Figure 13 ERDF and CF paid to final recipients as of end 2019 and in 2020, EUR million 

Compared with earlier reporting i.e., data as of the end of 2019, additional EUR 3.7 billion of 

loans was disbursed as well as over EUR 760 million equity. Additional EUR 2.7 billion was 

set  aside  for  guarantees  for  disbursed  loans  and  over  EUR  100  million  of  other  support 

combined within the FIs was paid to final recipients. 

The average loan24 was over EUR 40,000, ranging from EUR 16,000 in GR to EUR 590,000 in 

SK25. The average loan investment was also quite diverse across TOs, with the smallest average 

24    This only considers FIs that provided a single type of financial product. 

25    The high average amount in SK is influenced by a single investment of almost EUR 30 million made under 
the OP ‘Integrated Infrastructure’. This was used to purchase technical rolling stock for rail monitor/repair. 

28 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
amount being provided under TO4 (EUR 17,000). The average amount set aside for guarantees 

for disbursed loans was EUR 10,000, ranging from EUR 5,000 in IT to over EUR 80,000 in 
GR26. The average equity investment was EUR 370,000, ranging from about EUR 100,000 in 

FI to over EUR 1.9 million in NL.  

FIs supported almost 557,00027 final recipients (about 143,000 at end 2019). SMEs were the 

largest group with 478,000, of which 375,000 qualified as microenterprises. Large enterprises 

supported were 384. Most SMEs received support through  guarantees (369,000), while over 

4,000  SMEs  were  supported  through  equity  investments.  Supported  final  recipients  also 

included  over  74,500  individuals,  mostly  receiving  loans  (48,000),  and  3,650  other  final 
recipients28.  Compared  to  the  end  of  2019,  an  additional  365,000  SMEs  were  supported,  of 

which 308,000 microenterprises. The national OP ‘Imprese e competitività’ in IT reported that 

almost 260 000 more SMEs were supported compared with a year earlier. This corresponds to 

the considerable increase of resources paid to final recipients by this OP. It also reflects the fact 

that  the  vast  majority  of  SMEs  supported  under  the  OP  received  guarantees,  implying  a 

relatively small programme contribution i.e., amount set aside for guaranteed loans.  

26   With an average loan actually paid to final recipients of about EUR 260,000 in GR. 

27   Investments  made  in  final  recipients  were  536,000.  Investments  were  not  reported  or  no  investments  were 
reported for FIs that paid EUR 855 million to almost 8,000 final recipients. The difference between the number 
of  investments  and  final  recipients  could  also  be  due  to  some  final  recipients  receiving  more  than  one 
investment.  

28   Data  on  support  other  than  for  SMEs  is  strongly  influenced  by  a  small  number  of  products:  of  the  74,500 
individuals supported, 50,000 received loans and other support combined within the financial instrument for 
energy efficiency interventions in GR and 16,800 loans for research and innovation in HU. Of the 3,650 ‘Other’ 
final recipients, almost 2,600 received loans under TO4 mainly in LT, but also in PL and SK, while almost 300 
received loans under TO3 in FR. 

29 

 
 
  
                                                 
Figure 14 Number of final recipients supported, 2015-2020 (main types) 

2.5 Thematic objectives29 

Overall30, 23 Member States committed EUR 14.4 billion of ERDF to FIs supporting SMEs 

(TO3). This is followed by support to low carbon economy (TO4) with EUR 2.3 billion in 20 

Member States and by R&D and innovation (TO1) with EUR 2.2 billion in 17 Member States. 

While  the  amounts  committed  to  FIs  significantly  increased  under  TO3  (+EUR  5.1  billion, 

+54%) compared to the previous reporting exercise, reduced amounts committed to FIs were 

reported under TO1 (- EUR 300 million, - 12%)  and TO4 (- EUR 335 million, - 13%) . 

Most resources were committed to provide both loans and equity under TO1, whereas loans 

were the main financial product under TO4. The dominant financial product under TO3 were 

guarantees. 

29   There is no legal obligation to report on specific FI amounts per TO but the SFC makes it possible for MAs to 
submit such information voluntarily. Information on amounts under TOs was reported for all but 13 OPs in 
BG, CY, CZ, DE, FR, IT, PL, and the UK. ESIF committed by TOs by some FIs in CZ, DE, FR, HU, IT, MT, 
PL and SK exceeded ESIF committed to the FI, for a total of about EUR  328 million. In most other cases a 
priority  axis  is  clearly  linked  to  a  single  TO,  therefore  the  amounts  for  a  given  TO  are  available  from  the 
information provided under the priority axis. The amounts can also be derived for multi-TO priority axes when 
reporting under Article 46 CPR indicates a single TO for a given FI. Overall, EUR 20.1 billion, or 99% ERDF 
and CF commitments to FIs could be classified by TO. Breakdown of committed amounts by TOs could not 
be derived by other data reported by the Member States for some FIs in BG, CY, DE, EE, FR, IT and the UK. 

30   The amounts do not include FIs where the managing authorities undertake implementation directly. 

30 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 15 ERDF and CF committed by TO and financial product31, percent 

 Extending the scope of FIs to other TOs has been taken up by fewer Member States: 

  Seven Member States committed EUR 440 million of ERDF and CF for environment 

and resource efficiency (TO6), with the highest amount (EUR 182 million) in BG;  

  HU (over EUR 140 million), PL (EUR 230 million) and ES (almost EUR 30 million) 

committed EUR 400 million of ERDF for ICT (TO2) FIs; 

  PL  committed  considerable  resources  to  social  inclusion  (TO9,  EUR  156  million), 

while ES, NL, PT and SK also made commitments to this thematic objective;  

  SK is the only Member State with resources committed to the transport sector (TO7), 

for a total EUR 119 million ERDF and CF; 

  Limited ERDF amounts were committed to address climate change and risk prevention 

and management in CZ and employment and labour mobility in HU and SK. 

31   Information on the products an FI offers is not provided at the level of funds of funds, but only at the level that 

makes payments to final recipients. 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 16 shows that there are differences in the implementation speed of TOs. Compared to 

last year reporting, higher additional payments to final recipients as a share of ERDF and CF 

committed  to  FIs  were  reported  under  TO3,  with  all  other  TOs  also  showing  substantial 

progress. TO3 progress is the most impressive, because at the same time the respective amount 

committed increased significantly (hence percentages are calculated from considerably higher 

committed amounts). 

Figure 16 ERDF and CF amounts paid to final recipients as percentage of commitments, per TO32 

32     The analysis does not consider FIs with resources committed  to more TOs, accounting for about a fifth of 
ERDF and CF to FIs. Payments to final recipients or, in the case of guarantee, resources set aside for loans 
paid  to  final  recipients,  contribute  to  eligible  expenditure  at  closure,  together  with  other  expenditure  as 
stipulated in Article 42 CPR. It should also be noted that progress up to 2019 was calculated based on resources 
reported as committed to FIs by the end of that year. 

32 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
2.6 Leverage 

By the end of 2020, EUR 10.0 billion of ERDF and CF paid to final recipients mobilised EUR 

37.4  billion  of  financing  (loans,  loans  backed  by  guarantees  supported  from  programme 
resources, and equity support or similar)33. Mobilised resources vary across the Member States, 

depending on their co-financing rates, the local market conditions and the financial products 

provided. The largest amount was in IT (EUR 13.6 billion), ES (EUR 4.6 billion), GR (EUR 

4.5 billion), DE (EUR 2.5 billion) and PL (EUR 1.9 billion). Figure 17 provides the breakdown 

of reimbursable financing provided to final recipients in each Member State. 

Figure 17 Amount of reimbursable financing provided to final recipients as of end 2020, EUR million34 

33    The calculation excludes particularly high leverage figures, as described in footnote 54. 

34    In addition to loans and equity, non-ESIF mobilised at the level of final recipients includes guaranteed loans 
paid to final recipients net of ESIF committed in guarantee. Guaranteed loans paid to final recipients also 
includes new debt finance created by the SME Initiative – see CPR Article 39(10). 

33 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Most resources were paid as guaranteed loans, for a total of EUR 24.0 billion. In addition, EUR 

3.0 billion of private contributions were mobilised at the level of final recipients through loans 

and  over  EUR  2.3  billion  through  equity.  Private  resources  mobilised  at  the  level  of  final 

recipients35 through loans exceeded ESIF paid to final recipients in GR (EUR 1.4 billion and 

EUR 550 million) and LT (EUR 430 million and 250 million). In the case of equity, this was 

the case in twelve Member States, with the largest private amounts mobilised in DE (EUR 1.1 

billion) and the UK (EUR 385 million) and considerable amounts also mobilised in PT, FR, BE 

and SK (over EUR 100 million each). Figure 18 details the private contribution mobilised at 

the level of final recipients by financial product and Member State. 

Compared to the end of 2019, over EUR 16.6 billion of additional guaranteed loans was paid 

to final recipients, of which EUR 11.8 billion in IT and over EUR 2.2 billion in GR. Additional 

private  contributions  mobilised  at  the  level  of  final  recipients  were  almost  EUR  1.2  billion 

through loans and over EUR 735 million through equity. 

35 Including both national co-financing and non-programme resources. 

34 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Improving Energy Efficiency in Multi-Apartment Residential Buildings in Latvia 

This successful Latvian DME finanšu instruments supports energy efficiency improvement, 
smart  energy  management  as  well  as  the  use  of  renewable  energy  resources  at  multi-
apartment residential buildings. The FI is implemented by ALTUM, the national promotional 
bank of Latvia, and consists of a loan and a guarantee product. The total commitments from 
the programme resources to the financial instrument amount to EUR 25 million. In addition, 
ALTUM manages a separate ERDF grant scheme from which grants cover up to 50% of the 
eligible costs of the investment. Homeowner associations need to file one single application 
with their commercial banks to apply for loan and grant support.   

ALTUM  provides  individual  guarantees  for  loans  provided  by  a  commercial  bank  or  an 
alternative investment fund of up to 80% of the principal, for a period of up to 20 years. By 
the  end  of  2020,  there  were  172  guaranteed  loans  signed  with  final  recipients.  The  total 
leverage of this guarantee product hit 9.05, meaning that every euro set aside for the ERDF 
guarantee triggered additional 8 euro of additional investment in Latvia.  

Under the same FI, ALTUM also offers loans for the applicants whose loan application was 
rejected by their commercial bank. ALTUM offers a promotional loan covering up to 50% 
of eligible costs with a repayment term of up to 20 years. Targeting mostly small projects or 
houses in less developed areas, this product tripled the number of contract signed with final 
recipients from 21 to 61 in the course of the crisis year 2020. Moreover, the ALTUM loans 
achieved a total leverage effect of 3.74,  demonstrating their ability to mobilise significant 
private investment. 

Given  the  small  size  of  the  Latvian  market  and  the  relatively  large  size  of  the  projects 
supported,  DME  finanšu  instruments  proved  to  be  an  exemplary  delivery  mechanism  for 
achieving Union’s climate objectives, while saving energy costs of Latvian households.   

35 

 
 
 
Figure 18 Private contribution mobilised at the level of final recipients by financial product36 and Member 
State as of end 2020, EUR million 

36   The total value of guaranteed loans actually paid to final recipients also includes the total value of new debt 

finance created by SME Initiative – see CPR Article 39(10). 

36 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Reporting on expected leverage is only obligatory in annual implementation reports submitted 

in 2017, 2019 and in the final report, so this year it was provided on a voluntary basis.  

The data to calculate achieved leverage has been provided for37: 

  451 loan FIs, with a median achieved leverage of 1.3 (207 and 2.2 in 2019); 

  87 guarantee FIs, with a median achieved leverage of 4.8 (42 and 6.1 in 2019); 

  211 equity FIs, with a median achieved leverage of 1.8 (155 and 2.4 in 2019). 

37   Achieved  leverage  figures  include  FIs  of  which  managing  authorities  undertake  implementation  directly. 

Particularly high leverage figures, as defined in footnote 54, are not counted. 

37 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
The ability to attract additional resources is one of the key characteristic of FIs and one 

of the arguments for promoting their use to deliver ESIF policy objectives. A definition 

of the leverage effect is provided in Financial Regulation (EU, Euratom 2018/1046) in 

Article 2(38)  as  ‘the  amount  of  reimbursable  financing  provided  to  eligible  final 

recipients divided by the amount of the Union contribution’. 

The leverage effect is referred to in the CPR in two main contexts: as 'expected leverage 

effect' which is  established on the basis of the ex ante assessment and in the funding 

agreement with the body implementing the FI; and after launching the FI as 'achieved 

leverage  effect'.  Additional  resources,  and  hence  leverage,  can  be  accumulated  at 

different levels: fund of funds (if applicable), specific funds and final recipients.  

In the reporting, managing authorities provide the expected leverage effect according to 

the funding agreement for each FI. The achieved leverage effect, though, is calculated 

within SFC2014 to ensure a unified calculation across programmes and FIs. The formula 

for achieved leverage is:  

Total 
of 
final recipients as of the end of a reporting year  

amount 

finance 

which 

reached 

eligible 

Achieved leverage effect =  

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     Eligible  ESIF  support  which  effectively  contributed  to 
     the total amount of finance indicated in the numerator  

The total amount of finance which reached eligible final recipients is the sum of (1) the 

ESIF contribution which reached final recipients; (2) the national co-financing (public 

or private) which reached final recipients; (3) the contribution by other investors which 

reached  final  recipients,  and  (4)  the  amount  of  other  forms  of  support  combined  in  a 

single FI operation which reached final recipients. 

The  ESIF  support  which  contributed  to  the  total  amount  of  finance  reaching  final 

recipients  includes  ESIF  resources  invested  in  final  recipients  and  the  ESIF  share  of 

management costs and fees. 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
2.7 Management costs and fees 

23 Member States reported that EUR 663 million of MCFs had been paid to FIs by the end of 

2020. Only MCFs paid from programme resources are reported. Of the total MCFs, EUR 185 

million or 28% was paid as performance-based remuneration.   

Thresholds and criteria for determining the programme contribution to management costs and 

fees, including on the basis of performance, are set out in Articles 12 and 13 of Commission 

Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  No  480/2014,  and  aim  at  increasing  the  efficiency  and 

effectiveness  of  investments  undertaken  by  the  FIs.  The  performance-based  remuneration 

considers  the  disbursement  of  contributions  from  programmes,  resources  repaid  from 

investments or from the release of resources committed for guarantee contracts, the quality 

of  measures  accompanying  the  investment  before  and  after  the  investment  decision  to 

increase its impact and the FI contribution to programme objectives and outputs. 

For  those  FIs  with  at  least  some  MCFs  paid,  these  were  1.6%  and  2.5%  of  the  programme 

resources committed to fund of funds and specific funds, including fund of funds specific funds, 

respectively (Figure 19 provides a more detailed breakdown by type of financial product). This 

is below the thresholds stipulated by Article 13 of Commission Delegated Regulation 480/2014. 

When compared to the amounts already paid to final recipients, MCFs constituted 7.4% of the 

payments.  

39 

 
 
 
 
 
Figure 19 Breakdown of FIs by type of financial instrument and financial product, and MCFs paid 
cummulatively as a share of programme resources committed to FIs38 

2.8 Amounts repaid and reinvested 

By  the  end  of  2020,  resources  were  repaid  to  FIs  in 21  Member  States39.  In  total  EUR  948 

million attributable to support from ESIF had been paid back (EUR 484 million at the end of 

2019), or 10% of the reimbursable ERDF and CF paid to final recipients. 

An important characteristic of FIs, in comparison to grants, is that they can generate reflows. 

These reflows consist of capital repayments, such as loan principal or the repayment of equity 

participations as well as the release of amounts set aside for guarantees. Furthermore, these 

amounts also include interest, guarantee fees, dividends or other capital gains. According to 

Articles  43a  and  44  of  the  CPR  these  resources  returned  which  are  attributable  to  ESIF 

contribution are to be reused until the end of the eligibility period, for: 

  Differentiated treatment of investors operating under the market economy principle, as 

well as of the EIB when using the EU guarantee under EFSI; 

38   FIs providing more or other financial products are not included in the figure. 

39   i.e., all Member States with reimbursable ESIF resources paid to FIs, except for FI, MT and RO.  FIs which 
provided EUR 790 million of ERDF and CF support to final recipients (or 8% of ERDF and CF paid to final 
recipients), did not report on the amounts repaid. Other FIs reported that resources had not yet been repaid, 
covering EUR 2.7 billion - or over a fourth - of ERDF and CF paid to final recipients. 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
  Further investments through the same or other FIs;  

  To cover the losses resulting from negative interest; 

  Reimbursement of management costs incurred and payment of management fees for 

the FI.  

After the end of the eligibility period, the resources returned should be re-used in line with 

Article 45 CPR.  

The  repaid  resources  were  mostly  from  capital  repayments  (EUR  840  million)  and  to  FIs 

providing loans (EUR  857 million  in  19 Member States).  The highest  repayment  from loan 

investments  was  in  LT  (over  EUR  210  million),  PL  (EUR  146  million)  and  DE  (EUR  140 

million). As shown in Figure 20, loan amounts attributable to ESIF not (yet) repaid40 were the 

highest in PL (EUR 987 million) and HU (EUR 778 million). 

Of the amounts repaid to FIs and attributable to support from ERDF and CF, EUR 225 million 

or 27% had been reused by the end of 202041. Most of the ERDF and CF reused was in LT 

(EUR 173 million or 81% of the respective amount repaid. Overall, almost EUR 610 million or 

73%41 of support attributable to ERDF and CF repaid to FI had not yet been reused, most of 

which in DE (EUR 158 million) and PL (EUR 114 million). 

40     Loan amounts attributable to ESIF not (yet) repaid refer to the ERDF and CF paid to the final recipients that 
was  not returned to the financial instrument but can be  expected to be  partly  returned at some point. It is 
calculated  as  the  difference  between  ERDF  and  CF  paid  to  final  recipients  and  the  amounts  repaid  to  the 
financial instrument attributable to support from ERDF and CF.  

41    FIs to which EUR 114 million attributable to support from ERDF and CF was repaid (or 12% of ERDF and 
CF repaid), did not report on the amounts  reused. FIs that did not report on reused resources are excluded 
from the figure. 

41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 20 Amounts attributable to ESIF repaid by end 2020 (loan products)42, EUR million 

Overall, EUR 73 million or 3% of the loan amounts disbursed by the respective FIs was reported 

as defaulted. There was EUR 116 million or 8% of the amount committed by the respective FIs 

for guarantees provided called due to loan defaults. Default rates vary across FIs, depending on 

local  market  conditions,  investment  strategies  i.e.,  riskiness  of  final  recipients  targeted,  and 

timing i.e., defaults increase over time. 

2.9 Value of equity participation 

At end 2020, equity participations were valued at EUR 1.3 billion, or 71% of the programme 

resources paid to  final recipients  by those FIs (over EUR 1.8 billion or  92% of total equity 

investments43). The value of equity participations as a share of investment value varied widely 

42   The chart only considers FIs providing loans and reporting on resources attributable to ESIF.  

43   FIs which did not report the value of their equity investments as of the end 2020 are not considered, nor FIs 
which  reported  a  null  value  of  their  equity  investments,  as  this  also  indicates  a  lack  of  reporting.  FIs  that 
invested almost EUR 170 million in equity did not report or reported a null value for their equity investments. 
Amounts invested by these FIs were 8% of the total equity investments at the end of the reporting period with 
the highest amount for IT (EUR 58 million or 90% the respective equity paid to final recipients). 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
across FIs (see Figure 21). Resources attributable to ESIF support repaid to FIs providing only 

equity investments were EUR 61 million or 4% of the respective payments to final recipients.  

The  value  of  equity  participations  in  enterprises  made  by  venture  capital  funds  or 

co-investment facilities depends on the performance of the enterprises and may increase or 

decrease over the period of investment. Actual reflows from the capital investment will only 

be available with an exit, which may happen many years after initial investment. In order to 

have information on the progress over time, the managing authorities report on the value of 

equity participations. The amount to be reported should be the book value of the investment 

at  the  end  of  the  reporting  year  which,  depending  on  the  applicable  accounting  rules,  is 

calculated  as:  "Book  value  =  nominal  value  of  investments  +/–  fair-value  movement  – 

impairments of assets."  

Figure 21 Reporting FIs by value of equity participations as a share of investment value44  

44   Resources repaid to the FIs attributable to ESIF support are not considered in the figure. Additionally, 15% of 
the FIs reported the same value for the investment and the equity participations, possibly indicating that an 
updated evaluation of the participations had still to be carried out. These FIs, represented in the ‘100-150%’ 
column of the chart, made EUR 108 million of equity paiments to final recipients or 5% of the total. 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Financial instruments supporting innovative start-ups in Berlin 

The German capital runs under TO1 Strengthening research, technological development and 
innovation two successful equity instruments VC Fonds Kreativwirtschaft Berlin II and VC 
Fonds  Technologie  Berlin  II.  Both  equity  funds  are  implemented  by  the  regional 
development bank Investitionsbank Berlin (IBB). The importance of both instruments for the 
dynamic high-tech and start-up scene in Berlin, which suffered a sudden outflow of available 
financing  upon  the  coronavirus  outbreak,  is  highlighted  by  the  fact  that  both  funds  were 
topped up with EUR 22 million from REACT-EU resources.   

Both  financial  instruments  are  available  to  the  market  through  the  Venture  Capital  Fonds 
from  IBB  Ventures.  Eligible  recipients  must  fall  within  one  of  the  following  categories: 
creative industries, life science, industrial technologies or Information and Communication 
Technologies (ICT). Moreover, they must be in the early phase of development, have their 
business based in Berlin, and fulfill EU’s SME definition.  

The initial investments into eligible start-ups typically range between EUR 200,000 and EUR 
1 million. In order to support growth of promising recipients, the investment together with 
other  co-investors  can  be  increased  to  up  to  EUR  4  million  in  the  subsequent  financing 
rounds. 

As of 2020, payments to both instruments combined reached EUR 95 million and the total 
number of supported companies increased to 90. Moreover, the rule of minority share by IBB 
Ventures  and  a  lead  by  a  private  co-investor  ensures  an  achieved  leverage  effect,  which 
amounted to 10.87 (Kreativwirtschaft Berlin II) and 11.83 (Technologie Berlin II) by the end 
of 2020.  

44 

 
 
 
3.  Conclusions 

The data in this summary shows a substantial increase of resources committed to FIs together 

with a rapid acceleration in the implementation of FIs in 2020, as part of the response to the 

COVID-19 pandemic. Programme  contributions committed to FIs  increased by almost EUR 

5.5  billion  to  reach  EUR  27.5  billion,  including  EUR  20.5  billion  from  ERDF  and  CF. 

Programme resources committed increased especially in IT (over EUR 1.8 billion of additional 

resources) and GR (EUR 1.7 billion), while considerable additional resources were committed 

also in CZ, FR, HR, PL, SK and the UK (over EUR 200 million each). A total of EUR 17.8 

billion  (or  65%)  of  the  programme  amounts  committed  had  been  paid  to  FIs,  including 

EUR 13.7 billion of ERDF and CF. 

By the end of 2020, over  EUR 16.8 billion of  programme resources was committed to  final 

recipients, of which over EUR 11.9 billion of ERDF and CF. About EUR 13.4 billion of that 

committed amount had  been paid  to  final  recipients,  of  which  almost  EUR 10.0 billion was 

ERDF and CF.  

Of the ERDF and CF committed to FIs (i.e. EUR 20.5 bn), almost EUR 10 billion or 49% was 

invested  in  final  recipients.  This  shows  a  similar  pattern  with  the  2007-2013  programming 

period, where the comparable figure for the end of 2014 was 51%. However, such progress has 

been achieved based on ERDF and CF resources committed to FIs that were almost two times 

as  large  as  the  respective  amount  in  the  2007-2013  programming  period  i.e.,  over  EUR  20 

million compared to about EUR 11 billion in the previous period. 

This data also indicates a dramatic increase in payments of ERDF and CF to final recipients. 

The ERDF and CF paid to final recipients was well over two times that reported as paid as of 

the end of 2019, with an increase of EUR 5.4 billion. The largest increase was in IT and GR, 

each reporting over EUR 1.2 billion of additional ESIF paid to final recipients, while PL also 

reported a substantial increase (EUR 935 million).   

Compared with earlier reporting i.e., data as of the end of 2019, additional EUR 3.7 billion of 

loans was disbursed as well as over EUR 760 million equity. Additional EUR 2.7 billion was 

set  aside  for  guarantees  for  disbursed  loans  and  over  EUR  100  million  of  other  support 

combined  within  the  financial  instruments  was  paid  to  final  recipients.  Notwithstanding  the 

45 

 
 
 
 
 
continued progress, there were significant differences across Member States in the pace of FIs 

implementation.  

This reporting exercise confirms previous encouraging findings in terms of the capacity of FIs 

to attract additional resources. By the end of 2020, EUR 37.7 billion of reimbursable financing 

had been provided to final recipients, with an almost EUR 23 billion increase compared with a 
year earlier45. The largest increase was in IT (EUR 12.4 billion of additional financing), GR 

(EUR 4.1 billion) and PL (almost 1.4 billion). 

Most resources were paid as guaranteed loans, for a total of EUR 24.0 billion (or additional 

EUR  16.0  billion  as  compared  to  the  end  of  2019).  In  addition,  EUR  3.0  billion  of  private 

contributions was mobilised at the level of final recipients through loans (EUR 1.1 billion by 

the end of 2019) and over EUR 2.3 billion through equity (EUR 1.6 billion by the end of 2019).  

Supported final recipients increased by over 413,000 to reach almost 557,000. Of these, SMEs 

were the largest  group with  478,000, of which 375,000 qualified as microenterprises. SMEs 

were supported mostly through guarantees (369,000), including four out of five of the 365,000 

additional supported SMEs reported in 2020. Over 84,000 households improved their energy 

consumption classification (almost 57,000 by the end of 2019) and EUR 545 million of private 

investment  had  matched  public  support  in  innovation  and  R&D  projects  through  FIs 

(EUR 470 million by the end of 2019).  

The reported data also indicates increasing returns as EUR 948 million attributable to support 

from ERDF and CF had been paid back to FIs (EUR 484 million at the end of 2019), mostly to 

FIs providing loans. This was about 10% of reimbursable ERDF and CF paid to final recipients. 

Of the amounts repaid to FIs and attributable to support from ERDF and CF, EUR 225 million 

or 24% was reported to have been reused. 

Gaps  and  inconsistencies  in  the  data  demonstrate  that  there  is  still  scope  for  improving  the 

quality of data reported. Some of the data had already been corrected in the versions resubmitted 

by the managing authorities and available on cohesion policy open data platform46, while other 

45    The calculation excludes particularly high leverage figures, as described in footnote 54. 

46   cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu 

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
would only be reflected in the next year’s summaries. The Commission will put in place further 

actions to provide guidance and support to Member States, to ensure the summaries of data are 

based on the most complete and accurate information. 

Annex 1: Methodological assumptions 

ERDF and CF FI data was submitted based on the reporting model in line with Commission 
Implementing  Regulation  (EU)  No  821/2014  through  the  SFC201447,  as  part  of  the  annual 

implementation reports. On the basis of the initial quality checks, the Commission sent requests 

to MAs to re-check certain potentially inaccurate data. The complete dataset was downloaded 

from SFC2014 on 14 June 2021 and it has been manually corrected on the basis of inputs from 

managing authorities which have been received by 21 July 2021. 

Data on FIs is provided in SFC on three levels: a) the programme, b) the instrument and c) 

the  product(s).  Programme  level  covers  information  about  the  FIs,  including  financial 

intermediaries under funds of funds. The level of product was introduced to report on FIs 

providing more financial products. This level covers the amounts committed and invested in 

final recipients, number of contracts signed and investments made and the number and type 

of final recipients. The remaining information is to be provided at the level of the FI. 

For this year reporting, 25 Member States submitted data to the Commission, that is all Member 

States with indicatively planned amounts to FIs. All these Member States are implementing FIs 

under ERDF, while BG, CY, LT, PT, SI and SK also reported on FIs under CF.  

The data covers 158 programmes or four more programmes than last year reporting. Of these, 

one  is  only  CF,  five  bring  together  CF  and  ERDF,  15  combine  ERDF  and  ESF  and  one 

combines the three Funds48. The data covers 92% of ERDF and CF programmes with indicative 

47   SFC2014  ensures  the  electronic  exchange  of  information  concerning  shared  fund  management  between 

Member States and the European Commission. 

48   ESF contributions to FIs are reported in the chapter on ESF and YEI. 

47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
planned  allocations  to  FIs49.  In  5  Member  States,  34  programmes  implement  instruments 

covering multiple programmes. 

Member States reported 1,022 FIs either being set up or already operational. These included 

149 funds of funds, 598 specific funds under funds of funds, 270 specific funds without funds 

of funds and 14 FIs directly implemented by the managing authorities50. 

Automatic and manual quality checks on both compulsory and optional data identified some 
inconsistencies51  and  potential  inaccuracies,  as  detailed  under  the  relevant  sections  of  this 

report. Notwithstanding such reporting inaccuracies, summary statistics in this report remain 

reliable in most cases.  Individual instances where such inaccuracies may have an impact on 

reliability are duly noted throughout the document. 

In some cases, the data submitted by managing authorities was processed as follows: 

  Amounts  indicatively  allocated  to  FIs  in  the  programmes  were  corrected  to  reflect 

higher commitments to FIs in BG, CZ, GR, MT, PL, RO, SI, SK; 

  FIs  with  the  same  name  receiving  contributions  from  more  than  one  priority  axis  or 

more than one programme were counted as one FI; 

  Nine FIs with no reported ex ante assessment completion date have been included in the 

dataset52; 

  Reporting concerning SME Initiative set-up was complemented and adjusted according 

to data available to the Commission as part of reporting on COSME and Horizon 2020; 

  Commitments and payments to final recipients were used as a proxy for commitments 

and  payments  to  FIs  of  which  managing  authorities  undertake  implementation 

directly53; 

49   13 OPs reported indicative planned allocations to FIs but did not report on FI implementation progress. Seven 

OPs reported based on Article 46 CPR but did not report on indicative planned allocations to FIs.  

50   Some FIs were reported under more types. Some managing authorities in DE, ES and FR chose to implement 

FIs providing loans or guarantees directly under Article 38(4)(d). 

51   Inconsistencies in data series sometimes indicate that previously inaccurate information has been corrected.  

52   Four of these FIs were included only in the total count of FIs, as they did not report any further detail. The 

other five were included in the dataset as they reported signing a funding agreement. 

53   Managing authorities are not required to report this data. 

48 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
  ERDF/CF  commitments/payments  to  FIs  were  used  as  a  proxy  for  ERDF/CF 

commitments/payments 

to 

final 

recipients, 

for  FIs  with 

larger  ERDF/CF 

commitments/payments  to  final  recipients  than  to  FIs.  In  these  cases,  national  co-

financing  was 

increased  accordingly 

to  keep 

the 

respective  programme 

commitments/payments to final recipients; 

  Particularly high figures for expected and achieved leverage were not considered54.

54    Based on leverage figures of FIs supported by cohesion policy in 2007-2013, as well as FIs supported by the 
general budget in 2014-2020, leverage of more than 20 for guarantee and equity instruments, and 10 for loan 
instruments respectively were excluded. 

49 

 
                                                 
ESF and YEI 

List of Tables 

Table  1  Key  figures  reported  by  managing  authorities  as  of  the  end  of  2020  (financial 
figures in EUR million) ............................................................................................ 51 

List of Figures 

Figure 1 OP commitments and payments to FIs and final recipients (EUR million) ....... 53 

Figure 2 Share of ESF and YEI 2014-2020 allocations to FI per country, end 2020 ...... 54 

Figure 3 FI implementation progress by Member State, end 2020 (EUR) ...................... 55 

Figure 4 Overview of implementation by Member State, end 2020 (ESF and YEI) ....... 58 

Figure 5 OP amounts committed to funds of funds per Member State (EUR million) .... 59 

Figure 6 Amounts committed in the funding agreements and paid to FIs, end 2020 (EUR)
 .................................................................................................................................. 60 

Figure 7 ESF and YEI paid to final recipients as of end 2020, percent of ESF and YEI 
committed to FIs ....................................................................................................... 61 

Figure 8 Payments to FIs, commitments and payments to final recipients, end 2020 (EUR)
 .................................................................................................................................. 62 

Figure 9 Number and type of final recipients supported by product, end 2020 ............... 63 

Figure 10 Number of final recipients supported by Member State, end 2020 ................. 63 

Figure 11  ESF amounts committed per TO and Member State, end 2020 (EUR million)
 .................................................................................................................................. 68 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1.  Executive summary 

Table 1 Key figures reported by managing authorities as of the end of 2020 (financial figures in EUR 
million) 

2020 

2019 

Change 

Number of MS reporting on FIs  

Number of programmes reporting on FIs  

Programme amounts committed to FIs  

    Of which ESIF    

Programme amounts paid to FIs  

    Of which ESF and YEI  

Programme amounts committed to final 
recipients  

    Of which ESF and YEI  

Programme resources paid to final 
recipients  

    Of which ESF and YEI  

    Of which loans or microloans  

Financing (loans, guaranteed loans and 
equity) disbursed to final recipients55  

Programme resources paid as 
management costs and fees  

Amount attributable to ESIF support paid 
back to FIs  

11 

31 

785 

543 

331 

255 

234 

155 

182 

120 

121 

186 

10 

24 

10 

30 

820 

575 

265 

197 

116 

76 

87 

58 

87 

89 

7 

11 

+1 

+1 

-35 

-32 

+66 

+58 

+118 

+79 

+95 

+62 

+34 

97 

+3 

+13 

Final recipients supported  

Of which microenterprises  

7,964 

4,047 

4,175 

2,065 

+3,789 

+1,982 

55  This is calculated as: for loan and equity FIs, the sum of ESF/YEI paid to final recipients and non-ESIF 
contribution mobilised at the level of final recipients; for guarantee FIs, the total value of the guaranteed 
loans paid to final recipients. 

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
1.1 Main findings and key figures 

For this year reporting, managing authorities in 11 Member States reported on the progress 

of 31 OPs with setting up and implementing ESF and YEI co-funded FIs by the end of 

2020. 

Overall,  78  FIs  were  reported  as  being  set  up  or  already  operational  (55  in  2019). 

OP contributions of EUR 785 million were committed to these FIs, including EUR  543 
million of ESF (see Figure 22). ES56 reported first time commitments of OP resources to 

FIs. EUR 330 million were paid to FIs, including EUR 240 million of ESF and EUR 15 

million of YEI. 

Most FIs  supported by  ESF and YEI  were established under thematic objective  (TO)  8 

‘promoting sustainable and quality employment  and supporting  labour mobility’. There 

were  also  FIs  under  TO  9  ‘promoting  social  inclusion,  combating  poverty  and  any 

discrimination’ in BG, CZ, HU, IT and PL. TO 10 ‘investing in education, training and 

lifelong learning’ was addressed by FIs in IT, MT and PT. Managing authorities mainly 

established loan or micro-loan schemes with a few exceptions, including equity FIs in DE, 

PL, PT and SK and guarantees in MT and PT. 

FIs in all reporting Member States except ES had committed resources to final recipients, 

for a total of EUR 234 million of OP resources of which EUR 155 million of ESF. These 

FIs had paid EUR 182 million to final recipients, including EUR 120 million of ESF. 

By  the  end  of  2020,  FIs  supported  over  7,964  final  recipients,  of  which  4,047  were 

microenterprises and 3,557 individuals. 

56 Member States are identified by ISO Alpha-2 code. 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 22 OP commitments and payments to FIs and final recipients (EUR million) 

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

820

815

784

557

418

282

330

265

223

158

104

0

Committed to FI

Paid to FI

234

116

69

50

0

1

Committed to final
recipients

182

87

49

0

0.8

20

Paid to final recipients

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

1.2 Main messages 

FIs can be co-funded by the ESF to support investment priorities established in ESF OPs. 

They are not an alternative to grants but an additional form of finance that can result in 

more resources pursuing the same goals. 

Indications from 2014-2020 OPs were that 10 Member States plan to commit over EUR 

770 million from ESF and YEI to FIs or about 0.8% of the ESF and YEI allocations. Figure 

23 highlights the variations between Member States, with the highest allocations planned 

in LT, IT, MT and RO. 

Article  96(2)(b)(vi)  CPR  requires  OPs  to  set  out,  for  each  priority  axis  other  than 

technical  assistance,  the  corresponding  categories  of  intervention  and  an  indicative 

breakdown of the programmed resources. Nomeclature for the categories of intervention 

are provided in Annex I of CIR No 215/2014, including codes for the forms of finance. 

On this basis, managing authorities include indicative amounts planned for FIs in their 

programmes. These are subject to variation during the programming period, including 

based on mandatory ex-ante assessments, which may recommend different allocations 

or not to proceed with FIs. 

The reported data shows a reduction in planned ESF and YEI allocations to FIs in some 

Member States compared to the last reporting exercise, especially in PT (EUR 41 million) 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
and IT (EUR 32 million). A decrease was also reported in RO (EUR 23 million), BG (EUR 

13 million) and PL (EUR 11 million). 

Nonetheless, the data in this summary also shows that a considerable difference remains 

in  some  Member  States  between  the  indicative  planned  amounts  and  the  resources 

committed to FIs57 by the end of 2020. According to the indicative plans, EUR 230 million 

of ESF and YEI was  yet to be committed to FIs, of which EUR 110 million in RO and 

EUR 100 million in IT. These differences might be a sign of delay or they might indicate 

that  planned  amounts  to  FIs  have  not  yet  been  decreased  in  the  submitted  programme 

amendments. In this case, planned and committed amount figures should converge when 

the relevant priority axes are amended in the future. 

Figure 23 Share of ESF and YEI 2014-2020 allocations to FI per country, end 202058 

* EU share refers to all Member States 

Both ESF and YEI commitments and disbursements to final recipients showed a modest 

increase, also when compared to the respective amounts committed to the FI. There were 

57    Indicative planned amounts refer to resources programmed for FIs as set out based on Article 96(2)(b)(vi) 
CPR. Resources committed to FIs refers to data transmitted by managing authorities according to Article 
46 CPR.  

58     Only Member States reporting on indicative planned amounts for FIs based on Article 96(2)(b)(vi) CPR 

are included in the chart. ES is not shown as it only reported FIs according to Article 46 CPR. 

54 

 
 
 
 
  
 
                                                 
no  payments  yet  to  final  recipients  in  ES,  where  the  funding  agreement  of  the  only  FI 

having been established was signed in July 2018. Very limited progress - less than 10% of 

ESF and YEI committed to financial instruments - was also reported in BG, CZ, HU, IT, 

PT and SK. 

While managing authorities reported that almost EUR 10 million of management costs and 

fees  had  been  paid  from  OP  resources,  accrued  interest  and  gains  from  treasury 

management attributable to ESF also totalled EUR 10 million. 

Additionally, almost EUR 24 million had been repaid to FIs that was attributable to support 

from ESF, or 20% of the ESF amount paid to final recipients. 

ESF and YEI FIs showed a limited capacity to mobilise additional finance. While this is 

in line with managing authority expectations, it also reflects the risks involved in financing 

the type of final recipents supported by these FIs, which makes it harder to attract investors. 

Overall,  EUR  8  million  of  private  resources  were  mobilised  by  loan  FIs  and  EUR  21 

million through equity FI, most of which in PL and DE respectively. 

Figure 24 FI implementation progress by Member State, end 2020 (EUR) 

MS  N° of OPs 

BG 

CZ 

DE 

ES 

HU 

IT 

LT 

MT 

PL 

PT 

SK 

EU 

1 

1 

2 

1 

1 

8 

1 

1 

12 

2 

1 

31 

ESF 
committed to 
FI 

ESF paid 
to FI 

YEI paid 
to FI 

30,450,606 

7,390,899 

234,966 

11,878,210 

3,001,412 

103,600,000 

59,034,050 

3,500,000 

900,000 

4,024,178 

1,583,804 

- 

- 

- 

- 

ESF 
committed 
to final 
recipients 
1,992,031 

ESF paid to 
final 
recipients 

1,838,130 

1,398,973 

737,632 

38,080,982 

35,705,092 

- 

- 

1,762,756 

1,583,804 

188,275,382 

60,570,876  14,712,363 

39,630,208 

24,783,281 

24,546,803 

24,546,803 

2,400,000 

2,400,000 

79,629,137 

48,128,367 

45,000,000 

20,000,000 

49,725,000 

12,431,250 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

19,358,955 

18,974,309 

702,105 

373,842 

30,735,797 

30,455,672 

6,163,484 

3,752,034 

15,250,477 

1,625,891 

543,029,316  239,987,461  14,947,329 

155,075,768 

119,829,686 

55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2.  Reporting exercise 2020 

Data were submitted based on the reporting template prepared by the Commission and submitted 

through the SFC201459 reporting module as part of the annual implementation reports. 

Data  on  FIs  is  provided  in  SFC  on  three  levels:  a)  the  OP,  b)  the  instrument  and  c)  the 

product(s).  OP  level  covers  information  about  the  FIs,  including  financial  intermediaries 

under funds of funds. The level of product was introduced to report on FIs providing more 

financial products. This level covers the amounts committed and invested in final recipients, 

number of contracts signed and investments made and the number and type of final recipients. 

The remaining information is to be provided at the level of the FI. 

For this reporting, which refers to the end of 2020, 11 Member States using FIs under ESF submitted 

data to the Commission. BG and IT also reported co-financing FIs using both ESF and YEI. While 

34 OPs had planned amounts for FIs, 31 OPs reported FI data based on Article 46 CPR60. There 

were also 6 OPs with no planned amounts for FIs that reported based on Article 46 CPR. Among 

the reporting OPs, one brings together ESF and YEI and one only concerns YEI. IT reported on a 

multi-OP  FI  implemented  through  a  specific  fund  structure  (‘Fondo  Rotativo  Nazionale 

SELFIEmployment’). 

The complete set of data up to 31 December 2020 was downloaded from SFC2014 on 14 June 2021. 

Automatic  and  manual  quality  checks  on  both  compulsory  and  optional  data  identified  some 
inconsistencies61  and potential  inaccuracies, as detailed later in  the report.  Notwithstanding such 

reporting inaccuracies, summary statistics in this report remain reliable in most cases. Individual 

instances where such inaccuracies may have an impact on reliability are duly noted throughout the 

document. 

59   SFC2014's main function is the electronic exchange of information concerning funds in shared management between 

Member States and the European Commission. 

60   OPs reporting based on Article 46 CPR were: 2014BG05M9OP001, 2014CZ05M9OP001, 2014DE05SFOP002, 
2014DE05SFOP012, 2014ES05SFOP020, 2014HU05M2OP001, 2014IT05M9OP001, 2014IT05SFOP002, 
2014IT05SFOP005, 2014IT05SFOP016, 2014IT05SFOP020, 2014IT05SFOP021, 2014IT16M2OP005, 2014IT16M2OP006, 
2014LT16MAOP001, 2014MT05SFOP001, 2014PL05M9OP001, 2014PL16M2OP001, 2014PL16M2OP003, 
2014PL16M2OP004, 2014PL16M2OP005, 2014PL16M2OP006, 2014PL16M2OP008, 2014PL16M2OP009, 
2014PL16M2OP010, 2014PL16M2OP012, 2014PL16M2OP013, 2014PL16M2OP016, 2014PT05SFOP001, 
2014PT16M3OP001, 2014SK05M0OP001. 

61   Inconsistencies of time series sometimes indicate that previously inaccurate data has been corrected. 

56 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
In the report, FIs with the same name receiving contributions from more than one priority axis or 

more than one OP were counted as one FI. 

57 

 
 
 
3.  Summary of data collected on FIs implemented under ESF and YEI 

Member States reported 78 FIs established as at the end of 2020. Of these, 20 were funds of funds, 

16 were specific funds without a fund of funds and 42 were specific funds under a fund of funds 

structure. PL has the most FIs (39), followed by IT (12). 

Figure 25 Overview of implementation by Member State, end 2020 (ESF and YEI)  

MS 

BG 
CZ 
DE 
ES 
HU 
IT 
LT 
MT 
PL 
PT 
SK 
Total 

N° of fund 
of funds 

2 
- 
- 
1 
1 
1 
1 
- 
12 
1 
1 
20 

N° of 
specific 
funds 
- 
1 
2 
- 
- 
9 
- 
1 
2 
1 
- 
16 

N° of fund of 
funds specific 
funds 
4 
- 
- 
- 
5 
2 
1 
- 
25 
2 
3 
42 

Ex-ante 
assessment 
completed 
2 
1 
2 
1 
1 
10 
1 
1 
14 
2 
1 
36 

Funding 
agreements 
signed 
6 
1 
2 
1 
6 
12 
2 
1 
39 
4 
4 
78 

Comprehensive  reporting  requirements  allow  Member  States  to  report  on  the  progress  of  FI 

implementation from being set up, including the progress of  ex-ante assessments, designation or 

selection of the bodies implementing FIs and signature of the funding agreements. 

By the end of 2020, ex-ante assessments had been completed for all 36 funds of funds or specific 

funds without a fund of funds structure. Managing authorities had signed funding agreements with 

all 78 FIs. 

The  obligation  to  conduct  an  ex-ante  assessment  is  a  key  factor  for  the  2014-2020 

programming period. According to Article 37(2) CPR, the mandatory ex-ante assessment for 

FIs  must  establish  evidence  of  market  failure  (or  suboptimal  investment  situations)  and 

estimate the level and scope of public investment needs. This assessment must also set out 

the most suitable types of FIs. Moreover, under Article 37(3) CPR, the ex-ante assessment 

must be submitted to the OP monitoring committee for information and its summary findings 

and conclusions must be published within three months of being finalised. 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.1 Amounts committed and paid to FIs  

At the end of 2020, 11 Member States had committed EUR 785 million of OP contributions to FIs 

in funding agreements, including EUR 543 million of ESF (Figure 27). Most OP resources were 

committed to FIs in IT (EUR 308 million) and DE (EUR 170 million). Overall, EUR 107 million 

were committed to FIs having entrusted implementation tasks to the EIB in IT (EUR 100 million, 

all committed by the ‘Ricerca e innovazione’ programme) and PL (EUR 7 million). This is about 

14% of the programme resources committed to FIs.  

Managing authorities in all reporting Member States except CZ, DE and MT made commitments to 

funds of funds, for a total of EUR 365 million of OP resources including EUR 294 million ESF. 

Over 130 million of OP resources had yet to be committed to specific funds under funds of funds, 

especially in PT (EUR 38 million), and SK (EUR 30 million), PL (EUR 25 million) and BG (EUR 

21 million). Eight funds of funds committed less than EUR 5 million each, all in PL except one in 

HU. 

Figure 26 OP amounts committed to funds of funds per Member State (EUR million) 

Subsequent payments had been made in each of the FIs where managing authorities had committed 

programme contributions in funding agreements. OP resources of EUR 331 million were paid to 

FIs, including EUR 240 million ESF and EUR 15 million YEI. National co-financing paid to FIs 

59 

 
 
 
 
 
was EUR 91 million62, of which EUR 84 million was from public resources and EUR 7 million from 

private sources. Private co-financing was reported by 13 FIs in LT and PL. 

Figure 27 Amounts committed in the funding agreements and paid to FIs, end 2020 (EUR)63 

MS 

BG 
CZ 
DE 
ES 
HU 
IT 
LT 
MT 
PL 
PT 
SK 
EU 

OP amount 
committed to FI 
35,803,516 
15,314,373 
170,219,000 
7,000,000 
4,235,977 
307,690,006 
26,810,562 
3,000,000 
93,765,958 
62,291,319 
58,500,000 
784,630,710 

ESF committed 
to FI 
30,450,606 
11,878,210 
103,600,000 
3,500,000 
4,024,178 
188,275,382 
24,546,803 
2,400,000 
79,629,137 
45,000,000 
49,725,000 
543,029,316 

OP amount 
paid to FI 
8,715,913 
3,869,670 
95,284,750 
1,800,000 
1,667,162 
96,319,994 
26,810,562 
3,000,000 
55,046,047 
23,529,412 
14,625,000 
330,668,509 

of which ESF 

of which YEI 

7,390,899 
3,001,412 
59,034,050 
900,000 
1,583,804 
60,570,876 
24,546,803 
2,400,000 
48,128,367 
20,000,000 
12,431,250 
239,987,461 

234,966 
- 
- 
- 
- 
14,712,363 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
14,947,329 

3.2 Support to final recipients 

By the end of 2020, 48 FIs in ten Member States (all those reporting except ES) had committed 

EUR 234 million to final recipients, including EUR 155 million of ESIF. There were 8,978 contract 

signed, each committing over EUR 25,000 of OP resources on average. 

Each  of  these  FIs  had  also  made  payments  to  final  recipients,  totalling  EUR  182  million  of  OP 

resources, of which EUR 120 million was ESIF64. Overall, ESF and YEI paid to final recipients was 

22% of the respective amount committed to FIs, with large differences between Member States (see 

Figure 28). National co-financing of EUR 51 million was paid from both public and private sources. 

62      The  sum  of  ESF,  YEI  and  national  resources  reported  as  paid  to  the  FI  ‘Fondo  Rotativo  Nazionale 

SELFIEmployment’ in IT exceeded the respective OP amounts paid to the FI. 

63     Less YEI resources were reported paid to FIs in HU compared to last year reporting exercise. 

64    OP ESF Bund Deutschland 2014-2020 reported for the first time on resources paid to final recipients. OP resources 

paid to final recipients were reported to be EUR 51 million, of which EUR 30 million ESIF. 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 28 ESF and YEI paid to final recipients as of end 2020, percent of ESF and YEI committed to FIs 

There were 7,976 investments, which paid about EUR 23,000 of OP resources on average, with the 
highest average investment65 in DE (around EUR 34,000) and the lowest in MT (EUR 2,900 set 

aside for guaranteed loans under TO10). 

Payments to final recipients increased by EUR 94 million since the end of 201966. Of these, EUR 

61 million was ESF and YEI, or 11% of ESF and YEI committed to FI. Over EUR 80 million of OP 

resources paid to FIs by the end of 2019 had not yet been invested two years later. 

65   This only considers FIs reporting on both payments to final recipients and the respective number of investments. It 

excludes SK where the number of investments made in final recipients was considered implausible. 

66    Of this, EUR 51 million was paid by OP ESF Bund Deutschland 2014-2020, which reported for the first time on 

resources paid to final recipients. 

61 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 29 Payments to FIs, commitments and payments to final recipients, end 2020 (EUR)67  

of which 
ESIF 

of which 
ESIF 

OP amount 
paid to FI 

of which ESF  of which YEI 

OP amount 
committed to 
final 
recipients 
1,838,130 
2,340,155 
8,715,913 
737,632 
1,398,973 
3,869,670 
35,705,092 
59,664,346 
95,284,750 
- 
- 
1,800,000 
1,583,804 
1,855,534 
1,667,162 
24,783,281 
80,619,389 
96,319,994 
18,974,309 
21,509,949 
26,810,562 
373,842 
877,632 
3,000,000 
30,455,672 
37,611,999 
55,046,047 
3,752,034 
10,262,395 
23,529,412 
14,625,000 
1,625,891 
17,941,738 
330,668,509  239,987,461  14,947,329  234,082,109  155,075,768  181,689,471  119,829,686 

OP amount 
invested in 
final 
recipients 
2,159,095 
951,016 
57,799,519 
- 
1,667,163 
51,696,350 
21,082,565 
467,303 
37,261,721 
6,691,928 
1,912,813 

7,390,899 
3,001,412 
59,034,050 
900,000 
1,583,804 
60,570,876 
24,546,803 
2,400,000 
48,128,367 
20,000,000 
12,431,250 

1,992,031 
1,398,973 
38,080,982 
- 
1,762,756 
39,630,208 
19,358,955 
702,105 
30,735,797 
6,163,484 
15,250,477 

234,966 
- 
- 
- 
- 
14,712,363 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 

MS 

BG 
CZ 
DE 
ES 
HU 
IT 
LT 
MT 
PL 
PT 
SK 
EU 

The vast majority of FIs68 provided loans or micro-loans, for a total of EUR 121 million. FIs only 

providing  micro-loans  paid  EUR  60  million  to  final  recipients,  with  FIs  in  BG,  DE,  and  LT 

disboursing only this type of loans. Guarantees were provided in MT and PT, and equity in DE, PL, 

PT and SK. 

Overall, 18 FIs in CZ, IT, MT, PL, PT and SK reported support combined with FIs in the sense of 

Article  37(7)  CPR,  which  establishes  that  FIs  may  be  combined  with  grants,  interest  rate  or 

guarantee fee subsidies. By the end of 2020, these FIs paid about EUR 25 million of OPs resources 

to  final  recipients  and  only  a  tiny  amount  of  other  support  combined  within  the  FI  i.e.,  in  one 

operation. CPR rules for the 2021-2027 programming period extend the combination options and 

allow disbursement of the combined support directly to final recipients. This will make it easier for 

managing authorities to expand the reach of FI support through such combinations.  

67   Payments from ESF, YEI and national resources were reported to exceed OP amounts paid to one FI in IT. 

68   Information on the type of products an FI offers is not provided at the fund of funds level, but only at the level of 

payments to final recipients. 

62 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
3.3 Final recipients supported 

As  at  the  end  of  2020,  FIs  supported  over  7,960  final  recipients69,  of  which  4,047  were 

microenterprises and 3,557 individuals (Figure 30). Two out of three final recipients were provided 

with loans. 

Figure 30 Number and type of final recipients supported by product, end 2020 

Product 
Loans 
Guarantees 
Equity 
Total 

Large 
enterprises 
- 
- 
1 
1 

SMEs 
3,090 
- 
1,308 
4,398 

of which 
microenterprises 
2,879 
- 
1,168 
4,047 

Individuals 
2,208 
1,349 
- 
3,557 

Other 
7 
- 
1 
8 

Total 
5,305 
1,349 
1,310 
7,964 

Support was provided only to SMEs in CZ, DE, HU and LT, while BG and PL also strongly focused 

on SMEs. MT only supported individuals by providing guarantees. 

Figure 31 Number of final recipients supported by Member State, end 2020 

DE  HU 
1,295  106  2,389  1,085  177  1,488  1,179  1 

PT  SK  Total 
7,964 

LT  MT  PL 

IT 

Member State 
Number of final recipients  238 

BG  CZ 
6 

3.4 Management costs and fees 

Member States reported over EUR 10 million of management costs and fees paid from OP resources. 

Of these, EUR 4.9 million or 48% was paid as performance-based remuneration. 

In 2007-2013, management costs paid to implementing bodies were calculated on the basis 

of  amounts  contributed  to  the  FI  and  were,  in  many  cases,  decoupled  from  performance. 

Based on lessons learned, management costs and fees in 2014-2020 are linked to performance 

in  delivering  funds  to  final  recipients.  Applicable  thresholds  and  criteria  for  determining 

management costs and fees on the basis of performance are set out in Articles 12 and 13 of 

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 480/2014. These aim at increasing the efficiency 

and effectiveness of investments and avoiding undesirable practices such as double charging 

costs to both final recipients as well as ESF and YEI. 

69   Although resources were paid to final recipients by OP ESF Sachsen, the programme reported that no final recipients 

were supported. 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
The performance-based approach should consider disbursement of contributions provided by 

ESF  and  YEI,  resources  paid  back  from  investments  or  from  the  release  of  resources 

committed for guarantees, as well as the quality of measures before and after the investment 

decision to maximise its impact and the contribution of the FI to the objectives and outputs 

of the programme.  

FIs indicating that management costs and fees have not yet been paid to implementing bodies by the 

end of 2020 were paid EUR 144 million of OP resources, most of which in DE and IT. Overall, of 

the OP resources paid to these FIs, EUR 55 million were disboursed to FIs having signed a funding 

agreement by the end of 2018. Two FIs in IT and PT did not report on management costs and fees70, 

possibly indicating that no management costs and fees were to be paid from the OP contributions. 

3.5 Interest and gains from treasury management, and amounts repaid and reinvested 

By  the  end  of  2020,  accrued  interest  and  gains  attributable  to  ESF  totalled  EUR  10  million71. 

Negative interest and gains were reported by some FIs in BG, DE and IT. 

Article 43 of the CPR clarifies how managing authorities should deal with interest or other 

gains from the investment of ESF and YEI contributions to FIs. The 2014-2020 rules provide 

for reporting on this from the outset. For 2007-2013, information about treasury management 

was reported only at closure.  

An important characteristic of FIs, in comparison to grants, is that they can generate reflows. These 

include capital repayments, such as loan principal, an exit from an equity participation as well as 

the  release  of  amounts  set  aside  for  guarantees.  Other  gains  include  interest,  guarantee  fees, 

dividends and other gains. 

According to Article 43a and Article 44 of the CPR resources attributable to ESIF support 

paid back to FIs should be used for: 

  Further investments through the same or other FIs;  

70     ‘Fondo Regionale  Occupazione, Inclusione  e Sviluppo’ under the  ‘Calabria ERDF  ESF’ programme and ‘FIS 

Capital’ under the ‘Programa Operacional da Competitividade e Internacionalização’. 

71    FIs with EUR 13 mllion of paid OP resources did not report on interest and gains attributable to ESF. FIs having 

been paid over EUR 37 mllion of OP resources reported no interest and gains generated by ESF payments. 

64 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
  Differentiated treatment of investors operating under the market economy principle; 

  Reimbursement of management costs and fees of the FIs; 

  Covering the losses in the nominal amount of the ESI Funds contribution to the 

financial instrument resulting from negative interest. 

As at the end of 2020, 38 FIs reported that EUR 24 million had been returned which was attributable 

to  support  from  ESF,  or  20%  of  the  ESF  amount  paid  to  final  recipients.  Most  of  the  retuns 

attributable to support from ESF were in LT (almost EUR 8 million) and PL (EUR 7 million). 

3.6 Value of equity participation 

The value of equity participations made by venture capital funds or co-investment facilities depends 

on the performance of the enterprises in which they invest. The value may increase or decrease but 

reflows are only available at the moment of an exit, which may happen many years after the initial 

investment. 

In order to have information on progress, managing authorities report on the value of equity 

participations.  This  is  the  book  value  of  the  investment  at  the  end  of  the  reporting  year. 

Depending on the applicable accounting rules: ‘Book value = nominal value of investments 

adjusted for fair-value movement, less impairments of assets’. 

By the end of 2020, DE, PL, PT and SK had made equity investments in final recipients. Investments 

were by far the largest in DE (EUR 50 million or 85% of the total). However, the respective value 

of equity participations was not reported. SK reported the same value for the investment and the 

equity participations, possibly indicating that an updated evaluation of the participations had still to 

be carried out. 

65 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.7 Leverage 

Reporting on non-OP resources mobilised through FIs and expected leverage is only obligatory in 

annual implementation reports in 2017, 2019 and the final report. While such reporting was optional 

this  year,  many  FIs  still  did  report  on  their  expected  leverage.  Overall,  EUR  640  million  of  OP 

resources was committed to FIs reporting on expected leverage. Achieved leverage figures could 
also be calculated for FIs to which over EUR 610 million of OP resources was committed72. 

The  ability  to  attract  additional  resources  is  a  key  characteristic  of  FIs  and  one  of  the 

arguments for promoting their use to deliver ESIF policy objectives. A definition of leverage 

is provided in the Financial Regulation (EU, Euratom 2018/1046) in Article 2(38) as ‘the 

amount of reimbursable financing provided to eligible final recipients divided by the amount 

of the Union contribution’. 

The CPR refers to the 'expected leverage effect', which is established on the basis of the ex-

ante assessment and signature of the funding agreement with the body implementing the FI. 

After launching the FI, there is an 'achieved leverage effect'. Additional resources, and hence 

leverage, can be accumulated at the levels of fund of funds (if applicable), specific funds and 

final recipients.  

In the reporting, managing authorities provide the expected leverage stipulated in the funding 

agreement for each FI. Achieved leverage is calculated under SFC2014 to ensure coherence 

across OPs and FIs. The formula for achieved leverage is:  

 Total amount which reached eligible 
 final recipients as at the end of a reported year  

Achieved leverage effect =      -------------------------------------------------------------- 
                                                       Eligible ESIF support which contributed to the 
                                                           total amount indicated in the numerator  

The  total  finance  which  reached  eligible  final  recipients  is  the  sum  of  the  (1)  ESIF 

contribution;  (2)  national  co-financing  (public  or  private);  (3)  contributions  from  other 

investors, and (4) other forms of support combined in a single FI operation. 

ESIF  support,  which  contributed  to  the  amount  reaching  final  recipients,  includes  ESIF 

resources invested in final recipients and the ESIF share of management costs and fees. 

72    The loan FI ‘Fondo Microcredito FSE’, set-up under the OP ‘Sardegna FSE’ in IT, was excluded from the analysis, 

as its reported achieved leverage of above 20 was considered to be possibly inaccurate. 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
                                                 
Expected leverage for loan FIs ranged between 1.0 and 2.0, with the typical i.e., median value being 

1.2.  Achieved  leverage  for  loan  FIs  showed  a  similar  range  and  typical  value,  showing  that  FI 

capacity to mobilise additional finance was aligned with initial managing authority expectations. 

Loan FIs mobilised EUR 8 million of private resources at the level of the final recipients, mostly in 

PL. 

Expected leverage was also reported for seven guarantee FIs, ranging from 2.0 to 7.8, and five equity 

FIs (between 1.6 and 2.1). Where achieved leverage could be calculated for some of these FIs - two 

guarantee  and  four  equity  FIs  –  it  was  broadly  in  line  with  expected  leverage  stipulated  in  the 

funding agreement. Overall, EUR 1.2 million was set aside for EUR 7.3 million of guaranteed loans 

paid to final recipients in MT and PT. 

3.8 Indicators and achievements  

Information concerning the FI contribution to priority axis indicators is compulsory in 2017, 2019 

and at closure. Indicator information was therefore optional for this reporting exercise. 

Of 58 specific funds, under or without a fund of funds, 19 reported on contribution to the priority 

axis using common indicators. These FIs supported 825 unemployed people, including long-term 

unemployed (CO01), or 5% of their 15,273 target, and 447 inactive people (CO03) of the 3,720 

targeted (12%). In addition, 374 participants with tertiary education (ISCED 5 to 8) were supported, 

or 8% of the respective target (4,834). 

Specific targets should be fixed in the funding agreements against which progress is reported. 

Reporting  is  no  longer  limited  to  only  one  indicator  'jobs  created'  as  in  the  2007-2013 

programming  period.  Managing  authorities  can  choose  from  a  list  of  output  indicators 

approved in the OPs. 

Overall, 106 SMEs (including cooperative and social economy enterprises) were supported (CO23), 

or 5% of the respective target (2,066). The reported achieved value was only a tiny fraction of the 

supported SMEs (see section 3.3). This can be attributable to optional reporting and some FIs not 

using common indicators, as well as due to approaches used by managing authorities to report on 

indicators e.g., reporting on indicators only at a later stage of FI implementation. 

67 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.   Reporting by thematic objectives 

Although reporting  on specific amounts under TOs  is  not a legal  obligation under the CPR, this 

information was reported for all funds of funds and specific funds without a fund of fund structure. 

About EUR 377 million or over two thirds of ESF commitments to FIs were for TO8, while EUR 

90 million  and EUR 75 million were committed for TO10 and TO9. The highest  ESF resources 

committed to TO10 and TO9 were in IT and PL respectively (see Figure 32). 

Figure 32  ESF amounts committed per TO and Member State, end 2020 (EUR million) 

With EUR 21 million of ESIF resources paid to final recipients by the end of 2020, TO9 had the 

highest  rate  of  disbursement  of  committed  resources  (28%).  FIs  with  ESF  and  YEI  resources 

committed  to  TO8  paid  about  a  fourth  of  their  committed  amounts  to  final  recipients  (EUR  94 

million out of EUR 377 million committed). FIs addressing TO10 reported little progress (EUR 5 

million), also given to most resources having been committed only at a later stage in the 2014-2020 

programming period. 

68 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.  Conclusions 

By the end of 2020, EUR 785 million of OP resources were committed to FIs, of which EUR 543 

million was ESIF. This is about 0.6% of the ESF and YEI resources for the 2014-2020 programming 

period and below the amount indicatively planned for FIs (EUR 773 million or 0.8% of the ESF and 

YEI  resources).  Indicatively  planned  resources  exceeded  ESF  and  YEI  committed  amounts 
especially in RO and IT, for a total of over EUR 200 million73. 

Overall,  OP  amounts  committed  to  FIs  decreased  by  EUR  35  million  compared  to  the  latest 

reporting exercise, with a considerable decrease in PT (EUR 49 million) and additional resources 

committed in IT (EUR 18 million). ES reported for the first time on OP resources committed to FIs. 

Of the committed resources, EUR 330 million was paid to FIs, including EUR 240 million of ESF 

and 15 million of YEI. 

By  the  end  of  2020,  ESF  and  YEI  disbursements  to  final  recipients  were  22%  of  the  respective 

amounts committed to the FIs, with a modest increase compared to the latest reporting exercise. 

There were no payments yet to final recipients in ES, while very limited progress - less than 10% of 

ESF and YEI committed to financial instruments - was reported in BG, CZ, HU, IT, PT and SK. FIs 

with resources committed to TO9 had a slightly higher rate of disbursement to final recipients. 

Member States reported that almost EUR 10 million of management costs and fees had been paid 

from OP resources, while accrued interest and gains from treasury management attributable to ESF 

also totalled EUR 10 million. Overall, EUR 24 million had been repaid to FIs which was attributable 

to support from ESF, or 20% of the ESF amount paid to final recipients. 

Information  reported  on  leverage  indicates  a  limited  capacity  of  ESF  and  YEI  contributions  to 

mobilise  additional  finance.  While  this  is  in  line  with  managing  authority  expectations,  it  also 

reflects the risks involved in financing the type of final recipents supported by these FIs, such as 

unemployed  and  inactive  people.  In  addition,  a  small  average  investment  size  implies  higher 

transaction  costs,  which  makes  it  harder  to  attract  investors.  Overall,  EUR  8  million  of  private 

resources were mobilised by loan FIs at the level of the final recipients and EUR 21 million through 

equity FIs, most of which in PL and DE respectively. 

73    Indicative planned amounts refer to resources programmed for FIs as set out based on Article 96(2)(b)(vi) CPR. 
Resources committed to FIs refers to data  transmitted by managing authorities based onaccording to Article 46 
CPR.  

69 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Substantial efforts have been made over the years by the Commission to improve the quality of data 

by  providing  guidance.  Nonetheless,  quality  checks  identified  some  potential  improvements 

concerning  the  completeness  and  accuracy  of  data.  ESF  managing  authorities  are  invited  to  pay 

particular attention to these elements for the next reporting exercise. 

70 

 
 
 
 
EAFRD 

Tables  

Table 1 RDP amounts programed to FIs and committed in the funding agreements as of end of 
2020 (in million EUR) ...................................................................................................... 78 
Table 2 Take-up of FIs, investments in final recipients (in million EUR) ............................... 81 
Table 3 Final recipients supported by EAFRD FIs, by end of 2020 ........................................ 82 
Table 4 EAFRD amounts committed under FIs funding agreements to rural development focus 
areas (in million EUR) ..................................................................................................... 96 
Table 5 EAFRD amounts committed by Thematic objective, as of end of 2020 (in million EUR)
 .......................................................................................................................................... 99 

Figures 
Figure 1  Progress in setting-up of FIs under EAFRD until end of 2020 (number of RDPs/FIs)75 
Figure 2 Development of programming FIs and amounts committed in Funding Agreements (M 

EUR) ................................................................................................................................. 75 

Figure 3 RDP amounts programmed for FIs in 2020 compared to 2019 in 

EUR…………………………………..76 

Figure 4 EAFRD commitments to FIs per measure, as of end of 2020 (in million EUR & %)77 
Figure 5 Distribution of EAFRD commitments to financial products under FIs with completed 
implementation structure, as of end of 2020 (in million EUR, %) .................................. 79 
Figure 6 Average EAFRD contribution per product type in EUR ........................................... 83 
Figure 7 Final recipients supported under EAFRD FIs, by RDP and size category ................ 84 
Figure 8 Distribution of FI support among the different holding size categories under EAFRD, by 
end of 2020 (based on nr of supported projects) .............................................................. 84 
Figure 9 Distribution of FI support in million EUR to the different categories of size holdings 

under the EARFD in 
2020……………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………….85 

Figure 10 Distribution of FI support according to the holding size categories, by RDP (based on nr 
of supported projects) ....................................................................................................... 85 
Figure 11 Distribution of FI support among the different sub-sectors under the EAFRD, by end of 
2020 .................................................................................................................................. 86 
Figure 12 Distribution of FI support among the different sub-sectors, by RDP (based on nr of 
supported projects) ........................................................................................................... 87 

Figure 13 Amounts paid to final recipient (FR) as percentage of commitments per measure 

(EAFRD) .......................................................................................................................... 88 
Figure 14 Average loan size per measure in EUR (total RDP contribution) ........................... 89 
Figure 15 Management costs and fees paid in EUR, by type of FI, and number of reporting FIs
 .......................................................................................................................................... 90 
Figure 16 Amount of total management costs and fees paid in EUR and as percentage of payments 
to the FI, by end of 2020 .................................................................................................. 91 
Figure 17 Achieved  leverage versus expected leverage per type of FI (EAFRD) .................. 93 
Figure 18 EAFRD amounts committed under FIs funding agreements to rural development focus 

areas (%) ........................................................................................................................... 95 

Figure 19 EAFRD amounts committed to FIs by Thematic objective, as of end of 2020 (in %)98 
Figure 20 FI Contributions to the achievement of output indicators till end of 2020 ............ 100 

71 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.  Executive summary  

In 2020, Managing Authorities (MAs) of Rural Development Programmes (RDPs) continued with 
the implementation and set-up of financial instruments under the European Agricultural Fund for 
Rural  Development  (EAFRD).  Implementation  progressed  substantially,  although  the  number  of 
EAFRD financial instruments (FIs) only increased by two between 1 January 2020 and 31 December 
2020. Equity instruments were not set up by the end of 2020. 

By the end of the reporting period (31 December 2020), MAs of 55 RDPs - out of the total 112 - 
had initiated an ex-ante assessment for FIs (in accordance with Article 37 of the CPR). Of these 55, 
43  had  completed  their  assessment.  By  end  of  2020,  FIs  were  programmed  in  33  RDPs  in  13 
Member States (MSs) with a total public budget of EUR 809 million, out of which EUR 610 million 
came from the EAFRD, a small increase compared to 2019.  

By the end of 2020, 33 MAs had launched the selection of implementing bodies and 28 of them had 
signed 30 funding agreements in 11 Member States. Total commitments to FIs increased to EUR 
701 million, EUR 536 million of which were due to the EAFRD.74 All EAFRD FIs are tailor-made 
loan and guarantee instruments. 

In 2020, 25 FIs paid money to final recipients (7 more than 2019). MAs have reported EUR 228 
million  of  RDP  contributions  committed  for  final  recipients  in  loan  contracts  or  set  aside  for 
guarantees. The actual payments made to final recipients amounted to EUR 201 million (2019: 109 
million), EUR 150 million (2019: 81 million) of which came from the EAFRD.  

The number of final recipients supported increased by more than three times from 1 372 in 2019 to 
4  403  by  the  end  of  2020,  receiving  support  through  4824  loan  and/or  guarantee  contracts.  The 
proportion of SMEs (including micro-enterprises) reached 99.7%75 of all final recipients. The bulk 
of the SMEs is made up of 3 972 micro-enterprises which made up 90.2% of all final recipients.  

The largest proportion of final recipients belong to the largest farm size category with 50 hectares 
or more. Together with the second largest category of 20-50 hectares, they make up 77% of all the 
final recipients supported by FIs; 11% of the final recipients belong to the size category of below 5 
hectare.  

The share of the primary agricultural sector (incl. wine) in the number of financed projects increased 
from 85% in 2019 to 88% in 2020. Correspondingly, the share of non-agricultural businesses fell to 
12%. 

20  MAs  paid  EUR  6.5  million  for  management  costs  and  fees  (MCF)  to  20  funds  of  funds,  18 
specific funds implemented under a fund of funds and 11 stand-alone specific funds. Out of this, 
EUR  5.0  million  was  reported  to  have  been  paid  as  base  remuneration  and  EUR  1.6  million  as 
performance based remuneration. 

74 Excluding the specific fund of Puglia, which was wound up in October 2020 EUR 698 million were committed to FIs 
out of which 534.5 were EAFRD resources on 31.12.2020. No money was committed or paid to  final recipients 
under this SF. 

75 Individual farms and family farms fall under the enterprise-, most probably microenterprise, category under the EC 

Recommendation 2003/361/EC.  

72 

 
 
 
                                                 
Achieved leverage data was provided by 15 loan and 17 guarantee FIs under 23 RDPs. Loan FIs’ 
achieved leverage value varied between 1.04 and 11.63, with a median76 achieved leverage of 2.06. 
Guarantee FIs’ achieved leverage value varied between 1.23 and 15.42,  with  a median achieved 
leverage of 9.08.  

Loan FIs provided EUR 150.3 million RDP resources via loans to final recipients, including national 
co-finance. Together with additional national public and private financing (excluding national co-
finance, which is already included in the RDP figure), this brings the total to EUR 259.0 million of 
loan financing for final recipients. RDP guarantees generated a loan portfolio of EUR 282.5 million 
with just EUR 51.2 million from RDP resources. In summary, EUR 201.5 million RDP contributions 
generated EUR 541.4 million paid to or to the benefit of final recipients. 

In response to the COVID pandemic, legislation was passed to allow MS to respond quickly. These 
new possibilities introduced by the CRII+ legislation include for example support for stand-alone 
working  capital.  As  at  August  2021,  13  Rural  Development  Programmes  (RDP)  in  8  MSs  offer 
support for stand-alone working capital, an option that was introduced by the CRII+. In total, RDP 
amendments added a total of EUR 94.1 million, covering also non-COVID needs77. 

2.  2020 reporting exercise 

  Data submission and collection 

EAFRD MAs report on the implementation of FIs in the annual implementation report of RDPs, in 
accordance  with  Article  46  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  1303/2013  and  via  the  dedicated  module  in 
SFC201478. 

Data on the EAFRD FIs are reported in SFC2014 on three levels: per RDP (introduction module), 
per financial instrument  (per measure79), and per product(s) provided by the FI. The RDP 2014-
2020 measures relevant for this summary of data are:  M04 - Investments in physical assets (Art. 
17), M06 - Farm and business development (Art. 19), M08 - Investments in forest area development 
and  improvement  of  the  viability  of  forests  (Art.  21-26)  and  M019  –  support  for  leader  local 
development (Art. 42-44). 

76 The  median is the  middle number in a sorted list of  values  and can be  more descriptive  in certain cases  than the 
average. In the case of the leverage of different sized and different structured instruments, the median of leverages 
can better demonstrate the overall picture.  

77 This information is taken from submitted RDP amendments 

78The  first  reporting  exercise  on  FIs  for  RDPs  2014-2020  covering  the  years  2014&2015  was  carried  out  outside 

SFC2014, based on an Excel template completed by the RDP MAs.   

79 Measures with relevance to one or more Union priorities for Rural development in 2014-2020 programming period, 

as listed in Annex VI of Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013. 

73 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
  Quantity and quality of the data provided 

Under EAFRD, all 112 RDPs have to provide basic information on the implementation of FIs (see 
results in Figure ). Detailed reporting was compulsory for 28 RDPs, where the funding agreements 
for FIs were signed by the end of 2020. The quality checks of the AIRs by the Commission revealed 
some discrepancies in FIs data and missing information, which can be due to a number of MAs with 
FIs entering into the roll-out phase. Where necessary, the Commission has informed the EAFRD 
MAs about the quality checks of data through the letters used for the quality assessment process of 
the AIR. Thanks to the close collaboration between DG AGRI services and RDP MAs, the majority 
and most important missing or inaccurate data could be, respectively, completed or corrected.  

Areas with the highest error rates or no data reported:  

identification of the implementing bodies in case of Fund of Funds (FoF) structures; 
identification of the EFSI-EAFRD type of instrument  

- 
- 
-  differentiation  between  the  data  for  the  layer  of  the  FoF  versus  the  SF/FoF  (selection 

procedure, commitments, payments, MCF, additional resources); 
- 
additional national financing amount mistakenly included in the RDP contribution  
-  management cost and fees, broken down by base and performance based remuneration; 
- 
- 

interest and other gains, repaid amounts; 
reporting individual farmers and family farms under the “Individuals” category. 

Following the exchanges with the MAs and all subsequent corrections, the data on FIs reported in 
the 2020 AIRs can be considered reliable and comparable with the 2019 data. All figures reported 
either come directly from the reports by the MAs or are our own calculations based on those reported 
figures unless otherwise indicated. 

3.  Summary of data collected on the set-up of financial instruments under EAFRD 

3.1 Progress in set-up of FInancial instruments and in selection of the implementing bodies  

Programming, ex-ante assessment, selection procedure and funding agreements  

By the end of 2020, 55 out of the 112 RDP MAs had started ex-ante assessments required for setting 
up financial instruments, out of which 43 assessments were completed (Figure 1). 33 RDPs in 11 
Member States80 contained allocations for FI type of support amounting to EUR 809 million (out of 
which  EUR  610  million  EAFRD),  which  is  a  small  increase  compared  to  2019.  33  MAs  had 
launched  the  procedure  to  select  implementing  bodies,  out  of  which  28  signed  3181  funding 
agreements in 11 Member States.  

80 Including  5 RDPs, Castilla-La Mancha, Navarra, Basilicata, Lithuania,  Slovakia  which had not signed a Funding 

Agreement by 31.12.2020. 

81 Including Puglia’s specific Fund which was wound up in October 2020. 

74 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure  1.    Progress  in  setting-up  of  FIs  under  EAFRD  until  end  of  2020  (number  of 
RDPs/FIs) 
60

55

47

45

43

40

39

33

29

28

31

28

26

31

27

25

50

40

30

20

10

25

18

25

18

8

8

0
Ex-ante assessment
initiated

1st selection procedure
launched

Payments from MA to
FIs

Payments to final
recipients

2018

2019

2020

Note: Data on ex-ante assessments and selection procedure show number of RDPs, while data on 
funding agreements, payments and commitments show number of FIs 
**1  FIs  in  Puglia  was  discontinued  in  autumn  2020,  reducing  the  number  of  FIs  and  Funding 
agreements at 31.12.2020 to 30 

Compared to 2019, there has been another increase in commitments made by Managing Authorities 
in signed funding agreements, reaching the level of EUR 701 million total RDP commitment (out 
of  which  EUR  536  million  EAFRD)  (Figure  2),  which  is  87%  of  the  total  programmed  FI 
allocations. For details per RDP, see Table 1.  

Figure 2 Development of programming FIs and amounts committed in Funding Agreements, 
by end of reporting years (million EUR) 

805

809

702

701

651

599

610

502

492

536

488

347

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

RDP amounts
programmed to FIs

out of which EAFRD

RDP amounts
committed to FIs

out of which EAFRD

2018

2019

2020

*excluding Puglia’s specific fund which was wound up in October 2020, EUR 698 million were 
committed to FIs out of which 534.5 were EAFRD resources on 31.12.2020.  

75 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Under the 31 signed Funding Agreements, MAs reported to have paid out 53% (amounting to EUR 
375.1 million) of the committed RDP resources to the implementing bodies till end of 2020.  

The  general  increase  in  programme  contributions  to  FIs  in  RDPs  masks  some  diverging 
developments between RDPs. For example, Greece was the Member State whose RDP added the 
most  money  (green  columns)  compared  to  2019  followed  by  the  region  of  Andalucía  (Spain). 
Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia programmed money for FIs for the first time. On the other end of 
the spectrum (red columns for reductions in the amount programmed for FIs), Canarias and Slovenia 
removed  all  money  from  FIs  and  no  longer  has  a  FI  (see  figure  3  below).  RDPs  not  mentioned 
maintained the amount programmed for FIs. 

Figure 3 RDP amounts programmed for FI in 2020 compared to 2019 in EUR 

80,000,000 €

60,000,000 €

40,000,000 €

20,000,000 €

Greece

Andalucia

Galicia 

Poland

Croatia

Lithuania

Bulgaria

Slovakia

0 €

C
a
n
a
r
i
a
s

-20,000,000 €

-40,000,000 €

S
l
o
v
e
n
a

i

C
a
s
t
i
l
l

a
y
L
e
o
n

A
q
u
i
t
a
n
e

i

P
o
r
t
u
g
a

l

C
o
n
t
i
n
e
n
t
e

94% of EAFRD commitments in funding agreements were made under measure 4 “Investments”, 
while 5% were allocated to measure 6, “Business start-up and development”, and 1% was allocated 
under  measure  8,  “Investments  in  forestry  and  0.5%  under  M19  “Support  for  leader  local 
development” (see Figure 4).This distribution has changed only minimally compared to 2019. 

76 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 4 EAFRD commitments to FIs per measure, as of end of 2020 (in million EUR & %) 

6; 1.1%2.5; 0.5%

26; 4.9%

M04

M06

M08

M19

501; 93.5%

77 

 
 
 
Table 1 RDP amounts programed to FIs and committed in the funding agreements as of end 
of 2020 (in million EUR) 

MS 

RDP 

RDP 
programmed 
for FIs  

of 

out 
which 
EAFRD  

RDP 
amounts 
committed 
to FIs 

of 

out 
which 
EAFRD  

RDP 
committed/ 
programmed 

17,0 

100% 

BG 

DE 

EE 

EL 

ES 

FR 

HR 

IT 

LT 

PL 

PT 

RO 

SK 

Bulgaria 
Mecklenburg-
Vorpommern 
Estonia 

Greece 
Andalucía 
Castilla-La Mancha* 

Castilla y León 

Extremadura 

Galicia 

Navarra* 

Poitou-Charentes 
Aquitaine 
Midi-Pyrénées 
Limousin 
Languedoc-Roussillon 
PACA 
Croatia 
Emilia Romagna 

FVG 

Lombardia 

Piemonte 

Toscana 
Umbria 
Veneto 
Basilicata* 

Calabria 

Campania 

Puglia** 

Lithuania* 

Poland 

Continente 

Romania 

Slovakia* 

Total 

20,0 

5,9 

39,5 

113,9 
50,0 

21,6 

37,5 

5,1 

14,0 

22,6 

2,7 
13,7 
12,0 
4,1 
15,0 
8,0 
85,8 

6,0 

16,1 

35,4 

5,0 

9,8 
19,0 
15,1 

5,0 

10,0 

10,0 

15,0 

8 

68,6 

20,1 

94,0 

1,0 

17,0 

5,0 

35,5 

110,0 
42,5 

18,8 

24,9 

3,8 

10,5 

7,0 

2,0 
8,6 
6,4 
3,0 
9,5 
5,0 
73,0 

2,6 

6,9 

15,2 

2,2 

4,2 
8,2 
6,5 

3,0 

6,1 

6,1 

9,1 

6,8 

43,7 

18,5 

87,8 

0,8 

20,0 

5,9 

39,5 

80,0 
50,0 

0 

37,5 

5,1 

14,0 

0 

2,7 
13,7 
12,0 
4,1 
15,0 
8,0 
85,8 

6,0 

16,1 

35,4 

5,0 

9,8 
5,0 
15,0 

0 

10,0 

10,0 

13,0 

0 

68,6 

20,1 

93,9 

0 

5,0 

35,5 

80,0 
42,5 

0 

24,9 

3,8 

10,5 

0 

2,0 
8,6 
6,4 
3,0 
9,5 
5,0 
73,0 

2,6 

6,9 

15,2 

2,2 

4,2 
2,2 
6,5 

0 

6,1 

6,1 

7,9 

0 

43,7 

18,5 

87,8 

0,0 

100% 

100% 

70% 
100% 

0% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 
26% 
100% 

0% 

100% 

100% 

87% 

0% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

87% 

809,4 

609,9 

701,2 

536,3 

*Lithuania, Navarra, Castilla-La Mancha, Basilicata and Slovakia have not had not signed a FA 
in 
**Puglia’s second FI was discontinued in  October 2020; without  it Puglia committed EUR 10 
million to FIs, out of which EUR 6.1 million were EAFRD resources 

2020   

78 

 
 
  
  Implementation arrangements and legal status of FIs 

All EAFRD FIs are set up at national or regional level. In total 26 FIs were created in accordance 
with Article 38(1)(b) of the CPR, while another 5 FIs (Portugal, Greece, and the region of  Nouvelle 
Aquitaine in France) combine resources of EFSI and EAFRD in accordance with Article 38(1)(c) 
of the CPR. EAFRD Managing Authorities did not contribute to the SME Initiative or other EU 
level instruments under Article 38(1)(a) of the CPR.  

Instead  of  investing  in  capital  or  managing  directly,  all  EAFRD  MAs  have  decided  to  entrust 
implementation tasks, either through a direct award of a contract as did 23 FIs (5 of them used direct 
award  of  contract  to  combine  EFSI-EAFRD  resources),  or  through  entrustment  to  a  body  under 
public or private law in 8 cases. 

EIF has been entrusted to implement 15 FIs out of the 31, while 10 FIs are implemented by bodies 
governed by public or private law, 4 FIs are implemented by publicly owned bank or institution, 
and 2 FI are implemented by the EIB. 

The implementation is arranged through a Fund of Funds structure under 20 FIs (EUR 441 million 
of  RDP  commitment,  out  of  which  EUR  351.5  million  is  EAFRD),  having  25  Specific  Funds 
(SF/FoF).Single-layer Specific Funds are entrusted for the implementation of 11 FIs (EUR 269.5 
million RDP resources, out of which EUR 185 million is EAFRD). 

Only Croatia82 implements its FIs both through Fund of Funds and through Specific Funds. (SFs) 
The French region of PACA implements two SFs. 

Looking at the instruments which are up and running (established Specific Funds and Specific Funds 
under FoFs), the share of guarantee instruments of total EAFRD commitments is increasing after a 
slow start, reaching 54% of EAFRD commitments (EUR 226 million) by the end of 2020. The loan 
instruments in implementation account for 46% of the EAFRD commitments, (EUR 195.6 million; 
see Figure 5). Looking at the total RDP commitments (including the national public co-financing 
amounts),  the  commitments  to  guarantee  instruments  also  exceeded  the  commitments  to  loan 
instruments (EUR 364 million versus EUR 250 million).  

Figure 5 Distribution of EAFRD commitments to financial products under FIs with completed 
implementation structure, as of end of 2020 (in million EUR, %) 

226.2, 54%

195.6, 46%

loans

guarantees

82 Puglia did the same until it wound up its specific fund in October 2020 

79 

 
 
 
                                                 
3.2 Investments in final recipients, performance of financial instruments 

Overall  2583  instruments  (under  28  RDPs)  committed  EUR  228  million  RDP  support  to  final 
recipients, which is almost twice as much the amount of 2019. Similarly, disbursements – or in the 
case of guarantees set aside for guaranteeing disbursed loans - to final recipients almost doubled to 
EUR 201 million of RDP resources (see Table 2). Compared to the total RDP payments made to 
implementing bodies, this implies an overall disbursement rate of 43% by the end of 2020.  

The Italian Friuli-Venezia-Giulia (FVG) loan fund absorbed its entire budget already by 2018, while 
the oldest operational EAFRD FI, the Estonian loan fund, reached 98% disbursement of the total 
RDP resources committed to the FI. The Bulgarian instruments is a newcomer and it has not yet 
disbursed money to final recipients (FRs) by the end of the reporting period. 

Progress was rapid in Midi-Pyrénées, Croatia, and Romania. Their disbursement rates more than 
doubled  to  60%,  50%  and  39%  respectively.  Poland  and  Castilla  y  León  (Spain)  each  roughly 
quintupled their disbursement rates.  

Lombardia’s  disbursement  rate  rose  by  almost  20%  points  to  47%.  The  German  region  of 
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern  managed  to  double  its  disbursement  rate  in  2020  to  24%,  given  its 
widening of the targeted groups.  

Poitou-Charentes and Limousin achieved a disbursement rate of 17% during their first year of being 
fully operational, Aquitaine 29%. 

Concerning  Table  2  one  should  keep  in  mind  that  Puglia  discontinued  one  of  its  two  financial 
instruments in October 2020 which is why the table shows the figure for both FIs. The figures for 
the remaining FI in Puglia are EUR 10 million to committed FIs, out of which 6.1 million were 
EAFRD resources and it paid 2.5 million to its FI out of which 1.5 million were EAFRD resources. 

The Table 2 shows the figures for both of Puglia’s FIs. For the remaining FI the RDP amount paid 
to FI is EUR 2.5 million, out of which 1.5 million are EAFRD resources. The RDP and EAFRD 
amount committed to FRs are the same as those paid to FRs, EUR 0.6 million out of which EUR 
0.4 million are EAFRD resources.                                           

83 Puglia’s second FIs did not commit any money to final recipients before it was wound up.  

80 

 
 
 
                                                 
 
Table 2 Take-up of FIs, investments in final recipients (in million EUR) 

ES 

FR 

RDP 

MS 
BG 
Bulgaria 
DE  Mecklenburg-
Estonia 
EE 
Vorpommern 
Greece 
EL 
Andalucía 
Castilla y León 
Extremadura 
Galicia 
Poitou-Charentes 
Aquitaine 
Midi-Pyrénées 
Limousin 
Languedoc-Roussillon 
PACA 
Croatia 
Emilia Romagna 
FVG 
Lombardia 
Piemonte 
Toscana 
Umbria 
Veneto 
Calabria 
Campania 
Puglia* 
Lithuania 
Poland 
Continente 
Romania 
Total 

LT 
PL 
PT 
RO 

HR 

IT 

RDP amounts 
committed to 
FIs 
20,0 
5,9 
39,5 
80,0 
50,0 
37,5 
5,1 
14,0 
2,739 
13,7 
12,0 
4,1 
15,0 
8,0 
85,8 
6,0 
16,1 
35,4 
5,0 
9,8 
5,0 
15,0 
10,0 
10,0 
13,0 
0 
68,6 
20,1 
93,9 
701,2 

out of 
which 
EAFRD  
17,0 
5,0 
35,5 
80,0 
42,5 
24,9 
3,8 
10,5 
2,0 
8,6 
6,4 
3,0 
9,5 
5,0 
73,0 
2,6 
6,9 
15,2 
2,2 
4,2 
2,2 
6,5 
6,1 
6,1 
7,9 
0 
43,7 
18,5 
87,8 
536,3 

RDP 
amounts 
paid to 
FIs 
5,0 
2,5 
39,5 
20,0 
12,5 
22,1 
1,2 
3 
2,7 
13,7 
12,0 
4,1 
15,0 
1,7 
67,6 
1,5 
16,1 
16,6 
1,3 
2,5 
1,3 
3,8 
2,5 
2,5 
3,3 
0 
16,5 
5,0 
70,4 
365,6 

out of 
which 
EAFRD 
4,3 
2,1 
35,5 
20,0 
10,6 
13,9 
0,9 
2,25 
2,0 
8,6 
6,4 
3,0 
9,5 
0,0 
57,5 
0,6 
6,9 
7,2 
0,5 
1,1 
0,5 
1,6 
1,5 
1,5 
2,0 
0 
10,5 
4,6 
65,8 
280,8 

Payment rate 
to FIs 
 (vs total RDP 
commitments) 
25% 
42% 
100% 
25% 
25% 
59% 
23% 
21% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
21% 
79% 
25% 
100% 
47% 
25% 
25% 
25% 
25% 
25% 
25% 
25% 
0%  
24% 
25% 
75% 
52% 

RDP amount 
committed to 
FRs or set 
aside for 
guarantees 
0,0 
1,4 
39,3 
0,2 
0,0 
12,2 
0,0 
0,0 
0,5 
4,6 
7,4 
0,8 
6,7 
1,1 
43,8 
4,3 
16,1 
32,5 
0,2 
0,4 
0,0 
0,3 
0,5 
0,2 
0,6 
0,0 
14,5 
1,5 
38,6 
227,7 

out of 
which 
EAFRD 
0,0 
1,2 
35,4 
0,2 
0,0 
7,7 
0,0 
0,0 
0,3 
2,2 
3,9 
0,4 
4,2 
0,0 
36,5 
0,9 
6,9 
14,0 
0,1 
0,2 
0,0 
0,1 
0,3 
0,1 
0,4 
0,0 
9,2 
1,3 
36,0 
161,6 

RDP amount 
invested in 
FR or set 
aside for 
guarantees 
0,0 
1,4 
38,5 
0,2 
0,0 
12,2 
0,0 
0,0 
0,5 
4,0 
7,2 
0,7 
6,0 
0,8 
43,0 
0,5 
16,1 
16,5 
0,2 
0,4 
0,0 
0,3 
0,5 
0,2 
0,6 
0,0 
14,5 
0,8 
36,4 
201,4 

Disbursement rate 

out of 
which 
EAFRD 
0,0 
1,2 
34,7 
0,2 
0,0 
7,7 
0,0 
0,0 
0,2 
1,9 
3,8 
0,3 
3,8 
0,0 
36,5 
0,2 
6,9 
7,1 
0,1 
0,2 
0,0 
0,1 
0,3 
0,1 
0,4 
0,0 
9,2 
0,7 
34,0 
149,7 

in relation to 
RDP comts. 
to FIs 
 - 
24% 
98% 
0% 
0% 
32% 
0% 
0% 
17% 
29% 
60% 
17% 
40% 
10% 
50% 
8% 
100% 
47% 
3% 
4% 
0% 
2% 
5% 
2% 
5% 
0% 
21% 
4% 
39% 
28% 

in relation 
to RDP 
payments 
to FIs 
 - 
57% 
98% 
1% 
0% 
55% 
0% 
0% 
17% 
29% 
60% 
17% 
40% 
47% 
64% 
33% 
100% 
100% 
14% 
16% 
0% 
7% 
21% 
7% 
18% 
0% 
88% 
15% 
52% 
43% 

in relation 
to RDP 
comts. to 
FR 
recipients 
 - 
100% 
98% 
100% 
0% 
100% 
0% 
0% 
87% 
87% 
98% 
87% 
89% 
73% 
98% 
12% 
100% 
51% 
100% 
91% 
0% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
96% 
0% 
100% 
52% 
94% 
91% 

81 

 
 
 
  
The number of final recipients supported by the EAFRD more than tripled to 4403 (through 
4824 financing contracts) against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic by end of 2020.  
About  64%  of  the  financing  contracts  were  made  under  guarantee  FIs,  while  36%  of  them 
originated from loans (see Table 3). This is a change from last year when the majority was due 
to loan instruments.  

Table 3 Final recipients supported by EAFRD FIs, by end of 2020 

large 
enter-
prises 
 A 
0 

y 

0 

3 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 
0 

RDP 
Bulgaria 
Mecklenburg-
Vorpommern 
Estonia 
Greece 
Castilla 
León 
Extremadura  0 
0 
Galicia 
Poitou-
Charentes 
Aquitaine 
Midi-
Pyrénées 
Limousin 
Languedoc-
Roussillon 
PACA 
Croatia 
Emilia 
Romagna 
FVG 
Lombardia 
Piemonte 
Toscana 
Umbria 
Veneto 
Calabria 
Campania 
Puglia 
Poland 
Continente 
Romania 
Total 
percentage 

0 
0 

0 

0 
7 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
2 
13 
0,3% 

out 
of 
which  are 
micro-
enterprises 
0 

Other 
 C 
0 

SMEs  
B 
0 

Total  nr 
of 
final 
recipients 
supported 
 A+B+C 
0 

Total  nr 
of 
loan 
contracts 
signed 
with final 
recipients 
0 

Total  nr 
of 
guarantee 
contracts 
final 
for 
recipients 
0 

Total  nr 
of 
financing 
contracts 
signed 
0 

3 

216 
1 

356 

0 
0 

19 

160 

275 

28 

262 

22 
878 

9 

3 

195 
1 

304 

0 
0 

19 

159 

270 

28 

241 

0 
835 

2 

31 
0 
1 
6 
0 
0 
3 
0 
10 
1.527 
22 
315 
3972 

57 
12 
2 
9 
0 
3 
6 
2 
15 
1.604 
30 
421 
4379 
99,7%  90,2% 

0 

0 
0 

0 

0 
0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 
0 

0 

3 

216 
1 

359 

0 
0 

19 

160 

275 

28 

262 

22 
878 

9 

57 
19 
2 
9 
0 
3 
6 
2 
15 
1604 
31 
423 
4403 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0,0%  100,0% 

6 

232 
0 

0 

0 
0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

21 
871 

0 

57 
22 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
549 
1758 
36,4% 

0 

0 
1 

408 

0 
0 

22 

189 

330 

34 

312 

12 
7 

9 

0 
0 
3 
10 
0 
3 
8 
2 
15 
1670 
31 
0 
3066 
63,6% 

6 

232 
1 

408 

0 
0 

22 

189 

330 

34 

312 

33 
878 

9 

57 
22 
3 
10 
0 
3 
8 
2 
15 
1670 
31 
549 
4824 
100,0% 

*  PACA and Croatia have two Funding Agreements for implementing FIs. Puglia had two until 
October 2020. 

82 

 
 
Croatia was the RDP with most recipients with 420 in 2019 and reached 878 final recipients in 
2020. Poland reached 1604 FRs in 2020 during its first full year of implementation. For both 
RDPs the overwhelming number of FRs are micro-enterprises, which holds true for most RDPS. 
However,  the  Italian  RDPs  of  Emilia-Romagna  and  Lombardia  have  more  SMEs  or  large 
enterprises than micro-enterprises. About half of all the large enterprises supported under the 
EAFRD can be found in Lombardia (7 out of 13).  

Romania with 423 FRs and Castilla y León with 359 FRs both roughly doubled their number 
of FRs compared to 2019 as did Midi-Pyrenées. Aquitaine reached 160 FRs in its first year of 
operation.   

6 

Average 

loan 

size 

per 

product 

type 

in 

EUR

Figure 
100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

0 €

100,000 €

200,000 €

300,000 €

400,000 €

500,000 €

600,000 €

700,000 €

800,000 €

average loan investment

average loan investment backed by guarantee contracts

*One guarantee instrument from Croatia and one loan instrument from FVG have not been included in the graph 
as the size of 1 million and 1.4 million respectively would distort the graph. This graph includes financing related 
to RDP and additional national financing.  

The final recipients of EAFRD FIs are predominantly (99.7%) from the SME category, and 
90% of  all final  recipients  fall under the micro-enterprise  category  (which includes also  the 
family farms and individual farmers without legal entity). This reflects the general size structure 
of the sector. Only 13 large enterprises received finance from EAFRD FIs. See figure 7 on FIs 
with more than 25 final recipients.  

83 

 
 
 
Figure 7 Final recipients supported under EAFRD FIs, by RDP and size category 

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

160

159

216

195

262

241

275

270

356

421

304

315

0

0

28

28

57

31

1,604

1,527

878

835

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

SMEs

 micro- enterprises

Figures in blue and the blue columns show the number of SMEs (incl. microenterprises), 
figures in green and the green line shows the number of microenterprises. FIs under RDPs with 
less than 25 final recipients are not shown on the graph (see Table 3).  

Due to the EAFRD-specific monitoring framework, the MAs are also required to report on the 
sub-sector  and  size  category  of  the  final  recipients  supported  by  the  FIs  under  measure  4, 
“Investments” and measure 6, “Business start-up and development”. Data was reported for the 
majority of the running FIs.  

Size-wise, the distribution of support among the size categories reflect similar proportions when 
looking at the number of supported projects and the related public expenditure disbursed. For 
example,  46%  of  the  supported  projects  belong  to  a  farm  holding  in  the  category  above  50 
hectare. Similarly, 59% of the total public expenditure was disbursed to the farm holdings in 
the same size category. About 23% of the supported projects fall in the size category below 20 
hectare and are receiving 26% of the FI support (related public expenditure; see Figure 9).  

Figure  8  Distribution  of  FI  support  among  the  different  holding  size  categories  under 
EAFRD, by end of 2020 (based on number of supported projects) 

1724, 45.9%

434, 11.6%

184, 4.9%

254, 6.8%

 <5 ha

5-10 ha

10-20 ha

20-50 ha

> 50 ha

1156, 30.8%

84 

 
 
 
 
 
Figure  9  Distribution  of  payments  in  mio  EUR  and  %  of  total  to  different  holding 
categories, differentiated by size under EAFRD in 2020 

27.1, 15.3%

6.3, 3.6%

11.7, 6.6%

27.7, 15.7%

103.8, 58.8%

>50 ha

20-50 ha

10-20 ha

5-10 ha

< 5 ha

Figure  10  Distribution  of  FI  support  according  to  the  holding  size  categories,  by  RDP 
(based on the number of supported projects) 

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

 <5 ha

5-10 ha

10-20 ha

20-50 ha

> 50 ha

In  2020,  the  trend  of  a  shift  in  the  distribution  of  FI  payments  in  favour  of  the  primary 
agricultural  sector  (incl.  field  crops,  granivores,  horticulture,  milk,  mixed,  other  grazing 
livestock, other permanent crops and wine) versus the non-agricultural sector continued.  About 
88% of all financed projects belonged to the primary agricultural sector. The share of projects 
linked to field crops fell a bit to 34%, while the dairy sector increased to ca. 15%. Granivores 
and permanent crops slightly increased their share, while horticulture and wine’s decreased (see 
Figure 11). 

85 

 
 
                 
 
 
 
Figure 11 Distribution of FI support among the different sub-sectors under the EAFRD 
by nr of operations, by end of 2020 

8%

12%

13%

6%

3%

34%

6%

3%

15%

field crops
horticulture
mixed (crops and livestock)
other grazing livestock

granivores
milk
non-agricultural sector (food industry)
other permanent crops

86 

 
 
Figure 12 Distribution of FI support among the different sub-sectors, by RDP (based on nr of supported projects) 

35
37

77
7

185

153

38
25

328

1
8

20

100

31

17

26

2

26

1
1

8

1
3

15

14

6

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

8

12

12
1

16

29

16

34

10

28

86

3

37

36

69

13

24

41

60

13

46

1

4

1

31

37

86

5

37

21

17

22

3

7

2

6

1

5

1

22

2

8

9

7

21

1

1

1

1

2

1

6

1

3

1

1

1

1

3

1

2

127

88

269

229

318

34
62

543

1

8

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

2

6

5

1

1

1

4
2

60

12
11
3
8

448

8
9

58

24

103

21
9

42

133

field crops
milk
other grazing livestock

granivores
mixed (crops and livestock)
other permanent crops

horticulture
non-agricultural sector (food industry)
wine

87 

 
 
 
While  some  RDPs  like  Greece84,  Lombardia85  and  Mecklenburg-Vorpommern  provided 
support in 2020 only to the non-agricultural sector others such as Castilla y León, Croatia and 
Aquitaine provided support to great variety of sectors and mainly to agricultural ones. Toscana, 
Veneto and Campania did not support the non-agricultural sector at all (see Figure 12).  

When it comes to payments to final recipients, those under Measure 4 amounted to EUR 188.5 
million  total  RDP  resources  (out  of  which  EUR  138.1  million  EAFRD).  Payments  to  final 
recipients under Measure 6 amounted to EUR 11.8 million total RDP resources (out of which 
EUR 10.7 million EAFRD). Payments to final recipients under Measure 8 amounted to EUR 
1.1  million  total  RDP  resources  (out  of  which  EUR  0.9  million  EAFRD).  There  were  no 
payments to final recipients under measure 19 yet. However, payments to the FI under M019 
amounted to 2.5 million. Bulgaria signed its FA only in 2020, and it has not yet paid EAFRD 
funds  to  final  recipients  (see  Figure  13  for  a  representation  in  percentages).  The  amount  of 
payments  under  the  respective  reflects  the  programming,  M04  is  the  most  commonly 
programmed measure followed by M06.  

Figure  13  Amounts  paid  to  final  recipient  (FR)  as  percentage  of  commitments  per 
measure (EAFRD) 

M19

M08

M06

M04

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

EAFRD paid to FR

 EAFRD  committed to Fis

Figure  shows the average financing amount under the different measures under the different 
FIs (in the case of loan FIs it shows the loans, while in case of guarantee FIs it shows the average 
loan amount that is guaranteed).  

84 Greece started its implementation in December 2020 

85 Lombardia FI has its focus on food processing 

88 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 14 Average loan size per measure in EUR (total RDP contribution) 

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

0 €

100,000 €

200,000 €

300,000 €

400,000 €

500,000 €

600,000 €

700,000 €

800,000 €

M 06 M 04 M 08

This  graph  does  not  show  investments  by  a  Croatian  guarantee  instrument  as  its  average 
guaranteed loan size of EUR 1.4 million would distort the graph. 

  Management costs and fees 

20 MAs paid EUR 6.5 million for management costs and fees (MCF) to 20 Funds of funds, 18 
specific funds implemented under a Fund of funds and 11 stand-alone specific funds. Out of 
this, EUR 5.0 million was reported to have been paid as base remuneration and EUR 1.6 million 
as performance based remuneration. In total, 20 Fund of Funds reported management costs and 
fees totalling EUR 3.70 million, 18 Specific Funds under FoFs reported EUR 0.89 million and 
11 Specific Funds reported EUR 1.93 million (Figure 15).  

89 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 15 Management costs and fees paid in EUR, by type of FI, and number of reporting 
FIs 

 4,000,000.00

 3,500,000.00

 3,000,000.00

 2,500,000.00

 2,000,000.00

 1,500,000.00

 1,000,000.00

 500,000.00

 -

25

20

15

10

5

0

FoF

FoF/SF

SF

total MCF paid

Base remuneration

Performance based remuneration Number of reporting FIs

Though  the  regulatory  ceilings  are  defined  per  annum  by  closure,  it  can  be  stated  that  the 
EAFRD FIs are majorly far below the legal ceilings86, as of end of 2020. Romania paid most 
for management costs and fees totalling little over EUR 1.5 million, however, being the largest 
in terms of budget EAFRD FI, this fee still constitutes only 2.3% of the RDP amount transferred 
to  the  FI.  Poland  and  Mecklenburg  Vorpommern  paid  relatively  high  amounts  for  MCF  as 
expressed in percentage of EAFRD amounts paid to the FI, but assumedly it is due to the initial 
set-up costs in Poland’s case (see Figure 16). 

Galicia, Andalucía and Friuli-Venezia-Giulia did not report management costs and fees. The 
two Spanish RDPs are at the beginning of their implementation of financial instruments so this 
is to be expected. Estonia also does not report MCF because it does not pay them out of the 
original programme contributions but from re-paid resources, which is in fact a good practice 
as  these  re-paid  resources  become  ownership  of  the  Member  State  and  have  to  be  used  for 
purposes similar to the original one.  

86 Defined in Article 13 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 480/2014. 

90 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 16 Amount of total management costs and fees paid in EUR and as percentage of 
EAFRD payments to the FI, by end of 2020 

 1,600,000

 1,400,000

 1,200,000

 1,000,000

 800,000

 600,000

 400,000

 200,000

 -

9.0%

8.0%

7.0%

6.0%

5.0%

4.0%

3.0%

2.0%

1.0%

0.0%

MCF

MCF as % of EAFRD paid to FI

Note: * The graph shows the paid management costs and fees and the percentages compared 
to the payment to the FI separately for FoF and SF/FoF layer. The graph show only FIs paying 
more than EUR 100 000 in fees. 
** Estonia is not indicated  because it paid management costs and fees from re-paid resources. 

  Interest and other gains generated by support from the EAFRD to the financial 
instrument, resources paid back to financial instrument and amounts repaid and 
reinvested  

Reporting on treasury management is fulfilled by 11 Specific Funds and 17 Fund of Funds. By 
end of 2020, the amount from interest and other gains generated through treasury operations 
was EUR 1.3 million, increasing from EUR 0.82 million in 2019. This amount was generated 
mostly by Romania, another reported almost a minus of 80 000 EUR reflecting the low interest 
environment.  Repaid  resources  are  reported  to  amount  to  EUR  11.0  million,  out  of  which 
Estonia alone reported EUR 5.7 million, followed by Romania which reported EUR 2.9 million 
and  Croatia  which  reported  EUR  1.0  million.  The  resources  re-paid  consisted  of  EUR  7.7 
million capital repayments and EUR 3.3 million gains, other earnings and yields. 

Estonia reported having paid 1.6 mio management cost and fees from re-paid resources  and 
another 3.1 mio EUR of re-used EAFRD Funds. The only other RDP to report that was FVG in 
Italy with 0.44 mio EUR. 

  Performance of the financial instrument, including  leverage 

In line with Article 2(38) of the Financial Regulation, “leverage effect” is defined as the amount 
of  reimbursable  financing  provided  to  eligible  final  recipients  divided  by  the  amount  of  the 
Union contribution. Thus, the smaller the share of Union funding in a financial instrument and 

91 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
in the final financial product reaching the final recipient, the higher the potential leverage effect 
of the instrument. Consequently, the expected leverage of the capped portfolio guarantee of FIs 
are significantly higher than that of the loan type FIs.  

Achieved leverage data was provided by 15 loan and 17 guarantee FIs under 23 RDPs. Loan 
FIs’ achieved leverage value varied between 1.04 and 11.63, with a median87 achieved leverage 
of 2.06. Guarantee FIs’ achieved leverage value varied between 1.23 and 15.42, with a median 
achieved  leverage  of  9.08  (Figure  17).  Guarantee  instruments  achieve  by  their  very  nature 
higher  leverages  than  loans.  The  variations  between  guarantee  instruments  is  due  to  their 
specific design (portfolio guarantee or 1 to 1 guarantee) and characteristics, what final recipients 
they  target,  in  which  sectors  and  so  on.  The  same  applies  to  the  variation  between  loan 
instruments. 

Loan FIs provided EUR 150.3 million RDP resources via loans to final recipients, together with 
additional  national  public  and  private  financing  (excluding  the  RDP  national  co-finance) 
reaching in total EUR 259.0 million loan financing for final recipients. RDP guarantees on the 
other hand generated a loan portfolio of EUR 282.5 million with just EUR 51.2 million from 
RDP  resources.  In  summary,  EUR  201.5  million  RDP  contributions  generated  EUR  541.4 
million paid to or to the benefit of final recipients. Taking all FIs under the RDPs into account, 
EAFRD resources triggered an aggregated leverage of 2.69 of in 2020.  

At the end of the reporting period, one EAFRD FIs was being wound down, Puglia‘s specific 
fund. 

87 The median is the middle number in a sorted list of values and can be more descriptive in certain cases than the 
average.  In  the  case  of  the  leverage  of  different  sized  and  different  structured  instruments,  the  median  of 
leverages can better demonstrate the overall picture. For example, within the achieved leverage range for all 
loan instruments, the median of 2.06 indicates that 50% of the instruments have lower leverage than 2.06, 
while 50% of instruments have higher leverage.  

92 

Figure 17 Achieved leverage versus expected leverage per type of FI (EAFRD) 

e
g
a
r
e
v
e

l

d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

expected leverage

guarantees

loan

Note: *Leverage is calculated per product and per Specific Fund, therefore FIs under RDPs 
might have more than one leverage figures. 
**The graph displays all reported leverage amounts even if 0 is achieved for example because 
the FI is new and no or almost no money has been paid to FR yet. Also the FI that was wound 
down did not report an achieved leverage and was set to 0.  

3.3 Contribution of Financial Instruments to Focus areas and objectives under the cap 

3.3.1  Contribution to rural development focus areas 

Six  EU  Rural  Development  policy  priorities  covering  18  focus  areas  provide  the  basis  for 
rolling out support from the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) 
to  rural  areas.  By  end  of  2020,  Member  States  signed  Funding  Agreements  for  the 
implementation of FIs with EAFRD commitments under the following priorities and focus 
areas:      

 Union Priority 2 Farm Viability and Competitiveness:

o FA  2A  Improving  the  economic  performance  of  all  farms  and  facilitating  farm

restructuring and modernisation;

o FA 2B Generational renewal;
o FA 2C+ Improvement of the sustainability and competitiveness of forest enterprises;

 Union Priority 3 Food Chain Organisation and Risk Management:

93 

 
o  FA 3A Improving competitiveness of primary producers by better integrating them 

into the agri-food chain;           

  Union Priority 4 Restoring, preserving and enhancing ecosystems related to agriculture 

and forestry:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
o  FA  4A  Restoring,  preserving  and  enhancing  biodiversity  and  high  nature  value 

farming; 

  Union Priority 5 Resource-efficient, Climate-resilient Economy: 
o  FA 5A Increasing efficiency in water use by agriculture; 
o  FA 5C Facilitating the supply and use of renewable sources of energy;  
o  FA 5D Reducing green house gas and ammonia emissions from agriculture; 

  Union 

Priority 

Inclusion 
FA 6A Facilitating diversification, creation and development  of small  enterprises, as 
well as job creation; 

Social 

and 

6 

Economic  Development:                                                                                                                                                                                  

  FA 6B Fostering local development in rural areas. 

The indicative allocations in Funding Agreements by end of 2020 shows that MAs increased 
the allocations to projects aiming at improving competitiveness both under FA 2A and 3A, 
reaching the level of 56% and 34% of all EAFRD commitments respectively, and together 
with  FA  2C+  they  represent  90%  of  all  EAFRD  commitments,  the  same  as  2019. 
Commitments  to  focus  areas  FA  6A  Diversification  &  rural  businesses  and  FA  5C 
Renewable  energy  amount  to  ca.    5%  and  2%  respectively.  Commitments  to  FA  2B 
Generational  renewal  remain at  2%. New is  that money was committed to  6B, fostering 
local development this year, 5% of all commitments (see Table 4 and Figure 18).  

94 

 
 
 
Figure  18  EAFRD  amounts  committed  under  FIs  funding  agreements  to  rural 
development focus areas (%) 

1.7%

0.1%

0.1%

0.3%

0.5%

4.6%

56.1%

33.8%

0.7%

2.0%

2A

2B

2C+

3A

4A

5A

5C

5D

6A

6B

95 

Table  4  EAFRD  amounts  committed  under  FIs  funding  agreements  to  rural 
development focus areas (in million EUR) 

2B 

2C+  3A 

4A 

5A  5C  5D  6A 

 3.7  

 5.7  

 5.2  

8.1  

1.6  

1.3  

6B 
 2.5  

Total  
 17.0  

 73.0  

 1.5  

 6.8  

 10.1     

 35.5  

RDP/FA 
Bulgaria  

Croatia  

Estonia   

Poitou-
Charentes 
Aquitaine 
Midi-Pyrénées 
Limousin 
Languedoc-
Roussillon 
PACA 
Mecklenburg-
Vorpommern 
Greece 
Emilia-
Romagna 
Friuli-Venezia 
Giulia 
Lombardia 
Piemonte 
Toscana 
Umbria 
Veneto 
Calabria 
Campania 
Puglia 
Poland  
Portugal 
Continente 
Romania  
Andalucía 

2A 
 13.0  

 47.2  

 19.0  

 2.0  

 8.6  

 3.0  

 3.1  

 32.0  

 0.9  

 3.8  

 0.9  
 1.7  
 0.9  
 0.9  
 3.6  
 3.0  
 5.4  
 13.1  

 18.5  

 79.0  
 25.5  

 5.0  

 0.4  

Castilla y León 

 15.0  

Extremadura 
Galicia 

 1.0  

 4.5  

 1.0  

Total  

 301.0  

 11.0    3.7  

 6.4  

 6.2  

 1.5  

 48.0  

 1.7  

 3.2  

 15.2  
 2.5  
 2.5  
 1.3  
 5.6  
 2.4  
 3.0  
 2.1  
 30.6  

 7.8  
 17.0  

 4.4  

 1.3  
 9.0  

 0.2  

 3.5  

 1.0  

 0.3  

 1.5  
 24.8    2.5  

0.8  

 0.5  

 0.5  

181.4  

0.8  

9.4  

1.6  

 2.0  

 8.6  
 6.4  
 3.0  

 9.5  

 5.0  

 5.0  

 80.0  

 2.6  

 7.0  

 15.2  
 2.2  
 4.2  
 2.2  
 6.5  
 6.1  
 6.1  
 8.0  
 43.7  

 18.5  

 87.8  
 42.5  

 25.0  

 3.8  
 10.5  

 536.4  

*eventual discrepancies are due to all numbers having been rounded.  

 
 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
    
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
    
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
    
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
    
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
    
    
  
  
  
  
  
  
    
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
    
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
3.3.2  Contribution to thematic objectives  

In order to contribute to the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, 
including economic, social and territorial cohesion, each ESI Fund shall provide support 
to a number of thematic objectives defined in the Common Provisions Regulation. EAFRD 
FIs  are  reported  to  pursue  the  following  thematic  objectives,  with  TO9  being  newly 
reported this year, whereas the use of TO5 was not reported anymore. 

-  TO3 - Enhancing the competitiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises, the 
agricultural sector (for the EAFRD) and the fisheries and aquaculture sector (for 
the EMFF) 

-  TO4 - Supporting the shift towards a low-carbon economy in all sectors 

-  TO5 - Promoting climate change adaptation, risk prevention and management  

-  TO6  -  Preserving  and  protecting  the  environment  and  promoting  resource 

efficiency 

-  TO8  -  Promoting  sustainable  and  quality  employment  and  supporting  labour 

mobility 

-  TO9 –Social Inclusion 

Similarly to the tendency demonstrated in relation to the RD focus areas, the EAFRD FI 
allocations are predominantly committed to competitiveness related SME financing (TO3). 
It  received  EUR  496.9  million  as  of  end  of  2020  receiving  93%  of  the  total  funding 
amounting to EUR 536.4 million. TO3 funding increased by EUR 48 million compared to 
2019. The share of commitments going to TO4 and TO8 decreased slightly (see Figure 19 
Table 5).  

97 

 
 
 
 
Figure 19 EAFRD amounts committed to FIs by Thematic objective in million EUR 
and in % , as of end of 2020  

1.3, 0.2%

10.9, 2.0%

21.3, 4.0%

6.0, 1.1%

TO 3

TO 4

TO 6

TO 8

To 9

496.9, 92.6%

98 

Table  5  EAFRD  amounts  committed  by  Thematic  objective,  as  of  end  of  2020  (in 
million EUR) 

RDP/TOs 
Bulgaria 
Mecklenburg 
Vorpommern 
Estonia 
Andalucía 
Castilla y León 
Extremadura 
Galicia 
Poitou-Charentes 
Aquitaine 
Midi-Pyrénées 
Limousin 
Languedoc- 
Roussillon 
PACA 
Greece 
Croatia 
Emilia-Romagna 
Friuli-Venezia 
Giulia 
Lombardia 
Piemonte 
Toscana 
Umbria 
Veneto 
Calabria 
Campania 
Puglia 
Poland 
Portugal 
Continente 
Romania 
Total 

Competitiveness 
 TO3 
 13.0 

 Green 
Growth 
 TO4 

 TO6 

 Inclusive 
Growth 
 TO8 
 1.5 

 TO9 
 2.5 

Total 
 17.0 

 1.5 

 24.2 
 42.5 
 23.9 
 3.3 
 9.0 
 2.0 
 8.6 
 6.4 
 3.0 

 9.3 

 5.0 
 80.0 
 56.5 
 2.6 

 6.9 

 15.2 
 2.2 
 4.2 
 2.2 
 6.5 
 6.0 
 6.0 
 7.9 
 43.7 

 18.5 

 1.3 

 10.1 

 0.8 
 0.5 

 0.3 

 1.5 

 0.2 

 9.7 

 6.8 

 3.5 

 5.0 

 35.5 
 42.5 
 24.9 
 3.8 
 10.5 
 2.0 
 8.6 
 6.4 
 3.0 

 9.5 

 5.0 
 80.0 
 73.0 
 2.6 

 6.9 

 15.2 
 2.2 
 4.2 
 2.2 
 6.5 
 6.0 
 6.0 
 7.9 
 43.7 

 18.5 

 86.8 
 496.9 

 10.9 

 1.3 

 1.0 
 21.3 

 6.0 

 87.8 
 536.4 

*eventual discrepancies are due to all numbers having been rounded.

99 

3.3.3  FIs contributions to the achievement of output indicators 

The information concerning contribution of the FI to the achievement of the programme 
indicators was not compulsory in the annual implementation report submitted in year 2021 
(AIR 2020), consequently only 15 RDPs report on M04 and 5 on M06. Figure 20 indicates 
the aggregated target and achieved output indicators for the FIs.  

Figure 20 FI Contributions to the achievement of output indicators 2020 

Indicators 

Target value  Achieved value 

Achievement 
rate 

21,8% 

29,0% 

46,6% 

56,4% 

53,1% 

64,7% 

6,6% 

71,4% 

M04 

M06 

O1  Total  public 
expenditure 
O2 
investment 

Total 

728.281.734 

158.572.091 

1.101.416.978  319.939.833 

of 

O3 Nr. of actions 
operations 
supported 
O4 
Nr 
holdings 
beneficiaries 
supported 
O1  Total  public 
expenditure 
O2 
investment 

Total 

6.877 

3.203 

4.954 

2.792 

22.241.826 

11.808.042 

13.854.866 

8.970.825 

O3 Nr. of actions 
operations 
supported 
O4 
Nr 
holdings 
beneficiaries 
supported 

of 

212 

14 

175 

125 

100 

4.  Conclusions 

The data presented in this chapter represent the information on the progress of setting up 
and operating FIs under Rural Development Programmes by the 31/12/2020. A significant 
progress  in  the  implementation  could  be  observed  as  financial  instruments  mature  and 
implementation progresses from setting up to paying into the FI to committing and then 
paying  to  final  recipients.  The  extended  eligibility  period  until  2025  will  help  these 
instruments deploy their resources. However, some FIs have already completely disbursed 
their initial budgets. 

Guarantee Funds are now gaining in importance compared to Loan Funds and the achieved 
leverage can be very high. The distribution of resources is dominated by SMEs and micro-
enterprises.  Looking  at  the  sub-sectors,  it  can  be  seen  that  a  wide  range  of  agricultural 
specialisations and types of farms receive support, showing that financial instruments have 
a wide and far-reaching impact on finance for agriculture. 

The added flexibilities offered for FIs introduced in reaction to the Corona-19 health crisis, 
such as the provision of standalone working capital finance for affected SMEs aided the 
implementation of many instruments. It allowed the agricultural sector to secure liquidity, 
which helped farmers to overcome this period of crisis. It is probable that more money will 
be programmed for FIs in RDP amendments in reaction to the ongoing COVID-19 crisis. 
We also expect that member states will include FIs in their newly drafted CAP Strategic 
Plans. Furthermore, the possibility to continue with FIs across periods could be of interest 
to some Member States. 

101 

 
 
 
 
 
EMFF 

Until 2020, only Estonia has implemented financial instruments under the EMFF 2014-
2020.  

Following the recommendations of its updated ex-ante assessment in 2020, the Bulgarian 
managing authority started the process of setting up a financial instrument to offer loans 
and  guarantees  in  support  of  investments  in  aquaculture,  the  processing  of  fishery  and 
aquaculture products and CLLD, aimed at achieving more efficient use of resources.  

In addition, during the programming period 2014-2020, a number of Member States carried 
out  an  ex-ante  assessment  for  the  use  of  financial  instruments  under  their  EMFF 
operational programmes, and though the possibility to proceed with implementation was 
considered,  due  to  various  reasons  the  potential  financial  instrument  roll  out  has  been 
shifted towards the 2021-2027 period (e.g. Spain, Finland, Italy).  

In 2020, Estonia registered a marginal increase compared with the previous year: 

1. Growth loan for micro-enterprises and small enterprises that are launching or engaged
in fish processing:

 An amount of EUR 1.6 million has been paid out to the body implementing the
financial instruments - Estonian Rural Development Foundation (the total amount
committed  in  the  funding  agreement  is  EUR  3.5  million).  There  are  ten  loan
recipients, who have received a total of around EUR 0.6 million.

2. Long-term investment loan for enterprises launching or engaged in fish processing:

 An amount of EUR 4 million has been paid out to the Estonian Rural Development
Foundation  (the  total  amount  committed  in  the  funding  agreement  is  EUR  4.3
million). There are seven loan recipients, who have received a total of EUR 3.5
million.

3. Investment loan for enterprises launching or engaged in the production of aquaculture
products:

 An amount of EUR 2 million has been paid out to the Estonian Rural Development
Foundation  (the  total  amount  committed  in  the  funding  agreement  is  EUR  2.2
million).  There  are  five  loan  recipients,  who  have  received  a  total  of  EUR  0.7
million.

The use of financial instruments in Estonia has been rather positive, although the take-up 
from the sector has been slowed down during 2020. The relatively low uptake under the 
EMFF  is  linked  with  the  small  scale  of  the  sector,  lower  demand  as  a  similarity  loan 
product for the aquaculture sector was successfully implemented in the past under the EFF 
2007-2014 and the uncertain economic environment in the recent years.  

Following the coronavirus outbreak, the EMFF managing authority made it possible for 
the final recipients in Estonia to benefit from decreased interest rates from April 2020. At 
the same time, the unused budget initially planned to be allocated to financial instruments 
was diverted to emergency Covid-19 related measures to support the sector. 

102 

Key figures reported by managing authorities for state of play at 31/12/2020 

 EUR  10  million  planned  to  support  the  processing  of  fisheries  products  and  the

aquaculture sector through financial instruments.

 Three agreements were signed for a total amount of EUR 10 million (EUR 7.5 million
from EMFF and national EUR 2.5 million), of which EUR 7.7 million were already paid
to the body implementing the FI.
Payments to final beneficiaries amount to EUR 4.8 million, EMFF contributing with EUR
3.6 million.



103 

K
N
-
0
1
-
2
1
-
5
2
2
-
E
N
N

-