REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the final evaluation of the Programme for the competitiveness of enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (COSME) 2014-2020
Date: 2024-10-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, business start-up, company growth, competitiveness, corporate finance, market access, organisational culture, single market, small and medium-sized enterprises, sustainable development

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 1.10.2024  COM(2024) 425 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the final evaluation of the Programme for the competitiveness of enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (COSME) 2014-2020 {SWD(2024) 226 final}  
 
 
1 

INTRODUCTION 

The  purpose  of  the  report  is  to  present  findings  of  the  final  evaluation  of  the  COSME 
programme. According  to Article  15(4)  of  the  COSME  Regulation,1  the  Commission  shall 
establish a final evaluation report on the longer-term impact and sustainability of effects of the 
measures. 

The  Programme  for  the  Competitiveness  of  Enterprises  and  small  and  medium-sized 
enterprises  (COSME)  under  the  2014–2020  Multi-annual  Financial  Framework  (MFF) 
established by the COSME Regulation focused on tackling challenges and obstacles for SME 
competitiveness, growth and entrepreneurship. It also aimed to contribute towards the goals of 
creating more (and better) jobs and plugging the investment gaps in the EU.  

The COSME programme sought to address a number of market failures and issues that were 
affecting SMEs’ survival and return to growth in the years after the 2008 financial crisis, as 
described in the impact assessment. These issues included high borrowing costs and difficulties 
in accessing finance (partly due to information asymmetries leading to reluctance by private 
financial  institutions  to  lend  to  or  invest  in  SMEs),  challenges  for  accessing  customers  and 
international markets, and weaknesses in entrepreneurial culture. 

The COSME programme benefitted from the results of the Entrepreneurship and Innovation 
Programme (EIP) running over the years 2007-2013.  It was set in the broader context of EU 
policy support to SMEs, notably the Europe 2020 Strategy and the Small Business Act for 
Europe2. The Europe 2020 flagship initiative "An Industrial Policy for the Globalisation 
Era" emphasised the importance of promoting the creation and growth of SMEs. The COSME 
programme was one of the 11 actions put forward to implement this flagship initiative.  Other 
key initiatives running in the same period as COSME included the Horizon 2020 programme 
that supported innovation and the Digital Europe that included a focus on helping SMEs to 
reap the benefits of digital technologies. 

COSME’s main objective was to enhance SME competitiveness. In accordance with the impact 
assessment, the four specific objectives of COSME were: 

Improving access to finance for SMEs in the form of equity and debt (SO1) 

• 
•  Supporting SME access to market and internationalisation (SO2) 
•  Creating  a 

favourable  environment 

for  enterprises  and  supporting 

their 

competitiveness (SO3) 

•  Promoting entrepreneurship (SO4) 

Overall,  the  Programme  displayed  positive  impacts  on  final  SME  beneficiaries  across  all 
objectives.    

1  Regulation  (EU)  No 1287/2013  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  11 December  2013  establishing  a 
Programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (COSME) (2014 - 2020) and 
repealing Decision No 1639/2006/EC Text with EEA relevance. 

2 The Small Business Act for Europe adopted in 2008 and updated in 2011 provided a comprehensive framework for EU SME 

policy, emphasising access to finance, markets, and entrepreneurship. 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2  BACKGROUND AND STATE-OF-PLAY 

The  final  beneficiaries  of  the  COSME  programme  were  SMEs.  Many  actions  under  the 
programme  operated  through  business  support  organisations  and  other  intermediaries  that 
provided  advisory  and  support  services  and  funding  to  help  SMEs  to  boost  their 
competitiveness and sustainability.  

Implementation  of  some  actions  is  still  ongoing.  The  COSME  financial  instruments  were 
designed to run over a longer period.3  

The evaluation covered all specific objectives of the programme. The findings were supported 
by an external study4 , in accordance with Better Regulation guidelines. The methodology for 
this  evaluation  included  analysis  of  monitoring  data  and  statistics  provided  by  the 
Commission, the European Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprise (EISMEA) and the 
European  Investment  Fund  (EIF),  analysis  of  related  evaluation  studies,  macro-economic 
context  analysis,  counterfactual  analysis,  data  collection  through  a  targeted  consultation 
(surveys and 73 interviews with key stakeholders, focusing on main evaluation questions and 
related sub-questions), and triangulation of findings from these different sources. 

There have been several challenges for carrying out this evaluation, notably the wide range 
of  interventions  (complexity,  mitigated  by  mapping  and  prioritising  actions),  the  different 
levels of detail in available monitoring data, the slow initial response to targeted consultations 
and stakeholder fatigue (mitigated by further promotion of the surveys, extensions to survey 
deadlines and additional interviews). 

Concerning the robustness of the consultations, the evaluation study concludes that, overall, 
these provided the necessary evidence once the mitigating actions had been taken. Challenges 
were  also  encountered  for  constructing  a  large  and  robust  enough  control  group  for 
counterfactual analysis for the Loan Guarantee Facility (LGF) due to the large number of SMEs 
supported by this facility (865 387 distinct SMEs). 

COSME  was  implemented  through  Annual  Work  Programmes  (AWPs),  drawn  up 
according to the Commission's policy priorities, evolving SME needs and support gaps and in 
cooperation with relevant DG GROW policy units.  The programme committee composed of 
representatives of the Member States approved the work programmes. 

The  table  below  lists  the  actions  under  each  specific  objective.  For  the  purposes  of  the 
evaluation, the actions were also grouped according to a set of thematic areas. 

Table 1 List of COSME actions  

Thematic areas 
SO1 Improving access to finance for SMEs in the form of debt and equity 

Name of action and how it contributed to the specific objective 

Access to finance 

•  Equity  Facility  for  Growth  (EFG):  This  provides  equity  support  through  venture  capital 

investments to support the growth and expansion stage development of SMEs. 

•  Loan Guarantee Facility (LGF):  including the SME Initiative: This provides guarantees and 
counter-guarantees to  financial intermediaries  which  in turn support  debt  financing  (e.g. 
loans, guarantees, leases) for SMEs 

SO2 Improving access to markets for SMEs 

3  For example, the last operations for the Equity Facility for Growth are due to be wound down by 31 December 2034. 
4 Study for the COSME final evaluation (CSES) 2024 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Thematic areas 
Business support 
networks and 
services 

Name of action and how it contributed to the specific objective 
•  Enterprise  Europe  Network (EEN):    EEN  aims  to  improve  SMEs’  access  to  markets  by 
providing integrated services such as advice and information on EU funding, the internal 
market and internationalisation beyond the EU market, including international partnership 
services 

Public 
procurement 

•  EU-Japan centre for industrial cooperation 
•  International intellectual property (IPR) SME helpdesks 
•  Your Europe Business portal 
•  Single digital gateway 
•  Supporting European SMEs to participate in public procurement outside EU 
•  Co-financing of public procurement of innovation consortia 
•  Creating links for the facilitation of public procurement of innovation 
•  Training for SME-friendly policies in central purchasing bodies 

SO3 Improving framework conditions and competitiveness 
Internationalisation 

•  Clusters Go International: This supported cluster and business network collaboration across 
borders  and  sector  boundaries  and  the  establishment  of  European  Strategic  Cluster 
Partnerships to lead international cluster cooperation in fields of strategic interest towards 
third countries beyond Europe.  

Competitiveness 

•  Clusters Go international in the defence and security sector: see above – this was a separate 

action dedicated to the defence and security sector 

•  The  European  Cluster  Excellence  Programme:  this  aimed  to improve specialised  and 
customised  business  support  by  strengthening  cluster  management  excellence  and 
facilitating  exchanges  and  strategic  partnering  between  clusters  and  specialised  eco-
systems across Europe. 

•  E-Skills for competitiveness and innovation 
•  Strategic alliances for the uptake of advanced technologies by SMEs 
•  Early Warning Europe Mentor Academy 
•  Intellectual  Property  voucher  (also  known  as  SME  fund):  This  supports  SMEs  with  the 

protection of their IP, in order to maintain their competitive position5  

•  Development of the European Food Price Indicator 
•  WORTH  Partnership  Project:  an  acceleration  programme  which  provides  mentoring, 
designers, 

coaching 
business 
manufacturers/craftsmen and tech providers to develop new, innovative business ideas. 

partnerships 

between 

visibility 

and 

to 

Tourism 

Framework 
conditions 

•  Enhancing European Tourism Competitiveness and sustainability 
•  European Capital of Smart Tourism 
•  Innovation uptake and digitalisation in the tourism sector 
•  SME performance review: a comprehensive review of the performance of SMEs and issues 

affecting the business environment. Used to support SME policy-making. 

•  Following and monitoring the Small Business Act including the SME Envoys Network: COSME 
funded the meetings of the SME Envoys (an SME policy advisory group that supports the 
Commission’s work to make regulations and policies more SME-friendly). 

•  European  Enterprise  Awards:  an  annual  competition  to  recognise  the  most  successful 

promoters of entrepreneurship across Europe and the best entrepreneurial practices. 
•  Small Business Act including implementation and outreach tools such as Business Planet 
•  EU REFIT platform: COSME supported the development and testing of various IT tools for 

consulting stakeholders to support the Commission’s work on Better Regulation 

5 COSME 2020 Monitoring Report. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Thematic areas 
SO4 promote entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial culture 

Name of action and how it contributed to the specific objective 

Entrepreneurship 

•  Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs (EYE): EYE is a cross-border exchange programme which 
gives new or aspiring entrepreneurs the chance to  learn from experienced entrepreneurs 
running  small  businesses  in  other  COSME  Participating  Countries.  The  exchange  of 
experience takes place during a stay with the experienced entrepreneur, which helps the 
new entrepreneur acquire the skills needed to start and run a small firm. 

•  European network of female entrepreneurs and on-line e-platform, European network of 

mentors for female entrepreneurs 

•  Support for entrepreneurship policy implementation 
•  EYE IT Tool: The IT tool that supports the matching process and the management of the EYE 

action 

Social Economy 

•  Promotion of social economy in Europe 
•  European Social Economy Missions for developing inter-regional collaboration, sharing/ 
replicating best practices, and inter-regional learning in the field of social economy. 

Source:  
i) Thematic areas and actions: elaboration based on the supporting study for the COSME evaluation 
ii)  Contribution  of  the  action  to  the  specific  objective:  analysis  from  the  supporting  study  and  additional 
information from the European Commission. 

3 

 BUDGET AND BENEFICIARIES 

The  total  implemented  budget  of  the  COSME  programme  for  the  seven-year  period  was 
EUR 2.4 billion.  Bearing  in  mind  this  relatively  limited  overall  budget,  the  COSME 
programme reached a relatively large number of SMEs6. More than 800 000 SMEs benefited 
from the financial instruments, over 2.9 million from the in-depth services provided under 
this programme7, and 21 million SMEs benefited from COSME’s digital services. 

In addition to the 278 Member States, the following third countries participated in COSME: 
Albania, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iceland, Kosovo*9, Moldova, Montenegro, North 
Macedonia, Serbia, Türkiye and Ukraine. 

4 

IMPACT  

4.1 

Impacts on businesses and stakeholders 

COSME’s  financial  instruments  (Loan Guarantee  Facility  (LGF)  and  Equity  Facility  for 
Growth (EFG)) facilitated access to finance for over 800 000 SMEs. Micro-enterprises, which 
tend to struggle to demonstrate their creditworthiness, were the main beneficiary group.  

6  The  number  of  SMEs  reached  compares  favourably  to  the  SME  competitiveness  objective  of  the  European  Regional 
Development Fund (ERDF) which benefited from a significantly higher amount of EU funding (EUR 26.5 billion from the 
ERDF). Source: Evaluation study for the ex-post evaluation of Cohesion Policy programmes 2014-2020 financed by the 
ERDF. 

7 Including the in-depth support from EEN, EYE and the IP SME helpdesks 
8 The United Kingdom ceased to be an EU Member State as from 31 January 2020. UK beneficiaries participating in COSME 
actions funded under the EU budget of 2019 or from earlier years continued to participate until the end of those actions, and 
they were allowed to participate in COSME until the end of the transition period (31 December 2020). 

9 *This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on 

Kosovo’s declaration of independence. 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The counterfactual analysis10 demonstrated that the LGF had a positive and significant impact 
on the number of employees and the survival rates of the SME final recipients.  

For  the  EFG11,  SME  final  recipients  experienced  improvements  in  their  economic 
performance in the years after receiving finance via this scheme.  

The Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) provided integrated advisory and support services 
to help SMEs to take advantage of business opportunities in new markets both within the EU 
and beyond and supported cross-border business cooperation and transfer of knowledge. 
The  network’s  services  delivered  on  or  exceeded  all  targets,  and  the  targeted  consultations 
provide evidence of the  positive impacts  of EEN services on SME clients’ competitiveness 
(including  access  to  markets,  growth  or  maintenance  of  jobs,  and  the  introduction  of  new 
products).  

The  Cluster  actions  promoted  the  international  cooperation  of  SMEs,  boosted  their 
innovation  capacity  and  excellence,  and  the  development  of  products  and  services.  The 
programme supported 130 clusters initiatives with EUR 51 million. Clusters delivered some 
useful  outcomes  such  as  boosting  cluster  management  skills,  boosting  cluster  managers’ 
understanding  of  the  internationalisation  process,  and  led  to  increased  cooperation, 
networking, and the development of joint strategies. 

Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs (EYE) exchanges aimed to help new and experienced 
entrepreneurs to learn from one another to promote entrepreneurship and an entrepreneurial 
culture.  EYE  boosted  the  entrepreneurship  and  international  business  skills  of  the 
participating entrepreneurs. 

Although the descriptions of actions in annual work programmes improved in the latter years 
of the programme12, one key factor negatively influencing the performance of COSME, lies in 
the  fragmentation  of  smaller  actions  which  lacked  a  strong  thematic  link  to  other  COSME 
initiatives and its overarching objectives. One key cause was the wide scope of the objectives.  

4.2  Specific impacts on competitiveness 

The  programme  impacted  on  various  dimensions  of  SME  competitiveness:  helping 
businesses  to  gain  an  advantage  in  the  market  by  reducing  costs,  increasing  productivity, 
innovating, introducing new products, and expanding into new markets. 

All four specific objectives of the programme contributed towards this goal. There is stronger 
evidence of the contribution of SO1 and SO2 to SME competitiveness. SO3 actions contributed 
both  directly  (clusters)  and  indirectly  (SME  performance  review/SME  Envoys)  to 
strengthening  elements  of  SME  competitiveness  such  as  reducing  administrative  burdens. 
Under this objective the COSME programme supported E-skills for Jobs campaign in 2015-
2016 to fill digital skill shortages, gaps and mismatches. SO4 actions contributed primarily to 
enhancing  skills. Surveys  of entrepreneurs conducted by the Commission shortly  after their 

10 The counterfactual analysis was carried out within the supporting study, and it used data from the Orbis database, Bureau 

van Dijk. 

11 According to data from Orbis, it is too early to formally prove a direct causal link. Nevertheless, evidence from other studies 
on  similar  equity  schemes  supported  under  previous  EU  programmes  suggests  that  the  positive  impacts  of  the  EFG  on 
employment, turnover, and total assets observed with Orbis data would also prove to be valid if a counterfactual scenario were 
replicated once all the company data needed for the counterfactual analysis becomes available. 

12 As noted in point 4.1.1.1 of the supporting study. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EYE  exchanges  provide  early-stage  evidence  of  the  positive  impact  of  EYE  on  enterprise 
creation. However, there were no longitudinal surveys to confirm the full impacts in the longer 
term for COSME. Its successor the Single Market Programme is introducing such surveys to 
monitor careers of entrepreneurs.  

Table 2 Impacts of specific objectives and actions on SME competitiveness  

o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

g
n
i
v
o
r
p
m

I

1
0
S

e
h
t
n
i

s
E
M
S
r
o
f

e
c
n
a
n
i
f

y
t
i
u
q
e
d
n
a

t
b
e
d
f
o
m
r
o
f

g
n
i
v
o
r
p
m

I

o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

r
o
f

s
t
e
k
r
a
m

s
E
M
S

2
O
S

d
n
a
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c
k
r
o
w
e
m
a
r
f

g
n
i
v
o
r
p
m

I

3
O
S

s
s
e
n
e
v
i
t
i
t
e
p
m
o
c

Financial instruments: 

•  Loan Guarantee 
Facility (LGF) 

•  Equity Facility for 
Growth (EFG) 

•  Supported  day-to-day  operations  of  riskier  SMEs 
enabling  them  to  remain  competitive  and  survive, 
expanded  SME  lending,  provided  finance  to  SMEs  on 
better credit terms and conditions, helping SMEs to limit 
their costs (outcome) 

•  Allowed  SMEs  to  develop  and  invest  in  innovation 
in  energy  and  environment) 

investment 

(including 
(outcome) 

Enterprise Europe 
Network 

•  Improved access to markets, helped SMEs to introduce 

new products  

Clusters 
Internationalisation 

•  Enhanced  internationalisation  skills  of  clusters  (better 
understanding of internationalisation issues) (outcome) 

Clusters excellence 

•  Enhanced management skills of clusters (outcome) 

SME Performance 
Review, and the work of 
the SME Envoys 

•  The quality label was used by national funding authorities 
as a criterion for allocating national funding to clusters. 
This helped to ensure that national funding was allocated 
to  clusters  that  could  provide  better  quality  support  to 
businesses. 

•  Contributed  to  reducing  administrative  burdens.  Inter 
alia good progress was made with reducing the time and 
cost  of  registering  a  business  (two  related  economic 
impact indicators in the COSME Regulation).  

•  These actions contributed to the Commission’s work to 
monitor  actions  and  reforms  by  Member  States  for 
improving  the  business  environment.  (the  European 
Semester,  the  Recovery  and  Resilience  Facility  and 
feedback on the National Reform Programmes)  

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
d
n
a
p
i
h
s
r
u
e
n
e
r
p
e
r
t
n
e

e
t
o
m
o
r
P
4
O
S

e
r
u
t
l
u
c

l
a
i
r
u
e
n
e
r
p
e
r
t
n
e

Erasmus for Young 
Entrepreneurs (EYE) 

•  Enhanced business and internationalisation skills of both 

new and host entrepreneurs (outcome) 

•  Data  is  available  on  the  “potential  impact”,  i.e.  the 
percentage  of  entrepreneurs  “intending  to”  set  up  a 
in  an  EYE  exchange: 
business  after  participating 

•  In  the  period  from  1.2.2015  -  31.1.2023,  95%  of  new 
entrepreneurs (8016 responses) supported by EYE under 
the COSME programme said that their participation had 
contributed to their ambition to start their own business 
(significantly:  64%  or  to  some  extent:  31%).  (Source, 
survey  of  EYE  participants,  European  Commission). 

•  An additional survey would be needed at a later stage to 

check how many businesses were actually created. 

Source: Elaboration based on the supporting study for COSME evaluation 

4.3  Contribution to administrative burden reduction   

The COSME programme funded studies, and meetings with stakeholders that helped to address 
administrative  burdens  in  EU  and  national  policies  and  find  solutions  for  helping  SMEs  to 
address emerging issues. Examples: 

•  The Commission used the SME Performance Review to inform the European Semester 
and  policy  actions  related  to  SMEs,  including  shaping  the  National  Recovery  and 
Resilience Plans. 

•  COSME funded the meetings of the SME Envoys and the SME Assembly which provide 
advice and feedback on issues that SMEs are facing, including administrative burdens. The 
SME Envoy Network provided up-to-date information on barriers/administrative burdens 
and national support measures for SMEs. That allowed Member States’ services for SMEs 
to learn from each other and coordinate support measures.  

•  COSME also provided annual support to the action “Engaging SMEs and Stakeholders 
on policy design and implementation/strengthening of the Better Regulation Agenda”. 
The  2019  edition  of  this  action  supported  the  definition  of  “call  for  evidence”  business 
requirements. The 2020 work programme supported work to define the requirements and 
develop an internal Commission “one in, one out” calculator.  

Administrative  burden  in  the  implementation  of  COSME  actions  was  not  perceived  as 
considerable. 84% of SMEs using the Enterprise Europe Network reported incurring no direct 
or indirect costs linked to the EEN services. The majority of LGF final beneficiaries (62%) did 
not experience a high administrative burden. Less than half (46%) of surveyed LGF financial 
intermediaries  reported  an  additional  administrative  burden  associated  with  reporting. 
However, the perception of this burden varied considerably across financial instruments. EFG 
fund managers interviewed did not report any administrative burden associated with COSME. 
For most EYE entrepreneurs (64%) the administrative requirements and reporting obligations 
were, at worst, slightly burdensome.  

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.4  Geographical outreach 

COSME  achieved  a  broad  reach  in  terms  of  number,  type,  geographical  and  sectoral 
distribution of its beneficiaries. Unsurprisingly, there are a larger number of beneficiaries in 
the largest Member States, i.e. Italy, France and Spain where financial instruments have been 
of particular benefit to SMEs. The impacts of some actions can also be explained by differences 
in regional financial ecosystems and banking structures, where the countries with historically 
developed financial markets such as Germany, France, Italy and the Netherlands can benefit 
the most. In addition, regions with stronger international trade links or strategic positions have 
benefited further from EEN support to internationalisation. Given that entrepreneurial culture 
also  varies  across  Europe,  regions  with  robust  entrepreneurial  ecosystems,  supportive 
networks,  and  educational  institutions  may  witness  stronger  impacts.  Countries  such  as 
Lithuania and Cyprus were among the key beneficiaries of the EYE programme relative to the 
size of population, whereas France and Germany registered relatively the lowest number of 
exchanges.   

4.5  Contribution to wider policy objectives 

At a policy level, the programme aligned with key policy priorities such as the Small Business 
Act13,  the  Single  Market  Strategy14,  and  the  Start-up  and  Scale-up  Initiative.15  The 
programme  played  a  crucial  role  in  achieving  the  Commission's  growth  and  employment 
priorities  by  improving  access  to  finance,  facilitating  networking  and  cooperation  between 
businesses, sharing of information and best practice, and expanding market opportunities for 
EU SMEs16. 

COSME was highly valued by stakeholders for the focus on fostering economic growth and 
job  opportunities  and  facilitating  sustainable  growth.  Its  contribution  in  areas  beyond  the 
economic sphere and addressing societal challenges and inclusive and sustainable growth is 
difficult  to  assess  at  a  programme  level  given  the  evidence  gathered.  However,  some 
considerations can be made at a sub-programme level such as for social economy or tourism 
actions. 

Within  the  broader  competitiveness  objective,  several  actions  considered  climate-related 
challenges  such  as  using  innovation  to  become  more  energy-efficient  or  sustainable 
construction. Overall, the COSME contribution to the climate mainstreaming objective, set for 
all  Commission  programmes  (overall  20%  of  the  EU  budget  2014-2020),  is  estimated  at 
EUR 25.6 million.17  

For example, the EFG facilitated investment of more than EUR  62 million in SMEs in the 
energy  and  environment  sector.18  Over  200  EEN  expert  business  advisers  specialise  in 
climate-related issues. Under Clusters Go International, six projects out of 12 had a specific 
focus on helping SMEs to improve their resource-efficiency and implement the green transition 

13 European Commission. 2008. European Commission communication (COM (2008) 394 Final) – “Think Small First” – A 

“Small Business Act” for Europe. 

14 Available at: European Commission. 2023. The Single Market strategy. 
15 Available at: European Economic and Social Committee. 2016. Europe's next leaders: the Start-up and Scale-up Initiative. 
16 Inter alia, evidence is provided in the effectiveness analysis for the financial instruments and the EEN. 
17 COSME 2020 Monitoring Report. 
18 EIF. 2022. COSME-Equity Facility for Growth Implementation Update, 

https://www.eif.org/what_we_do/equity/single_eu_equity_instrument/cosme_efg/cosme-efg-implementation-update.pdf.  

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
in  2020.19  Several  studies provided evidence for policy measures on climate issues,  and in 
particular the European Climate Neutral Industry Competitiveness Scoreboard (CIndECS) 
informed policy work related to the Clean Energy Technology Observatory and the Net Zero 
Industry Act.20 

Tourism actions, actions supporting women entrepreneurship and social economy missions had 
mostly successful outcomes and demonstrated the role that SMEs can play in territorial and 
social cohesion. One focus area of the social economy missions was local or regional measures 
tackling unemployment. In the tourism sector, workshops and reports developed topics such as 
sustainability,  digitalisation,  and  resilience  and  contributed  evidence  and  experience  for  the 
Transition Pathway for Tourism21 published by the Commission in February 2022.22  

Other actions in the field of social economy supported inter-regional learning and collaboration 
for  more  sustainable  growth.  As  an  example,  the  European  Social  Economy  Missions  of 
202023 involved a wide range of umbrella organisations focused on the social economy. 

Furthermore, the SME Performance Review and actions addressing framework conditions 
provided  solid  evidence  to  support  policy  making  and  published  materials  that  generated 
additional  visibility  for  the  Programme.  The  SME  Performance  Review  reports  have  been 
useful for deepening the understanding of market trends through key performance indicators 
and for supporting national policy developments. Other initiatives were helpful for supporting 
evidence-based policy making and national reform efforts.24 

5  WHAT WAS THE EU ADDED VALUE OF THE PROGRAMME 

COSME has offered EU added value by supporting actions that go beyond the scope and 
depth of actions supported at national or regional level. The advisory services and grants 
projects  brought  considerable  additionality  by  combining  expertise  from  many  countries. 
This  could  not  have been achieved by any national  or regional programme. The number of 
businesses receiving finance and/or advisory services was beyond the capacity of any national 
or regional support scheme.  

For the LGF, COSME provided EU added value by offering better conditions for SMEs than 
national  and  regional  support  schemes.  It  also  ensured  availability  of  finance  for  riskier 
businesses that did not have collateral. The EFG provided partial additionality by providing a 
wider scope or array of support than national or regional equity schemes. It played a key role 
in developing the European equity ecosystem thanks to its pan-European perspective which 
helped overcome fragmentation of the European equity market. It also provided larger amounts 
of capital to individual SMEs (larger ticket size) than the EU average.   

COSME supported a range of in-depth advisory services for SMEs on a large and international 
scale.  The  international  component  of  these  services  was  not  available  through  national 
services and support schemes in a large number of Member States, and therefore not available 

19 Clusters Go International “all sectors” call (GRO/SME/20/C/02). 
20 COSME 2020 Monitoring Report. 
21 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_850 
22 Monitoring fiche. GRO/SME/20/C/081.  
23 These aimed to contribute to better, high-quality employment, the green, social and digital transition at a local level, and 
the adoption of resilient and sustainable business models. Monitoring fiche. GRO/SME/20/D/01 - European Social 
Economy Missions. 

24 For instance, the Initiative for a Built Environment, produced a monitoring tool to support the design and monitoring of 

construction-related measures in the context of the NRRPs Monitoring fiche. GRO/SME/20/F/103. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
for a large part of EU SMEs. In particular, EEN offered full additionality and European value-
added by supporting networking and information sharing between the EEN advisors across the 
EU.  The  international  IP  helpdesks  also  provided  full  additionality  by  helping  SMEs  to 
obtain tailor-made responses with complex input from several different countries.   

The 2021 evaluation study on Cluster Initiatives under COSME, Horizon 2020 & FPI25 found 
that cluster organisations participating in Clusters Go International considered the supported 
cluster  partnerships  to  be  unique  in  terms  of  developing  market  access  for  SMEs  in  third 
countries.  

The  EYE  offered  additionality  and  strong  EU  added  value  by  providing  transnational 
mobility possibilities for entrepreneurs that are not otherwise available. While Member States 
offer  a  wide  range  of  support  for  entrepreneurs,  there  are  few  if  any  instances  of  national 
programmes  supporting  transnational  mobility  and  certainly  none  with  the  scale  and 
international profile of EYE. 

The EU branding and EU-wide scope of COSME delivered EU added value in the form of a 
greater international profile for the Programme. Some COSME actions such as the EEN or 
the EYE are now becoming widely recognised throughout the SME community. EEN branding 
is widely used and its role for EU-related support is recognized, but there is scope to increase 
SMEs’ awareness that EEN services are EU co-funded26. 

6  EFFICIENCY 

The assessment of the efficiency of the COSME programme covers budget and implementation 
structures and governance, proportionality of costs and benefits, and the administrative costs 
for applicants and beneficiaries. It is based on programme data on key metrics, notably “Time 
to  inform”  (TTI)  and  “Time  to  grant”  (TTG)  in  relation  to  open  calls27.  It  also  uses  the 
findings  of  the  interim  evaluation  of  COSME  covering  implementation  in  2014-2016,  and 
evidence gathered in the interviews and targeted surveys.  

There  has  been  a  high  execution  rate  of  the  programme  budget  in  each  year  of  the 
programme’s implementation, even though there was a steady increase in the annual budget 
year-on-year. The execution rate ranged from 94% in 2016 to 99% in (2014, 2015 and 2020) 
and the average rate over the life of the programme was 98%.28  

The  COSME  actions  provided  a  diversity  of  quantifiable  benefits  for  participants  and 
beneficiaries, as well as for the EU more generally.  

25  Evaluation  Study  of  &  Potential  Follow-Up 

to  Cluster 

Initiatives  under  COSME,  H2020  &  FPI: 

https://www.ideaconsult.be/en/projects/evaluation-study-of--potential-follow-up-to-cluster-initiatives-under-cosme-
h2020--fpi. 

26 Some of the interviewed EEN members reported that SMEs primarily recognise the name of the EEN member 

organisation.  

27 TTI refers to the time from the call deadline to the invitation to sign the contract, whilst TTG refers to the time 
elapsing between the closure of a call and the signature of the Grant Agreement, which typically marks the 
start of the project. 

28 Source: annual monitoring reports produced by the European Commission 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3 Main quantifiable benefits of specific COSME actions  

Action 

Indicator (proxy of benefits) 

Type of indicator 

EYE 

Number of host/new entrepreneurs  

Number of intermediary organisations 

Number of EYE exchanges 

EEN 

Number of SMEs receiving EEN services 

Number of SMEs using digital services 

Output 

Output 

Outcome 

Outcome 

Outcome 

Value of the 
indicator 

15 096 

360 

7 548 

1 957 822 

21.5 million  
(2020-21) 

Number of cross-border partnership agreements 
signed 

Outcome 

18 701 

Clusters 

Number of cluster initiatives and events 

Number of cluster organisations involved 

Outcome 

Output 

132 

392 

Number of SMEs benefiting from actions 

Outcome 

>4 055 SMEs 

Number of sectors covered by cluster initiatives 

Outcome 

61 

LGF 

Total EU commitments to debt finance 

Number of intermediaries supported 

Total value of lending provided on the basis of 
LGF as supported by the European Fund for 
Strategic Investments (EFSI) 

Number of SMEs receiving guaranteed loans 

Number of jobs maintained or created in the 
SMEs or sector 

Output 

Output 

Output 

EUR 1.2 billion 

128 

EUR 54 billion 

Outcome 

Impact 

865 387 

233 14629 

EFG 

Total EU contribution committed by DG GROW 

EUR 378.1million 

Number of financial intermediaries supported 

Output 

23 

Total funding catalysed by instrument 

Outcome 

EUR 3.9 billion 

Number of jobs maintained or created in the 
SMEs or sector 

Impact 

1 60430 

Source: Elaboration based on the supporting study for COSME evaluation 

7  RELEVANCE 

COSME  objectives  aimed  at  addressing  key  challenges  for  European  SMEs,  and  the 
programme adapted to emerging needs. Changes in budget allocation were made during the 
implementation of the programme to meet changing needs. Flexibility was cited in feedback 
provided by stakeholders  benefiting from  public procurement,  social economy,  and tourism 

29 This figure is based on the COSME LGF – Growth & Employment report 31-12-2019. 
30 This figure is based on the COSME EFG – Growth & Employment report 31-12-2019. 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
actions.31  All  programming  documents  took  account  of  the  increased  interest  in 
sustainability, the digital and green transitions, and women entrepreneurship.  

As  programme  implementation  progressed  throughout  the  period  of  the  programme,  more 
emphasis was put on innovation and digitalisation. New EU policy initiatives approved in the 
final years of the programme included the 2018 proposal for the Digital Europe Programme32 
to strengthen the EU's digital capabilities.   

In the 2014-2020 period, particular attention was also devoted to sustainability and the green 
transition. The European Green Deal (2019)33 became a central policy framework aiming to 
make the EU climate-neutral  by 2050. COSME has  helped enterprises  and clusters develop 
green  and  sustainable  products,  and  part  of  the  COSME  financial  support  was  allocated  to 
SMEs which made environmentally friendly investments.  

8  COHERENCE 

The  most  internally  coherent  actions  are  the  financial  instruments,  EEN,  clusters 
internationalisation actions, the IP help desks, and the EU Japan centre. 

The  supporting  study  finds  that  progress  has  been  made  (additional  synergies,  leveraging 
complementarities and minimising overlaps) throughout the period since the time of the interim 
evaluation, which found that synergies within the COSME programme at that time were not 
strong34.  Nevertheless,  the  supporting  study  also  suggests  a  need  for  a  more  systematic 
approach for identifying and implementing synergies, and for better interaction between 
communication tools for different actions.  

Table 4 Synergies, complementarities and/or cooperation with other programmes or support 
services 

Type or name of 
programme or 
actions  
Horizon 2020 
ESIF 

EFSI 
IP Helpdesks under 
various EU 
programmes 

COSME actions showing synergies, 
complementarities, or cooperation 

Overlaps 

EEN, LGF, EFG 
EFG, EEN 
LGF: some overlap, but SMEs’ demand for 
credit was sufficiently strong to ensure that 
both regional and LGF finance were fully 
used. 
LGF (complementarity and cooperation) 
International IP helpdesks 
EU Japan Centre  

See middle column 

EFG 

31 Feedback collected from interviews on the topic for the study. 
32https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/digital-europe-

programme_en 

33 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52019DC0640 
34  Implementation of the interim evaluation recommendations is provided in Annex VI A of the Staff Working Document. 

Further information on these synergies is given in 2019 and 2020 Monitoring Reports. 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
National and/or 
regional support 
measures 

Digital Innovation 
Hubs35 

EYE: complementary to entrepreneurship 
and skills actions 
LGF and EFG: complementary to regional 
FIs 
EEN:  
-  made  good  progress  with 

regional 

integration  

-  Cooperated with Digital Innovation Hubs 

Source: Elaboration based on the supporting study for COSME evaluation 

9  CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNT 

The  programme  built  on  the  results  of  the  previous  Entrepreneurship  and  Innovation 
Programme (EIP) (2007-2013). Many of the actions supported under the EIP were continued 
in COSME. Whilst acknowledging the importance of innovation in its interventions, COSME 
focussed on competitiveness. The programme made significant progress towards achieving 
its general and specific objectives, successfully tackling a range of complex issues at the same 
time, based on the analysis of available hard data and the feedback from the surveys. 

The programme supported SMEs in accessing finance, in understanding how to operate in new 
markets and global value chains and in collaborating across borders and within clusters. More 
generally, it promoted entrepreneurship and business creation and a more business-friendly 
environment.  

9.1  Key strengths of COSME  

•  use  of  intermediaries  that  understood  the  needs  of  SMEs  in  specific  sectors  and 

ecosystems;  
flexibility of the Programme; 

• 
•  strong track record on financial implementation and sound budgetary monitoring 

which enabled budget re-allocations when necessary; 

•  positive effects on final SME beneficiaries across all objectives; 
•  highly  relevant  and  remained  relevant  throughout  its  duration,  demonstrating 

capability to help SMEs tackle new issues. 

The  LGF  demonstrated  a  good  impact  on  survival  rates,  but  no  causal  proof  of  impact  on 
employment,  turnover  and  total  assets.  The  EFG  had  good  impact  on  survival  rates, 
employment and economic performance in general.36   

The  EEN  proved  effective.  The  programme  helped  nearly  2.9  million  SMEs  obtain  crucial 
advisory  services,  information  to  operate  in  new  markets  and  support  in  finding  partners. 
Evidence from the surveys indicates that EEN services helped SMEs to survive, maintain and 

35 These started off as national/regional initiatives. As of 2023, the EDIH’s became operational.  
36 Based on counterfactual analysis. Although the EFG could not demonstrate statistically significant and positive economic 
benefits, largely due to the very small final sample size, the analysis demonstrates that over time, the EFG final recipients 
have  not  only  exhibited  high  survival  rates,  but  have  also  experienced  significant  positive  trends  in  their  economic 
performance, e.g. increase in turnover and assets.  

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
increase their workforce, expand into new markets, as well as maintain or sustain their turnover. 
The EYE also showed some very positive impacts, notably on skills.   

9.2  Key weaknesses of COSME  

• 

incomplete monitoring  and reporting system  with  measurable indicators  not  fully 
covering all interventions; 

•  monitoring  of 

smaller 

interventions 

focussed  primarily  on 

financial 

implementation, deliverables, and addressing any issues encountered; 

• 

the  governance  structure  of  the  programme  and  in  particular,  the  involvement  of 
multiple  intermediary  bodies,  contributed  to  challenges  for  data  gathering  on  final 
impacts.  

The  evaluation  found  that  a  weakness  in  programme  planning  is  an  incomplete  monitoring 
system explaining how all actions, especially the smaller ones, aim to address specific needs 
and  market  failures  coherently  and  contribute  to  the  programme’s  overall  objectives  and 
broader EU policy priorities. 

Some smaller actions were more successful than others. A few actions faced implementation 
and performance issues that were closely monitored by the Commission.  

9.3  Lessons learnt for the future 

COSME presented several key strengths. The Programme had positive effects on final SME 
beneficiaries, was relevant and remained relevant throughout, presented a strong track record 
on implementation and confirmed the validity of intermediaries as an effective implementation 
mode. Yet, a number of key suggestions for future improvement can also be proposed:  

•  Develop  a  simpler  and  more  logical  framework  for  monitoring  which  would 
facilitate the assessment of the programme and ensure that all actions preserve a 
strong relevance.  

• 

• 

Increase attention paid to the results and impacts of the programme, including 
in  the  longer  term,  and  to  the  measurement  of  the  indicators  laid  down  in  the 
COSME regulation and subsequent programming documents for all the actions. 

Improve  coherence  of  smaller  actions.  The  identification  and  activation  of 
synergies should be further pursued on a regular basis.  

An  area  for  improvement  is  developing  a  simpler  monitoring  and  reporting  system  with 
measurable indicators. Although many aspects of reporting on smaller actions improved in the 
latter  years  of  the  COSME  programme,  the  analysis  did  not  find  sufficiently  granular 
monitoring data and information on their results and how they contributed to the Programme’s 
overarching objectives.  

The study also identified a need for improved data-gathering on the final beneficiaries of the 
programme, as regards their results and how they contributed to the programme’s overarching 
objectives. The need for more complete monitoring data should not mean calling for additional 
reporting  burden.  Solutions  are  explored,  including  automation  and  use  of  existing  data,  to 
ensure provision of information while not adding administrative burden. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Financial  instruments  have  demonstrated  high  internal  coherence,  with  loan  guarantee  and 
equity  financing  being  mutually  supportive.  Larger  actions  such  as  the  EEN,  the  financial 
instruments,  and  actions  such  as  the  international  IP  SME  Helpdesks  built  synergies  with 
actions  supported  under  other  EU  funds  and  programmes  such  as  Horizon  2020.  Although 
many smaller actions made a valuable contribution to the goals of the programme and achieved 
good impacts, some were less coherent. 

Flagship COSME  actions such as the Enterprise  Europe Network  could  also  further benefit 
from  increased  visibility  among  SME  community.  EU-wide  branding  has  the  potential  to 
enhance the Programme’s international profile, further improve uptake of actions by SMEs as 
well as create new opportunities for cooperation. 

15