REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS on the interim evaluation of the Single Market Programme 2021-2027
Date: 2025-07-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, EU statistics, European standard, competitiveness, consumer protection, food safety, performance measurement, public health, single market, small and medium-sized enterprises

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 1.7.2025  COM(2025) 347 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS on the interim evaluation of the Single Market Programme 2021-2027 {SEC(2025) 195 final} - {SWD(2025) 172 final}  
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

The single market programme (‘the programme’ or ‘SMP’) is the EU funding programme 
designed to help the single market reach its full potential and ensure Europe’s long-term 
recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The SMP was established by Regulation (EU) 
2021/690 for the period of the 2021-2027 EU long-term budget (known as the multiannual 
financial framework)1. 

Article 3.1 of the SMP Regulation sets out two general objectives: 

• 

• 

‘to  improve  the  functioning  of  the  internal  market,  and  especially  to  protect  and 
empower citizens, consumers and businesses, in particular SMEs, by enforcing Union 
law, facilitating market access, setting standards and promoting human, animal and 
plant  health  and  animal  welfare,  whilst  respecting  the  principles  of  sustainable 
development  and  ensuring  a  high  level  of  consumer  protection,  as  well  as  by 
enhancing  cooperation  between  the  competent  authorities  of  Member  States  and 
between  the  competent  authorities  of  Member  States  and  the  Commission  and  the 
decentralised Union agencies; 
to  develop,  produce  and  disseminate  high-quality,  comparable,  timely  and  reliable 
European statistics which underpin the design, monitoring and evaluation of all Union 
policies  and  help  citizens,  policymakers,  authorities,  businesses,  academia  and  the 
media  to  make  informed  decisions  and  to  actively  participate  in  the  democratic 
process.’ 

The Regulation (Article 3.2) also sets out specific objectives, which are the foundation of 
the programme’s pillar structure: 

•  Pillar 1: Making the internal market more effective. 
•  Pillar 2: Strengthening the competitiveness and sustainability of small and medium-

sized enterprises (SMEs). 

•  Pillar 3: Ensuring effective European standards and international financial and non-

financial reporting and auditing standards. 

•  Pillar 4: Promoting the interests of consumers and ensuring a high level of consumer 

protection and product safety. 

•  Pillar  5:  Contributing  to  a  high  level  of  health  and  safety  for  humans,  animals  and 

plants in plant, animal, food and feed areas. 

•  Pillar  6:  Developing,  producing,  disseminating,  and  communicating  high-quality 

European statistics. 

Under  Article 18  of  the  SMP  Regulation,  the  Commission  must  carry  out  perform  an 
interim evaluation  within four years after the start  of its implementation,  which will  be 
used  in  the  decision-making  process.  The  interim  evaluation  covers  the  2021-2023 
implementation period. 

The evaluation assesses the programme against its general and specific objectives. In line 
with the Better Regulation Guidelines, the evaluation  is  based  on the analysis of five 
evaluation criteria (effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, EU added value, relevance). The 
evaluation  also  assesses  three  additional  criteria  on  the  design  of  the  programme 
(flexibility, synergies, simplification). Due to the complex design of the SMP, a bottom-

1 SMP Regulation - 2021/690 - EN - EUR-Lex. 

1 

 
 
 
up  approach,  pillar  by  pillar,  was  adopted  for  this  evaluation.  The  Commission  first 
analysed the performance of each pillar against its specific objectives to assess how they 
contributed to the general objectives of the SMP and draw conclusions for the programme 
as a whole. This approach is reflected in this report. 

The findings, conclusions and lessons learnt will help the Commission to plan its work for 
the remaining period of the multiannual financial framework. This will serve as a solid 
basis  to  design  future  programmes  and  actions  for  the  single  market  in  the  post-2027 
financial period. 

This  report  is  based  on  an  evaluation  staff  working  document,  produced  by  the 
Commission, which accompanies the report. The staff working document provides more 
details on the evaluation process and the results. The exercise has been supported by an 
external contractor, tasked to deliver an independent study that has been used to support 
the  findings  of  the  evaluation.  The  evaluation  also  uses  evidence  stemming  from 
consultation  activities,  the  impact  assessment,  monitoring  reports,  including  annual 
reports, and other relevant data. 

The evaluation methodology included analysis of data and triangulation of findings from 
the various sources used. A number of challenges and limitations were faced during the 
evaluation that can be grouped in two categories. The first category includes challenges 
related to the lack of a common reporting structure and a system of indicators that would 
capture  the  complexity  of  the  SMP’s  architecture  and  the  diverse  nature  of  its  pillar 
activities and reflect the progress and cumulative impact of the programme. The second 
category  concerns  insufficient  primary  and  secondary  data  due  to  a  limited  number  of 
responses  to  the  public  consultation,  modest  feedback  to  the  call  for  evidence,  and 
insufficient  statistical  data  to  quantify  the  costs and  benefits  of  the  programme  and  the 
results produced. 

2.  BACKGROUND 

The  Single  Market  Programme  consolidates  predecessor  budget  lines  and  six  major 
programmes from the previous financial period (2014-2020). It integrates initiatives such 
as  COSME,  the  Consumer  Programme,  and  the  Food  Chain  Programme  into  a  single 
framework. 

The  Single  Market  Programme  serves  as  the  EU’s  principal  funding  instrument  for 
maintaining  and  advancing  the  single  market.  The  SMP’s  strategic  focus  on  fostering 
economic growth, reducing barriers and boosting cooperation aligns with its overarching 
objectives of ensuring a robust and integrated single market. 

The  SMP’s  total  budget  is  EUR 4 353  million  for  2021-2027.  The  SMP  allocated 
EUR 1 909 million during its first three years, which is 44% of the total budget. The SMP 
funds have been allocated over the first three years of implementation (2021-2023) in line 
with the indicated amounts in the Regulation. The allocation of funds across the various 
pillars has remained aligned with the framework set out in the SMP Regulation2. 

The programme is structured around six pillars, each targeting specific objectives. The 
SMP  Regulation  allocated  indicative  shares  of  the  total  budget  to  each  pillar.  The 

2 Article 4 of the SMP Regulation indicates specific funding amounts for each pillar in euro. 

2 

 
 
programme’s  funds  are  distributed  through  various  mechanisms  tailored  to  the  specific 
needs of each pillar. 

The core activities supported by the SMP encompass: 

•  data  collection,  analysis,  European  official  statistics,  studies,  and  evaluations  to 
support the effective enforcement and modernisation of the EU legal framework; 
•  capacity-building initiatives and the facilitation of joint actions among Member States, 

• 

their relevant authorities, the Commission and decentralised EU agencies; 
financial  support  for  mechanisms  that  enable  individuals,  consumers  and  business 
representatives to engage in decision-making processes; 
improving the exchange and dissemination of expertise and knowledge; 

• 
•  drawing up common European standards. 
Pillar  1  supports  the  internal  market,  for  example,  by  the  effective  enforcement  of 
competition policies and robust market surveillance  mechanisms, and was allocated 
EUR 557 million (13%). Procurement contracts funded activities like the development of 
digital  platforms,  including  CASE@EC  and  Safety  Gate,  which  improved  competition 
enforcement and facilitated safer market practices. These activities directly addressed the 
objective of maintaining a well-functioning internal market. 

Pillar 2 supports SMEs by fostering competitiveness, facilitating access to markets and 
enabling  the  digital  and  green  transitions  and  was  allocated  EUR 1  billion  (24%). 
Grants supported the delivery of tailored advisory services and international networking 
opportunities through flagships initiatives, such as: (i) Enterprise Europe Network (EEN), 
enabling SMEs to expand into new markets and adopt digital and green technologies; and 
(ii) Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs, which facilitated cross-border exchanges, fostering 
innovation and entrepreneurial growth. 

Pillar  3  strengthens  standardisation  processes  and  reporting  frameworks  to  ensure 
harmonised market practices and was allocated EUR 221 million (5%). Contributions to 
European standardisation organisations and specific grants supported the development and 
implementation  of  harmonised  standards,  ensuring  compatibility  and  facilitating  trade 
within the EU and helping maintain the EU’s global competitiveness. 

Pillar  4  advances  consumer  protection  and  product  safety  through  coordinated 
enforcement and capacity-building initiatives and was allocated EUR 189.5 million (4%). 
Grants and procurement financed capacity-building programmes for national authorities 
and  strengthened  consumer  redress  mechanisms.  Examples  include  the  European 
Consumer  Centres  (ECCs),  which  resolved  thousands  of  cross-border  disputes,  and  the 
Safety Gate platform, which enabled faster identification and removal of unsafe products, 
safeguarding consumer interests. 

Pillar 5 addresses health and safety challenges  in the food and agricultural sectors by 
promoting  preventative  measures,  disease  control  and  sustainable  practices  and  was 
allocated  EUR 1.68  billion  (40%).  Grants  supported  veterinary  and  phytosanitary 
emergency  measures  and  programmes  and  antimicrobial  resistance  and  food  waste 
prevention activities. In addition, procurement contracts financed training initiatives under 
the  Better  Training  for  Safer  Food  (BTSF)  programme.  These  activities  strengthened 
disease  prevention  measures,  improved  compliance  with  EU  rules,  strengthened  public 
health safety and helped make the food supply chain more sustainable. 

3 

 
Pillar 6 delivers high-quality European statistics, providing a robust evidence base for 
policymaking  and  decision-making  and  was  allocated  EUR 552  million  (13%). 
Procurement contracts and grants to national statistical offices enabled the production of 
robust  datasets,  including  timely  updates  on  economic,  social  and  environmental 
indicators. These activities ensured policymakers had access to reliable and relevant data 
to address emerging challenges and opportunities effectively. 

3.  KEY FINDINGS 

Due to the unique structure of the SMP and because activities are carried out through the 
programme  pillars, the analysis focuses on the specific objectives  as  a basis to  provide 
findings for the programme as a whole. The interim evaluation of the programme shows 
positive  conclusions  for  the  first  three  years  of  implementation  (2021-2023).  The 
evaluation  demonstrated  that  the  key  funded  actions  have  contributed  to  achieving  the 
SMP’s general and specific objectives. Despite the overall positive conclusions at this mid-
term stage of implementation, there is further room for improvement. 

3.1.  Effectiveness 

The SMP has shown effectiveness in achieving its objectives, although there can be some 
improvements as the effectiveness varies across the different pillars. 

The SMP-funded activities under Pillar 1 effectively supported the improvement of digital 
tools  across  various  policy  areas,  including  competition  policy,  market  surveillance, 
financial  services  and  consumer  information.  These  tools  improved  the  enforcement  of 
competition  rules  by  deploying  specific  digital  solutions,  enhancing  cooperation  with 
national  competition  authorities  (NCAs)  and  Member  States.  Examples  such  as 
CASE@EC,  a  tool  for  case  management,  and  eRFI,  the  Commission's  electronic 
investigative  platform,  demonstrate  progress,  although  the  deployment  of  CASE@EC 
across  competition  policy  instruments  is  only  partially  completed  and  the  legacy  case 
management tools still need to be phased out. Additionally, tools like Your Europe and the 
Internal  Market  Information  System  (IMI)  have  significantly  supported  administrative 
cooperation and public access to EU information. However, the evaluation underscores the 
importance  of  regularly  collecting  user  feedback  to  better  assess  these  tools’  broader 
impact. 

Pillar  2  demonstrates  effectiveness  in  achieving  its  objectives,  with  flagship  initiatives 
such  as  the  Enterprise  Europe  Network  (EEN)  and  Erasmus  for  Young  Entrepreneurs 
(EYE) delivering strong results. EEN clients report very high satisfaction rates and tangible 
effects  on  business  performance,  and  EYE  exchanges  show  high  success  rates  and 
confirmed learning impacts. Euroclusters have effectively used cascade funding to support 
SME  resilience,  digitalisation  and  greening.  Actions  supporting  internationalisation, 
including  Intellectual Property (IP) Helpdesks and the EU-Japan Centre, have achieved 
substantial results, with high satisfaction rates and significant numbers of SMEs supported. 

Pillar  3  has  effectively  boosted  stakeholder  involvement  in  European  standardisation 
processes and increased the adoption of European standards, supporting harmonisation and 
key  policy  objectives.  While  organisations 
the  European  Committee  for 
standardisation (CEN) and the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation 
(CENELEC) achieved strong national adoption rates, challenges remain in ensuring EU 
representation at international level and improving ETSI’s performance. The pillar has also 
effectively  supported  the  development  of  high-quality  standards  for  financial  and  non-

like 

4 

 
financial reporting and auditing. Through SMP funding, EFRAG successfully developed 
the  first  set  of  ESRS  and  promoted  EU  views  in  financial  reporting,  and  the  PIOB 
strengthened oversight of auditing standards, improving multi-stakeholder representation 
and addressing issues of public interest. 

Pillar  4  has  been  instrumental  in  effectively  maintaining  and  strengthening  consumer 
protection  across  the  EU  and  boosting  consumer  participation  in  policymaking.  In 
particular, this is thanks to the work of the CPC network, the Safety Gate alert system, 
ECCs  and  the  CASP  product  safety  initiative,  as  well  as  advocacy  by  consumer 
organisations  at  EU  level  through  BEUC.  The  pillar  has  also  effectively  strengthened 
consumer  involvement  in  financial  services  policymaking.  Finance  Watch  and  Better 
Finance  have  significantly  contributed  to  policy  debates,  raising  awareness  and 
representing  consumer  interests.  However,  survey  results  indicate  a  need  for  more 
visibility and better communication of these organisation’s activities. 

Pillar 5 has effectively contributed to improving health and safety across the EU. It has 
supported the  eradication and  containment of animal  diseases, like African swine fever 
(ASF) and highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), and reduced cases of brucellosis, 
rabies  and  Salmonella  infection  in  poultry  populations.  The  co-financed  measures  have 
helped Member States to eradicate or contain plant pests, such as Xylella fastidiosa, long-
horn  beetle  and  pinewood  nematode.  Member  States  and  stakeholders  report  positive 
impacts  though  quantitative  data;  however,  it  is  not  clear  to  which  extent  the  SMP 
contributed  to  these  results.  The  flexibility  in  veterinary  and  phytosanitary  work 
programmes  allowed  resources  to  be  reallocated  to  urgent  challenges,  boosting 
effectiveness. However, reduced co-financing rates have posed budgetary challenges for 
several Member State authorities. Pillar 5 has effectively contributed to improving skills 
and  knowledge  sharing  between  stakeholders  through  the  BTSF  programme,  the  EU 
reference  laboratory  and  reference  centre  networks.  It  also  effectively  helped  fight 
antimicrobial resistance, prevent food waste and improve animal welfare standards. 

Pillar  6  has  effectively  improved  the  quality  and  timeliness  of  European  statistics, 
providing a strong evidence base for policymaking across the single market and key areas 
such as the green and digital transitions and social rights. Eurostat data played a critical 
role in shaping major EU strategies, including the NextGenerationEU, the European Green 
Deal and RePowerEU, while also facilitating effective responses to crises like the energy 
crisis  and  COVID-19.  The  European  Statistical  Programme  (ESP)  expanded  statistical 
coverage  and  introduced  methodological  improvements,  new  data  sources  and  better 
validation  processes,  significantly  boosting  data  reliability.  High  levels  of  user  trust  in 
European statistics, with 95% of respondents in 2024 expressing confidence, underscores 
the pillar’s success in meeting policymaker and stakeholder needs. 

3.2.  Efficiency 

The implementation of the programme has been efficient, with an efficient allocation of 
resources  and  signs  of  cost-effectiveness.  Beneficiaries  generally  consider  costs  and 
benefits  to  be  proportionate,  without  disproportionate  administrative  burden.  However, 
there  is  room  to  make  pillar  activities  more  efficient,  for  instance  with  regards  to  the 
eGrants tool. 

The  SMP’s  efficiency  in  Pillar  1  was  bolstered  by  allocating  funds  to  procurement 
activities  managed  through  the  Commission’s  tendering  process,  allowing  targeted  and 
resource-efficient service delivery. Digital tools such as eRFI and IMI were developed and 
maintained at low cost, replacing redundant systems and improving information sharing 

5 

 
among national authorities, businesses and the public. Despite these achievements, limited 
efficiency gains were noted in consolidating budget lines, with only minor administrative 
simplifications  and improved budgetary transfer  mechanisms observed  compared to  the 
previous  financing  period.  Efforts  to  maximise  efficiency  through  training  and  peer-
learning  activities,  such  as  simplifying  cost  options  for  grants,  remain  areas  for 
improvement. 

Pillar 2’s Financial Support for Third Parties (FSTP) is an efficient tool for supporting 
small  businesses  but  can  result  in  administrative  burdens  placed  on  smaller  and  less 
the 
experienced  consortia  receiving  SMP  funding.  Beneficiaries  generally  find 
administrative requirements reasonable, and SME clients of the EEN report that services 
are efficiently aligned with business needs. Simplifying processes, such as by developing 
standard  templates,  a  central  management  platform  and  better  payment  conditions  are 
means to improve efficiency while smaller programme actions are best  reserved for cases 
with a clear justification, such as piloting innovative approaches. 

Pillar 3 has improved financial reporting transparency, which has been streamlined by the 
introduction of unit costs. However, the initial  transition  created  administrative burden, 
including  duplicate  eGrants  processes  and  insufficient  travel  reimbursements  during 
periods of inflation. Beneficiaries efficiently managed funds to  ensure value for money 
and actively worked to diversify funding sources, but progress varies across organisations 
like  the  International  Financial  Reporting  Standards  Foundation  (IFRS  Foundation), 
European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) and the Public Interest Oversight 
Board (PIOB). Ensuring sufficient public funding for EFRAG and securing a sustainable 
funding model for the PIOB are critical to maintaining independence and supporting high-
quality corporate and sustainability reporting, which are essential for investors and capital 
markets. 

In Pillar 4, the shift toward procurement has improved efficiency in addressing evolving 
consumer issues, like digital rights and product safety, and this is supported by evidence 
gathered through surveys and studies. Better Finance demonstrated high productivity and 
effectiveness, achieving significant outputs per person and excelling compared to similarly 
sized  organisations.  Similarly,  Finance  Watch  maintained  a  high  level  of  efficiency, 
producing  extensive  outputs,  particularly  in  communication  activities,  while  delivering 
high-quality  work  on  financial  malpractice,  finance  for  green  SMEs  and  over-
indebtedness. 

Pillar 5 has  supported  veterinary and phytosanitary programmes efficiently, effectively 
reallocating  resources  to  priority  diseases,  like  ASF  and  HPAI,  while  co-financing 
measures  to  mitigate  plant  pest  outbreaks,  such  as  Xylella  fastidiosa  and  pinewood 
nematode.  Cost-effectiveness  analyses  of  SMP-funded  responses  to  HPAI  and  Xylella 
fastidiosa highlight the programme’s role in alleviating the financial burden on Member 
States.  The  support  for  WOAH’s  Animal  Welfare  Platform  has  strengthened  the 
implementation of animal welfare standards and enforcement across Europe. The BTSF 
programme  also  recorded  a  significant  decrease  in  unit  costs  per  training  and  per 
participant, mainly due to the move to online formats. 

Pillar 6 has demonstrated efficiency in resource allocation, with stakeholders recognising 
the  ESP’s  cost-effectiveness  and  the  proportionate  benefits  it  delivers.  Automation  and 
streamlined  statistical  processes  have  contributed  to  efficiency  gains,  linked  with  a 
reduction  in  human  resources  within  the  European  Statistical  System  (ESS).  However, 
stakeholders warn that any further reductions of staff could hinder the ESP’s ability to meet 
growing  demands  for  detailed  and  timely  statistics  and  invest  in  new  technologies. 

6 

 
Legislative simplification and the adoption of electronic tools have successfully reduced 
the  administrative  burden,  with  stakeholders  reporting  moderate  to  high  success  in  this 
area. The ESP’s reliance on diverse financing sources, including subdelegated funds, has 
supported  the  development  of  tailored  statistics.  However,  stakeholders  emphasise  the 
importance of a funding structure that ensures autonomy and long-term efficiency. 

3.3.  Coherence 

The evaluation finds that the SMP demonstrates internal coherence. There are no overlaps 
between its pillars and areas of action, each pillar focusing on different policy fields with 
distinct  regulatory  frameworks.  Alignment  with  other  multiannual  financial  framework 
programmes,  whose  activities  are  not  duplicated  by  the  SMP,  and  the  EU  regulatory 
framework,  EU  strategies  and  broader  objectives  highlight  its  consistency  (external 
coherence). However, some nuance must be noted as the cross-thematic and diverse nature 
of the SMP can add more complexity to the overall coordination of the programme which 
in turn might impact the coherence of activities. 

Pillar 1 showcases coherence both internally and externally. Its activities are aligned with 
one  another  in  pursuing  the  objectives  set  out  in  the  SMP  Regulation  and  match  the 
Commission's  overall  strategies  and  priorities.  However,  the  consolidation  of  activities 
within the pillar has not produced the expected synergies or joint actions of an integrated 
financial instrument. 

Pillar  2  shows  internal  and  external  coherence  through  improved  synergies  and 
cooperation  among  flagship  actions  like  the  IP  Helpdesks.  However,  smaller  or  less 
continuous  actions  have  weaker  connections  to  other  activities.  While  stakeholders 
acknowledge the complexity of coordination within the SMP’s cross-thematic structure, 
the pillar benefits from the SMP’s broader reach and stronger positioning. Examples of 
synergies  with  other  SMP  pillars  and  EU  programmes  (such  as  Horizon  Europe  and 
national and regional initiatives) highlights how the pillar aligns with and complements 
broader support frameworks, particularly the EEN. 

Pillar  3  demonstrates  internal  and  external  coherence;  the  merging  of  budget  lines  for 
European  standardisation  and  financial  reporting  did  not  result  in  inconsistencies.  The 
specific nature of its activities minimises the risk of overlap or conflict, both within the 
pillar itself and with other pillars. The SMP’s operational support for standardisation aligns 
seamlessly with project-specific funding from programmes like Horizon Europe and LIFE. 
This strengthens synergies and advances EU priorities, such as the European Green Deal 
and the digital transition. EFRAG’s new mandate to develop ESRS fills a critical gap in 
sustainability reporting, with careful attention paid to interoperability with global standards 
to ensure consistency with international frameworks. 

Pillar  4  exhibits  strong  internal  and  external  coherence,  aligning  its  activities  with  the 
objectives of the SMP Regulation and complementing broader EU initiatives, such as the 
New Consumer Agenda. The work of beneficiaries, including BEUC, Better Finance and 
Finance  Watch,  reflects  a  collaborative  approach,  addressing  both  general  consumer 
concerns and  financial services issues. Additionally, the pillar complements other SMP 
pillars, such as Pillar 1 on market surveillance and Pillar 3 on setting standards. The pillar 
also  complements  the  Horizon  Europe  and  Digital  Europe  programmes,  ensuring 
alignment with key EU priorities in sustainability, digitalisation and consumer protection. 

Pillar 5 demonstrates strong internal coherence in its parts on food safety, with animal and 
plant health complementing one another to ensure safety across the food chain. Externally, 

7 

 
it aligns  well with EU priorities, including  the European Green Deal,  the  Farm to Fork 
strategy and common agricultural policy (CAP) measures through initiatives like reducing 
food waste, minimising pesticide use and combating antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The 
pillar  clearly  complements  other  programmes,  particularly  Horizon  Europe  and 
EU4Health:  each  programme  focuses  on  distinct  yet  coordinated  aspects  of  sustainable 
agriculture, AMR mitigation and environmental sustainability. This maximises impact and 
avoids duplicating efforts. 

Pillar  6's  objectives  and  activities  demonstrate  strong  internal  and  external  coherence, 
supported  by  legal  frameworks  ensuring  consistent  and  comparable  statistics  across 
Member States.  It  ensures  coherence through legal  frameworks, governance bodies and 
alignment with EU strategies. Collaboration with the ECB and international organisations 
improves efficiency and consistency with global standards. 

3.4.  EU added value 

The SMP generates added value that funding at national level could not have achieved. 
The financed activities allow the Commission to fulfil its legal obligations to address issues 
falling  within  its  remit.  Action  at  EU  level  is  also  required  due  to  the  nature  of  the 
challenges and needs pertaining to the functioning of the single market. In doing so, the 
SMP  delivers cross-border benefits  and economies of scale that  action at national  level 
alone could not match, underscoring its added value. 

Pillar  1  delivers  EU  added  value  by  enabling  the  Commission  to  fulfil  its  legal 
responsibilities, which cannot be delegated to Member States, and by achieving economies 
of scale. The programme’s support for cross-border services, such as coordination among 
national  authorities,  enforcement  of  EU  law  and  shared  IT  tools,  provides  benefits  that 
cannot be replicated at national level. These activities are critical for deepening the single 
market, boosting competitiveness and ensuring the effective development and monitoring 
of EU law and policies. Additionally, the evaluation highlights that without SMP funding, 
alternative EU funding sources would be required to meet these obligations. 

Pillar 2 demonstrates significant EU added value by fostering cross-border cooperation, 
enabling mutual learning and providing benchmarking and guidance on SME policy that 
national programmes cannot achieve. Stakeholder consultations consistently confirmed the 
unique  value  of  EU-level  initiatives  in  harmonising  regulation  and  frameworks  for  the 
single market. To tackle uneven participation in calls and projects, promotion efforts and 
consortium  requirements  now  target  under-represented  countries,  ensuring  broader 
inclusivity and sustained EU added value. 

Pillar  3  provides  great  EU  added  value  by  ensuring  sustained  support  for  Annex  III 
organisations  (Organisations  representing  SMEs,  consumers,  environmental  and  social 
interests in European standardisation3), which depend on SMP funding to remain active 
and  inclusive  in  the  standardisation  process.  Without  EU  funding,  there  is  a  risk  of 
renationalisation,  which  risks  undermining  the  EU’s  unified  voice  in  international 
economic  and  financial  forums,  reducing  coherence  and  effectiveness.  EU  action  is 
essential  for  oversight  and  coordination,  aligning  standardisation  efforts  with  EU 
legislation  and  public  interests,  preventing  market  fragmentation  and  ensuring  high-
quality, applicable standards. 

3 Standardisation Regulation - 1025/2012 - EN - EUR-Lex. 

8 

 
 
Pillar 4 provides  significant  EU added value by funding studies and data collection on 
consumer issues, enabling policymakers to address emerging risks, benchmark Member 
State performance and shape coordinated enforcement action. The SMP supports consumer 
advocacy at EU level, ensuring representation in areas like financial services that would 
be insufficiently addressed at national level. Additionally, cooperation with international 
organisations  and  non-EU  countries  strengthens  the  scope  and  impact  of  EU  consumer 
policy, which relies on coordinated, data-driven actions to tackle cross-border challenges 
and promote consumer interests effectively. 

Pillar  5  actions  have  a  positive  impact  on  protecting  human,  animal  and  plant  health, 
empowering the public through consumer awareness and knowledge sharing and providing 
greater sustainability for food systems. It delivers significant EU added value by enabling 
coordinated actions in animal and plant health that Member States could not achieve alone 
or  would  struggle  to  finance.  SMP  funding  supports  veterinary  and  phytosanitary 
emergency measures and programmes, vaccine  banks  (which  are  critical for addressing 
cross-border  animal  diseases  and  plant  pests),  and  essential  tools  like  EU  reference 
laboratories and BTSF trainings. These efforts contribute greatly to improving the official 
control capacities of Member States, harmonising enforcement and ensuring a consistent 
approach necessary for the smooth functioning of the single market. 

Pillar 6 delivers strong EU added value to EU data through its impartiality, reliability and 
harmonised  comparability  across  Member  States.  The  centralised  framework  and 
methodological  advancements  have  significantly  improved  data  quality  and  timeliness, 
enabling  informed  decision-making.  Initiatives  like  the  European  Statistical  Recovery 
Dashboard show they can adapt to emerging needs, while grants and collaborative efforts 
strengthen Member State capacity. Stakeholders universally value the ESP for its critical 
role  in  providing  unified,  standardised  statistics  that  are  essential  for  policymaking  – 
something which Member States could not achieve on their own. Eurostat’s alignment with 
global standards further underscores the importance of their activities. 

3.5.  Relevance 

The  objectives  of  the  SMP  and  the  activities  implemented  within  all  its  pillars  remain 
relevant to the needs of the single market and prove some degree of adaptability to respond 
to  emerging  and  unforeseen  challenges  (e.g.  COVID-19,  Ukraine),  even  with  a 
comparatively  modest  budget  that  did  not  anticipate  the  inflationary  pressure  or  these 
events during the implementation of the programme. The programme's relevance increases 
when considering emerging political challenges reflected in  the new Political Guidelines4 
and  recent  reports  from  Enrico  Letta  and  Mario  Draghi5.  However,  the  programme’s 
modest budget and the need for better visibility and communication of certain activities 
suggest  areas for improvement to  ensure it remains relevant  to  the needs  of  the public, 
businesses and the political challenges of the EU in general. 

Pillar 1 remains highly relevant as it supports EU law enforcement, competition rules, IT 
systems  and coordination groups  that are  aligned with  the Commission’s strategies and 
priorities.  The  pillar's  relevance  is  set  to  grow  further  by  contributing  to  growth, 
investments and the completion of the single market, including the creation of a Savings 
and Investment Union under the 2024-2029 Political Guidelines. 

4 European Commission political guidelines for 2024-2029. 
5 Draghi Report’, EU competitiveness: Looking ahead - European Commission. ‘Letta Report’, Enrico Letta 

- Much more than a market (April 2024). 

9 

 
 
Pillar 2’s objectives  and actions  are highly relevant. They are closely  aligned with  EU 
strategies  and  priorities  and  with  work  programmes  developed  based  on  extensive 
stakeholder consultations to ensure they address the evolving needs of SMEs and the single 
market. However, improvements could be made by explicitly linking actions to objectives 
in  work  programmes  and  by  avoiding  overwhelming  beneficiaries  with  too  many  
demands. 

Pillar  3  remains  relevant  as  it  is  well-aligned  with  market  needs,  supporting  the  free 
movement of capital within the single market, boosting EU companies’ competitiveness in 
global capital markets, and ensuring EU interests are represented in the standard-setting 
process. Activities, such as EFRAG’s development of sustainability reporting standards 
under the CSRD are critical to implementing EU law, influencing global standardisation 
and addressing the growing importance of sustainability reporting. 

Pillar 4 remains highly relevant, addressing consumer protection and financial services 
through activities aligned with the New Consumer Agenda and EU priorities. Initiatives, 
such as Consumer PRO, ADR grants, and IT tools, like Safety Gate and e-surveillance web 
crawlers,  effectively  support  enforcement  authorities,  empower  consumers  and  ensure 
product safety. The beneficiaries Better Finance and Finance Watch play a crucial role in 
representing  financial  services  consumers.  Their  expertise  is  set  to  grow  in  importance 
alongside  the  EU’s  focus  on  the  Savings  and  Investment  Union  and  financial  literacy 
although greater visibility and resources may be required in the future. 

Pillar 5 contributes to a stronger, more coherent single market and is highly relevant to the 
evolving  needs  of  the  EU  food  chain.  The  pillar  tackles  key  issues  such  as  emerging 
diseases, antimicrobial resistance, food safety and sustainable practices. The co-financed 
emergency measures for animal and plant diseases helped alleviate the burden on farmers. 
Activities focusing on surveillance, laboratory inspections and sustainable food production 
align with broader EU policies like the European Green Deal and the Farm to Fork strategy, 
ensuring continued relevance in tackling public health and sustainability challenges. 

Pillar  6  remains  highly  relevant.  It  aligns  closely  with  the  needs  of  the  ESS  and  other 
stakeholders  by  addressing  changing  policy  priorities  and  data  requirements.  While  the 
ESS has demonstrated adaptability, particularly during crises like COVID-19 and the war 
in Ukraine, gaps in regional data granularity, timeliness and the integration of new data 
sources highlight the need for continued innovation and improvements to meet emerging 
policy demands. 

3.6. 

Flexibility 

The SMP has partially delivered on the expected benefits of an integrated programme. The 
potential of the SMP for flexibility has brought some positive results, but its full potential 
remains untapped. Budgetary transfers have been relatively small amounts and occurred 
between budget lines managed by the same Commission department. 

3.7. 

Simplification 

Although  there  is  some  evidence  from  the  interim  evaluation,  overall  simplification  at 
programme level is not at the expected level. Some simplification has resulted from having 
a single legal basis for the programme: the Commission only had to prepare one proposal, 
and Parliament and the Council only had to adopted one regulation. However, evidence of 
other  simplification  is  limited  as  multiple  committees  and  work  programmes  are  still 
required to cover different policy areas. 

10 

 
3.8. 

Synergies 

The expected synergies from  consolidating  activities into a single financing  instrument 
have  not  fully  materialised,  despite  cooperation  across  policy  areas,  implying  sound 
collaboration  between  Commission  departments.  Joint  activities  across  multiple  pillars 
have been carried out but more could be developed. 

4.  RECOMMENDATIONS 

Despite  the  overall  positive  conclusions  at  this  mid-term  stage  of  implementation, 
there is room for improvement. Taking into account the limited budget of the programme 
and  its  fixed  programming  schedule,  accommodating  new  policy  priorities  without  a 
substantially increased budget is a challenge. In particular, higher-than-expected inflation 
has reduced the number and scope of actions that could be carried out. 

The potential for flexibility, synergies and simplification should be further harnessed to 
make the most of the SMP’s unique design. The Commission departments responsible for 
each SMP pillar could investigate the feasibility of initiating more joint actions, such as 
cross-pillar training, shared procurement activities, common purchases of databases, joint 
studies,  Eurobarometer  surveys,  framework  contracts  and  shared  IT  projects. 
Simplification should be considered with regards to the eGrants tool. 

Data collection in relation to the achievement of indicators could be more streamlined. A 
more systematic gathering of data across all pillars would better inform the assessment of 
the  programme’s  implementation.  It  would  allow  the  Commission  to  adopt  corrective 
measures to ensure that the activities effectively and efficiently serve the achievement of 
the objectives and remain relevant and coherent within the SMP and with the EU’s broader 
priorities. 

Certain indicators in the monitoring and evaluation framework could be updated and 
refined to be more tailored to the SMP and better reflect programme performance. This 
would also improve data collection, align the framework closer with the intervention logic, 
and ultimately improve the assessment of the programme’s implementation, in particular 
during the final evaluation. 

Pillar 1: More frequent feedback collection, where relevant, from users of services like 
Your Europe Advice (YEA) and the EU Taxonomy Compass, would improve monitoring 
user satisfaction and service delivery6. Introducing a unified reporting system across all 
budget  lines would streamline the tracking  of activities, outputs  and results. This  could 
reveal opportunities for synergies in areas like joint procurement, training and coordinated 
enforcement across multiple domains. 

Pillar 2: Systematic monitoring of output and result indicators in project reports  would 
identify  all  SMEs  supported  under  the  SMP.  Explicitly  linking  these  indicators  to  the 
specific objectives would bring more clarity on the programme’s impact. Result indicators 
could be improved by linking SME satisfaction with the support received and any follow-
up action they take. A harmonised survey should try to gather data on the impact on, for 
example, growth, digitalisation, and internationalisation. 

6 Your Europe includes a feedback mechanism and runs an annual user feedback survey. 

11 

 
 
Pillar  3:  Creating  clearer  monitoring  and  feedback  mechanisms  for  participation  in 
standardisation  processes  would  improve  the  understanding  of  how  EU  funding 
(particularly  Annex 
involvement.  Some 
organisations that are financed to support the development of financial and non-financial 
reporting standards would be severely impacted if they received no funding, risking their 
ability to continue their activities that are instrumental to EU policy objectives. Increasing 
the funding base of these organisations is also necessary. 

impacts  stakeholder 

III  organisations) 

Pillar 4: Experience with the programme has shown that, while indicators need to be in 
place  to  measure  the  quantitative  outputs  of  the  beneficiaries,  there  are  challenges  in 
measuring the quality or impact of the activities using quantitative indicators. Financial 
difficulties have also been encountered by some beneficiaries due to increased inflation 
that  was  not  covered  by  the  amounts  in  the  SMP’s  initial  programme  design.  Product 
compliance and safety would be improved by ensuring more market surveillance officers, 
better cooperation with customs authorities, faster dissemination of research findings, and 
more frequent calls for funding. Varying level of resources among grant participants may 
have  affected  the  level  of  achievements  for  these  actions  particularly  where  matching 
funding is required. 

Pillar  5:  Improving  the  monitoring  framework  of  the  programme  by  setting  indicators 
would  help  better  measure  the  effectiveness  and  efficiency  of  financed  activities,  for 
instance  to  monitor  the  progress  and  impact  of  European  Union  Reference  Centres’ 
(EURCs) activities on animal welfare. This would also help better assess to what extent 
these activities contribute to the smooth functioning of the internal market. Access to an 
emergency aid reserve is needed to secure the efficient implementation of veterinary and 
phytosanitary emergency measures and programmes. 

Pillar 6: There is a need to continue investing in new technologies and innovative data 
sources.  Improving  adaptability  to  rapid  technological  developments  is  crucial,  and 
continuous  efforts  are  needed  to  improve  timeliness,  reduce  publication  delays  and 
strengthen  capacity-building  initiatives  among  Member  States.  Prioritising  statistical 
outputs and continued coordination with other EU bodies is needed to ensure that the most 
critical  and  high-impact  data  needs  are  efficiently  addressed.  To  achieve  this,  stronger 
mechanisms  to  boost  user  engagement  and  better  understand  their  needs  and  priorities 
should  be  developed,  including  more  timely  and  inclusive  feedback.  It  is  considered 
important to continue delineating the European Statistics Pillar, including its activities and 
budget,  within  the  future  MFF  architecture,  in  order  to  highlight  its  independent  and 
impartial nature. 

12