Evaluation of the SME Funding Schemes - summary

1. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work Evaluation of the SME Funding Schemes - summary

2. Aims of evaluation An evaluation of the SME funding scheme wascarried outin the first half of 2003. The main aims were to: • Assess the impact and sustainability of the 2001projects • Carry out a preliminary evaluation of the 2002 projects • Prepare recommendations for future funding schemes Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

3. Overall conclusion • A well-run programme that is achieving useful results in the field of health and safety at work. • Relevant to the health and safety issues faced by SMEs and shows a high degree of financial additionality. • Considerable added value, beneficial impacts on the target group of SMEs, and wider ‘demonstration’ effects. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

4. Methodology – key phases 6 Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

5. Numbers of projects • A total of103 projects involving total costs of some €14.7 million from the Agency. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

6. Types of projects • Projects supported under the SME Funding Scheme addressed a very diverse range of subjects. The analysis below is limited to the 2002-03 scheme Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

7. Acceptances • A large number ofapplications. • Relatively few accepted - 12% under the 2001-02 scheme and 14% the following year. • Calls for proposals and subsequent procedures were clear. • More time is needed to prepare project proposals. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

8. Financing • National projects received funding of up to €90,000 and transnational projects generally received amounts up to €200,000. • The Agency’s intervention rate was 55.6%. • There is a higher intervention rate for transnational projects (67%) than national projects (54%). Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

9. Additionality • Very few projects would have gone ahead without some input from Agency funding. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

10. Projects that did not go ahead • Of projects that did not receive Agency funding, most were unable to obtain alternative funding and did not go ahead. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

11. Achievement of objectives • Most projects considered that they had fully or partially achieved their objectives. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

12. Help and advice • Those carrying out projects rated highly the help and advice received from the Agency. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

13. Numbers of SMEs benefiting • Of the order of 700,000 SMEs will have benefited from the scheme in some way (after scaling up for non respondents). • Of these 700,000 SMEs of the order of 80,000 SMEs will have received direct advice. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

14. Number of SMEs benefiting • Note: A = Number of respondents; B = Average number of beneficiaries claimed by respondents; C = Total. For the 2001-02 scheme a further total D is shown which excludes one Netherlands scheme where the data includes beneficiaries from other non Agency work Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

15. Period for which SMEs benefit • Project holders considered that SMEs continue to benefit from the results of projects. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

16. Benefits to SMEs Feedback from interviews and case studies suggests that the benefits of the SME Funding Scheme are very diverse (and consequently difficult to measure): For example: • Useful case studies but difficulties in transferring experiences. • The challenge of reaching SMEs. • Spin off into other areas, for example reduced insurance premiums. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

17. Timescale for each programme • Each funding scheme takes two years from start to completion. But this only allows about 9 months for fieldwork. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

18. Project timescales • The one-year period for completion of projects is too short. • Not enough time after completion of schemes to disseminate the results. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

19. Publicity and dissemination • Most projects involved a research phase and a publicity or dissemination phase. • Need to concentrate more on dissemination. • There are many studies carried out by others who bring together research on safety and health. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

20. Recommendations - General • Continued support, preferably on a larger scale, for the SME Funding Scheme. • Consider whether the SME Funding Scheme should continue in its current form, i.e. as a separate scheme, or become part of a larger EU-funded programme. • If the SME Funding Scheme continues in its present form, the funding arrangements should be altered to allow projects to be supported on a multi-annual basis. Similarly, if the SME Funding Scheme continues in its present form, there should be a greater focus on the types of projects that deliver the highest Community added value. • There also needs to be more emphasis on ensuring that the results of projects are disseminated as widely as possible. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

21. Recommendations – Using other EU funds • Steps should be taken to ensure that synergies with other EU funded networks and programmes are maximised. • ‘Horizontal’ theme in major EU-supported programmes such as the Structural Funds. • Prepare guidance aimed at policymakers in regional authorities explaining what sorts of health and safety projects are eligible for support. • The Agency should investigate the possibility of similar guidance being included in other major EU funding initiatives, in particular the agricultural and fishery funds. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services

22. Recommendations – New Member States • Whilst a transfer of know-how from the Agency’s EU15 SME Funding Scheme to the New Member States (NMSs) is desirable, this should be a two-way process. • Following EU enlargement, there is a strong case for a special SME Funding Scheme for the NMSs. • There is a need to review experience from EU15 to identify ideas and good practices in the safety and health at work field that are especially relevant to the NMSs. • Support should be provided, where necessary, to help develop safety and health at work institutional capacity and policies in the NMSs. • Many of the suggested improvements to the SME Funding Scheme that has operated in EU15 are especially relevant to the NMSs and should be implemented there if a scheme is to be launched that goes beyond transferring best practices. Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services