1 / 22

Evaluation of the SME Funding Schemes - summary

European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Evaluation of the SME Funding Schemes - summary. Aims of evaluation. An evaluation of the SME funding scheme was carried out in the first half of 2003. The main aims were to: Assess the impact and sustainability of the 2001 projects

precious-thomas
Download Presentation

Evaluation of the SME Funding Schemes - summary

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  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

More Related