1. Ivan FILUS
BIC Bratislava
Enterprise Europe Network
SME NCP / Access2Finance NCP
SME Instrument
Experiences from the first calls
Results, recommendations,
main problems and feedback
from Slovak SMEs
SME Instrument
Experiences from the first calls
Results, recommendations,
main problems and feedback
from Slovak SMEs

2. RESULTS
of the FIRST CALLS

3. SMEINST: State of play (2014)
• 5 cut-offs
• 8.181 proposals received ~25% of whole H2020
• 822 companies funded
• 258,5 M€ budget allocated

4. SMEINST Phase 1: 2014 results

5. SMEINST Phase 1:
TOP 10 Coordinators

6. SMEINST Phase 1: Thematic distribution

7. SME Analysis SMEINST Phase 1:
Size of beneficiaries

8. SMEINST Phase 2: 2014 results

9. SMEINST Phase 2:
TOP 10 Coordinators

10. SMEINST Phase 2: March 2015 Cut-off
Submitted proposal

11. SMEINST Phase 2: Thematic distribution

12. SME Analysis SMEINST Phase 2:
Size of beneficiaries

13. 2014 Champions League
(All phases and cut-offs)

14. TOP 10 Success Rates

15. Who are the evaluators? (CO1.14)
Total nber Experts Share
Business 49 9,4%
Business development 118 22,6%
Business incubation 20 3,8%
Commercial / Marketing 15 2,9%
Entrepreneurship / Start-up 92 17,7%
Finance 25 4,8%
Gender issues 1 0,2%
Innovation advice/management 146 28,0%
Legal advice / Intellectual Property
Rights 15 2,9%
Other 9 1,7%
Risk finance (Business Angel Investor
/ Venture Capital) 31 6,0%
Total 521 * 100,0%
* 434 (83%) of the experts was involved in evaluation
51 (12%) from universities, 383 (88%) from business environment, 34% women

16. Results of Slovakia

17. SK summary results
(Phase 1 – All cut-offs)
• 92 SMEs involved in
• 123 proposals submitted
• 2 projects approved
– 1 coordinator (single partner)
– 1 partner (CZ-SK consortium)
Main list 1
Below available budget 1
Below threshold 119
Ineligible 2

18. SK Results: Areas (submitted proposals)

19. SK Results: Overall scores

20. SK Results: Evaluation
(submitted proposals)

21. SK Results: Regions (submitted proposals)

22. Quick survey of SMEI
• November 2014
• 20+ Slovak SMEs involved in first SMEI call
• 8 SMEs provided feedback
– Positives
– Negatives

23. Positive aspects
• possibility of funding for the individual company
– no need of consortia
• higher frequency of deadlines / cut-off dates
– more frequent than RIA
• wide thematic scope of the SMEI calls
• adequate amount of funding
– for small SMEs
• low bureaucratic burden
– in proposal preparation (forms, 10 pages) / possible
reporting

24. Positive aspects
• rather quick feedback in Phase 1 evaluation
• funding of the innovation in SMEs
• funding of significant part of the innovation cycle
– feas. studies > R&D > demo > tests
• access to the innovation/business mentors
– provided a good number of high profile experts will be
subscribed in the coaching database

25. Negative aspects
• MOST IMPORTANT:
Feedback (ESR) on Phase 1 proposal
– very few information provided
– no comments for possible improvement
– very subjective (subjectivity of the judging process is highly
influencing the selection process )

26. Negative aspects
• TRL – unclear definition (e.g. transition between
laboratory and operational environment)
• strong correlation between countries of beneficiaries
and evaluators
• missing notification about ESR
• page limit (10 pages)

27. Main observation – Slovakia in SMEINST
• great initial enthusiasm
• disappointment from the success rate
• lot of rumours
• efficiancy of the SMEINST management
• consulting companies
• we are (slowly) getting better
• future ... work with the promising business plans

28. Specific case: Re-submissions
Overall results

29. Specific case: Re-submissions
Subjectivity of evaluation
vs.
continuous improvement and learning
Statistics based of the first 4 cut-off dates (Phase 1):
• 23 SK companies (25%)
• 53 projects (43%)

30. Specific case: Re-submissions (SK)
ups 11
downs 8
up-down 4

31. Contact
Ivan FILUS
BIC Bratislava
Enterprise Europe Network
t: 02/ 5441 7515, 5441 7606
e: filus@bic.sk
Zochova 5
811 03 Bratislava
www.BIC.sk
www.EEN.sk
h2020.CVTISR.sk