Fase 2: Identificar las vulnerabilidades de la infraestructura

the conclusion quoted in this point, the Commission clearly recognises that objectives for the 1994 to 1999 period were not sufficiently clear and quantified. It was partly for this rea- son that the thematic evaluation was commissioned, with a view to assessing the impact of the Structural Funds on SMEs and analysing the most effective means of assisting SMEs. The results of the evaluation have been fed into the program- ming of the Structural Funds for the 2000 to 2006 period, in particular on the question of how to ensure better tar- geting of aid on SMEs. In addition, because this was a the- matic evaluation undertaken mid-way through the program- ming period, it was inevitable that it would not be possible to draw definitive conclusions on the impact of the Structural Funds on SMEs in the 1994 to 1999 period.

In addition to the estimate of expenditure on SMEs, the the- matic evaluation also estimated the number of beneficiary companies and the employment created. It concluded that between 1989 and 1999 over one and a half million SMEs were assisted by the Structural Funds, representing 21,2 % of eligible SMEs. Between 1994 and 1999, it estimated gross jobs created of 2,3 million, with net jobs estimated at 2 mil- lion.

(30_{) More than a quarter (25,6 %) of the SMEs covered bythe}

thematic evaluation of SMEs which received SF assistance were unaware that the funds theyhad received came from Communitysources. In its 1996 Annual Report (para- graphs 6.53 to 6.59), the Court drew attention to a num- ber of practices which would explain this lack of informa- tion.

(31_{) The surveycarried out in 1998 amongst those SMEs}

which had benefited from a number of Communitysub- sidies shows that 69,7 % of them consider the relevant systems to be ‘not integrated at all’. This percentage rises to 85,1 % for the SMEs which received ERDF and ESF aid. The authors of the evaluation conclude that ‘At an EU level, there is a need to improve the overall coherence of different Commission programmes that have a bearing on SME development’, which confirms the Court’s obser- vations (Annual Report concerning the financial year 1996, paragraphs 6.98 to 6.99).

(32_{) ‘Financial engineering’ is understood to be SF contribu-}

tions to implementing measures other than the non- repayable assistance described under Article 28(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999. This covers, in particular: repayable assistance, interest-rate subsidies, guarantees, equityholdings, venture-capital holdings or another form of finance.

(33_{) (OJ C 267, 22.9.1999, p. 2). These guidelines stipulate}

that ‘Assistance under the SFs to stimulate the productive sector must focus in particular on small and medium- sized enterprises’.

measures has been reduced and the SME CI abol- ished (34_{), the strategyfor aid to SMEs should become}

more straightforward and more consistent. The new regulatoryframework should allow improvements in the management of aid measures in support of SMEs, in monitoring and evaluation, provided that the provi- sions become operational as soon as possible. The new regulatoryframework for the management and control systems for the Structural Funds was adopted by the Commission in March 2001 (35_{). Moreover, Commis-}

sion Regulation (EC) No 1159/2000 (36_{) of 30 May2000}

on information and publicitymeasures to be carried out bythe Member States concerning assistance from the Structural Funds should improve the visibilityof the aid measures. In addition, a new regulatoryframework was also drawn up in the field of competition policy rules (37_{). With regard to the period 1994 to 1999, with}

the exception of the adoption in 1997 of the datasheets on eligibilityof expenditure (38_{) and of Regulation}

(EC) No 2064/97, the measures taken could not have anysignificant impact on the programmes already adopted and in progress.

A further concern of the evaluation was to identify the extent of deadweight in aid schemes for SMEs. As a result of the findings of the evaluation and in order to enhance the impact of Structural Fund support to SMEs, the Commission has given greater priority to indirect support for SMEs as opposed to direct aid and this is reflected in the programmes for the 2000 to 2006 period.

The European Employment Strategy emphasises the impor- tance of the role played by SMEs in providing jobs within the European Union. The combined assistance from the Member States, the different Structural Funds and the EIB is aimed at meeting the various needs experienced by SMEs upon setting up and in the context of their activities in the market place (financing, hiring of staff, providing skills for employees, etc.). The late adoption of the new regulation on management and control had a limited impact on the management of the Funds, given that most operational programmes were adopted between the end of 2000 and March 2001, and that the Commis- sion’s main requirements were made known to the Member States in March 2000, and discussed in great depth in the Fund Committees between then and the vote in the Manage- ment Committee in December 2000.

(34_{) In particular, with regard to the SME Initiative, the Court}

found (Annual Report concerning the financial year1999, paragraphs 6.86 to 6.91) that the programmes under this Initiative either covered measures which were identical or similar to the ones in the CSFs or the SPDs or created new measures with the same objectives as the existing ones. (35_{) Commission Regulation (EC) No 438/2001 of 2 March}

2001 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 as regards the management and control systems for assistance granted under the Structural Funds (OJ L 63, 3.3.2001, p. 21). (36_{) OJ L 130, 31.5.2000, p. 30.}

(37_{) These are Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of}

22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the appli- cation of Article 93 of the EC Treaty(OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 1) and Council Regulation (EC) No 994/1998 of 7 May 1998 on the application of Articles 92 and 93 of the Treatyestablishing the European Communityto certain categories of horizontal State aid (OJ L 142, 14.5.1998, p. 1), and also the Commission Regulations concerning State aid on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treatyto training aid,de minimisaid and aid to SMEs: Regulations (EC) No 68/2001, (EC) No 69/2001 and (EC) No 70/2001 of 12 January2001 (OJ L 10, 13.1.2001, p. 20, 30 and 33).

(38_{) Commission Decisions 97/317/EC to 97/331/EC of}

23 April 1997 modifying the decisions approving the CSFs, the SPDs and the CommunityInitiative programmes (OJ L 146, 5.6.1997, p. 1).

3.81. The eligibilityof expenditure sheets allowed clari- fication, as from 1 May1997, of some of the problems raised bythe Court (Annual Report concerning the financial year 1996, paragraphs 6.73 to 6.76 and 6.84), in particular in respect of financing from other sources for co-financed projects and financial engineering. For the period 2000 to 2006, these sheets have been replaced byrules contained in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1685/2000 (39_{). However, the eligibilityconditions}

governing financing from other sources have not been retained in the new rules and those regarding financial engineering were substantiallyamended (40_{), which has}

produced uncertainty(see paragraph 3.91).

3.81. During the 1994 to 1999 programming period,