59 innovative SMEs to share €70.5 million under Horizon 2020 SME Instrument

59 innovative SMEs to share €70.5 million under Horizon 2020 SME Instrument

Printer-friendly versionPDF version

59 SMEs from 16 countries have been selected in the latest round of Horizon 2020 SME Instrument Phase 2. For each project, the participants will receive up to €2.5 million to finance innovation activities and the development of their business plans. The companies will also be entitled to benefit from up to 12 days of business coaching.

The European Commission received 962 proposals under Phase 2 by the second cut-off date of 2015 on 17 June. 357 received an evaluation score above the application threshold and 44 or 12.3%, amounting to total project costs of €93.7 million, have been selected for funding.

Spanish SMEs have once again been particularly successful with 11 beneficiaries on track to receive €15 million.

They are closely followed by firms from Italy, the United Kingdom, Germany and Denmark. Since the launch of the programme on 1st January 2014, 273 SMEs have been selected under Phase 2 of the SME Instrument sharing more than €387 million.






Last edition on 15/09/2015 to correct the amount of grant requested.


  • Clara B.'s picture

    Thanks for the info. Are the €93.7 million grant requested or projects budget? According to the Flash call info (http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/doc/call/h2020/h2020-sm...) the total EU budget allocated to the 44 projects is € 70.467.289. It is quite a big difference if we want to figure out how much budget is left. Thanks in advance for your response.

  • martizr's picture

    93.7 is the grant requested.

    Erwan @EASME

  • Clara B.'s picture

    thanks Erwan. Then, if in June were granted around €68.5m and in September €93.7m, are there around €70m left for the two remaining cut offs in 2015 (total budget €230m)?

  • martizr's picture

    It's not so easy to calculate. Last year for example we received additional budget for some topics for the last cut-off. We'll publish an article in the coming days to explain the details.

    Erwan @EASME

  • James Whitby's picture

    Has this 'more detailed' article clarifying the remaing budget been published? I find the press releases rather hard to follow (c.f. confusion even here between grant requested and total project costs); could you not state what funds remain from the foreseen budget (without any possible extra funds)? I am particularly interested phase 2 of the SME Instrument scheme.

  • martizr's picture

    Correction: 93.7 is the total cast of all the projects selected. Total of grant requested is €70.5 million

  • Oscar's picture

    Many statistics are always published. However, there is never information regarding the cut-off mark for each topic and each date. Where can I obtain this information? It should be available for everyone without asking our NCPs.

    In my opinion, I prefer this information to submit or not a proposal rather that countries with more or less sucess (that it is interesting but not useful)

  • martizr's picture

    We decided not to publish this information because we consider it would not help applicants as the marks are different according to the topic and to the cut-off.

    Erwan @EASME

  • Santiago's picture

    I agree with you. A ranking of proposals or at least the cut-off mark per topic would be usefull to have a feeling of the level of competitors. That would be useful. Interesting, but maybe not so useful would also be to publish the evaluation success rate per country: number of proposals that passed the threshold in each country. Unless that is an information that were already published and I was not aware of it. In that case I´d appreciate a link.

  • jason's picture

    Can you explain the huge difference in scores for each propsal? Some are being funded with scores as low as 12 while others are not being funded with scores as high 14.3 ? Also the decision by some project officers to influence the budgets of the sub contractors even though they have passed the value for money tests and the budget allocations have been authorised by the independent evaluators?

  • martizr's picture

    The pass mark directly depends on the number of good proposals received.

    What do you mean by 'the decision by some project officers to influence the budgets of the sub contractors'?

    Erwan @EASME

  • Jason's picture

    Hi Erwan, I have to disagree with the pass mark answer I am afraid I have first hand knowledge of proposals written and submitted scoring higher than those funded in the same calls, However my main concern was with the (un) official budget placed on sub contractors. If the SME and the sub contractor agree on the work to be carried out during the submission and that budget is accepted as value for money and passed by the independent evaluator does the Project Officer then have the right to put that project on hold and demand that the sub contract budget be reduced to 5% of the total grant ? This has happened to a company I work with and has placed the project at risk as the budget cannot cover the work that was agreed in the proposal.

  • Anonymous's picture


  • Alessandro Canepa's picture

    It would be interesting to know how many winners of Phase II come from Phase I and how many entered directly phase II.

  • martizr's picture

    For the June cut-off 14 project out of 44 went through phase 1 first.

    Erwan @EASME

  • CFA's picture

    Dear Erwin,
    Can you provide us with data of age of SME Instrument beneficiaries? Are they usually start-ups?
    Kind regards

  • martizr's picture

    In 2014 32% of phase 1 and 21% of phase 2 beneficiaries were established for less than 3 years.
    Also 60% of Phase 1 have less to 10 employees.

    Erwan @EASME

  • Michael's picture

    When looking at the tables above I see that there are 6 beneficiaries from Germany for the cut-off date on June 17th, 2015. However, when looking at the list of beneficiaries here (https://ec.europa.eu/easme/en/sme-instrument-beneficiaries) and filtering for Germany, I only see four beneficiaries. I think it has something to do with # of proposals and # of beneficiaries not being equal but the visualization in the link above does not provide a list of all beneficiaries.

    Thanks, Michael

  • Mathilde's picture

    Dear Erwan,
    You provided us with the data for the June (2015) cut-off regarding the number of winners of Phase II coming from Phase I. What about the other cut-off?
    Thanks in advance for your response

  • martizr's picture

    We have not received this information yet but we will publish the figure as soon as it is available.

    Erwan @EASME

  • Jag's picture

    Hi, there is a small mistake on the first graph.

    Instead of Ireland (1) it should be Israel(1)

    It doesn't matter...But just in case.

Add new comment

Please answer this question
Enter the characters shown in the image.