Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011."— Presentation transcript:

1 2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw,

2 Purpose of the evaluation Estimation of the impact of grants on growth of SMEs in Poland. Measure covered by the study:Improvement of competitiveness of SMEs through investments (Measure 2.3) implemented within Sectoral Operational Programme Improvement of the Competitiveness of Enterprises, years (SOP-ICE). Measure 2.3 was aimed at improvement of competitiveness of Polish SMEs through modernisation of their product offer and their technology base. Average value of the subsidy amounted to PLN 532 thousand.

3 Impact evaluation problem ? Factor x 1 Factor x 2 Problem: low competitiveness of enterprises SOP-ICE Effects SELECTION BIAS

4 The approach Counterfactual framework -> Q: what would have happened in the absence of the intervention? Quasi-experimental approach was chosen. Control group was selected from unsuccessful applicants. Method used to reduce the selection bias: Propensity Score Matching.

5 Data sets used in the evaluation PARP data sets (databases of all applicants, with employment +9); 19 covariates were controlled, such as: age, revenues, size, legal form, assets, the use of other subsidies, etc. Central Statistical Office data sets (Report on revenues, costs and financial results and the cost of fixed assets); 31 outcome variables were estimated, such as: net revenues from sales, employment, expenditures, profits, etc.

6 Unsuccessful applicants Control group ps= 0,6 ps= 0,5 ps= 0,8 ps= 0,1 ps= 0,2 ps= 0,3 ps= 0,2 ps= 0,01 ps= 0,4 ps= 0,9 Beneficiaries ps= 0,8 ps= 0,3 ps= 0,9 ps= 0,4 ps= 0,1 Propensity Score Matching (1-1; nearest neighbour)

7 Selection bias Variable Treated (mean value) Untreated (mean value) Control group (mean value) The standardized difference in percent (before matching) The standardized difference in percent (after matching) Age of the company 10,3110,4110,13-1,122,28 Revenues (in total) 50409, , ,93-4,74-2,35 Revenue growth before the programe (comparing 2 periods) 0,720,590,7326,72-2,35 Assets (in toatal) 32676, , ,08-2,780,15 Assets growth before the programe (comparing 2 periods) 0,700,600,7020,12-0,35 Value of deminimis 13802,679826, ,885,222,90 Total employment 70,3444,7771,1547,44-1,50 Employment growth before the programme 0,660,570,6618,88-0,46 Difference in employment 7,294,207,7317,62-2,49 Percentage of women 0,270,330,27-25,820,98 Number of contracts signed in Phare 1,150,451,0653,956,87 Value of signed contracts in Phare 15502,535301, ,8846,737,18 Application in SOP-ICE Measure 2.1 0,060,020,0621,452,77 Contract in SOP-ICE Measure 2.1 0,040,010,0320,242,60 Contract in SOP-HRD Measure 2.3 0,080,040,0915,92-2,28 Credit 0,700,530,6834,684,86 Project area …………… Region …………… Legal form …………… PKD code ……………

8 Date of measurement

9 Employment and wages costs Impact: +14 FTEsImpact: +PLN 511thousand

10 Net revenues from sales Impact: +PLN thousand

11 Operating expenses Impact: +PLN thousand

12 Losses – scale of the phenomenon Impact: +3,3%Impact: zero

13 Losses Impact: +PLN 360 thousandImpact: +PLN thousand

14 Profits Impact: +PLN 412 thousandImpact: +PLN 248 thousand

15 Asset Turnover Impact: -0,10

16 Total expenditures on tangible fixed assets in use Impact: +PLN 434 thousandImpact: +PLN 395 thousand

17 Liabilities Impact: +PLN 458 thousand Impact: +PLN 372 thousand

18 Export Impact: +PLN thousandImpact: -PLN 753 thousand

19 Value of purchases in total imports Impact: +PLN thousand

20 Structure of imports Impact: +PLN thousandImpact: -PLN 109 thousand

21 Current ratio Impact: -0,07

22 Main positive impacts: Employment and wages. Export and import (production activity). Profits. Expenditures on tangible fixed assets in use (machinery and technical equipment). Main negative impacts, or no impact: Productivity of the enterprises. Losses and their amount. Liquidity of the enterprises. Summary

23 More on this…

24 Thank you for your attention! Polish Agency for Enterprise Development 81/83 Pańska Street Warsaw, Poland Tel + 48 (22) Fax + 48 (22) (22) Infoline: + 48 (22) /92/93


Download ppt "2011 Example from enterprise support in Poland Rafał Trzciński Impact Evaluation Seminar Warsaw, 12.12.2011."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google