This report was commissioned by Energy Systems Catapult and carried out by SQW, it applies a quasi‑experimental “difference‑in‑differences” (DiD) methodology to estimate the causal impact of the Catapult’s support on the growth of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in the energy innovation space. Specifically, it compares firms that engaged in the Catapult’s programmes (incubation, acceleration, Living Lab R&D, challenge calls, investor‑readiness support) against three counterfactual groups: (1) a 1:1 propensity‑score‑matched set of non‑beneficiary companies; (2) a 1:2 matched set; and (3) SMEs that applied to the Catapult but were either unsuccessful or only received very light “surgery” advice (“Catapult comparison” group).

Purpose of the report

• To quantify the Catapult’s net effects on key business outcomes – employment, turnover, total assets, and external finance – over and above what would have happened without support, by leveraging administrative and commercial datasets (Beauhurst, DataCity, ONS‑BSD) and robust DiD techniques.
• To inform the Catapult’s evaluation framework and future programme design by identifying which impacts are already materialising and where further qualitative investigation is needed.

Key findings

• Boost in external funding
  Catapult‑supported SMEs see their chance of securing any external finance jump from 47% to 59% (vs. matched peers) and from 21% to 59% (vs. unsuccessful applicants), raising average funding by 70–100% over what would have occurred without the Catapult’s support.
• Asset growth
  Total assets of beneficiary firms grow 43–55% more than matched comparators, and an additional 17% beyond the gap with the Catapult applicant group.
• Employment and turnover
  No clear net uplift yet detectable in headcount or revenue – observed 6–9% higher employment and ~10% faster turnover growth largely mirror pre‑support trends.
• Timing of impacts
  Finance and asset effects emerge within one to two years; sales and staffing impacts likely materialise three to six years post‑engagement due to long R&D and regulatory cycles.