Research and analysis

Evaluation of the Create Growth Programme: Final report

Published 16 July 2026

Applies to England

Executive summary

This report presents the final findings of an independent impact evaluation of the Create Growth Programme (CGP).

The CGP was a £43 million initiative to support the development of businesses in the creative industries with high-growth potential. The CGP provided a bespoke package of finance, business support and investor capacity building to support creative businesses in particular areas of England. The programme was initiated in late 2022 in six areas of England (the ‘original regions’) before being expanded to a further 6 areas (the ‘expansion regions’) from March 2024. The CGP concluded in March 2026.

Create Growth supported businesses in 12 regions of England through 3 strands of activity

The aims of the CGP were to:

• Support high growth potential businesses to become investment ready.
• Increase the number of investors willing to invest in creative businesses outside of London.
• Build local capacity for supporting creative businesses in regions to drive local growth outside of London.

This independent impact evaluation has examined what changes have occurred as a result of the CGP and whether the programme has achieved (or looks set to achieve) its intended outcomes. The overall evaluation takes a mixed methods approach, synthesising evidence from multiple data sources and analytical methods, to assess what outcomes have changed and the extent to which observed changes can reasonably be attributed to the programme. The analysis is structured within a contribution analysis framework, assessing whether observed outcomes are consistent with the programme’s theory of change and considering other factors that may have influenced results.

A previous report provided an early impact assessment, examining immediate and short-term impacts on businesses and investors, as well as leading indicators of future impacts. The report included quantitative analysis focussed on businesses supported earlier in the programme (those who participated in the programme prior to summer 2024) and examined impacts as of summer 2024. The quantitative evidence was combined with extensive qualitative insights and a selection of case studies.

This report extends that evaluation evidence in two ways:

• Examining the immediate and short-term impacts of the programme for businesses which were supported in later cohorts after summer 2024. This is important as impacts may have changed with the programme maturing in the original regions and following its rollout in expansion regions.
• Examining the short- to medium-term outcomes for businesses which were supported early in the programme. This is important to understand whether perceptions of impacts have changed over time, and to explore evidence of impacts that take longer to manifest.

The analysis is predominantly quantitative, drawing on four main sources of evidence:

• Primary survey data: A bespoke survey of businesses engaging with the CGP, with baseline data collected prior to support being received and follow-up surveys in 2024 and 2025. This enables before-after comparisons, as well as analysis of self-reported impacts.
• Innovate UK monitoring data: Self-reported data from recipients of CGP grant funding, providing evidence on innovation outputs and perceived business growth impacts.
• The Data City data: Company-level data enabling time-series analysis of employment and finance outcomes for CGP-supported businesses. These data are benchmarked against wider creative industry trends to provide a contextual comparison.
• Insights from delivery partners: Qualitative insights collected in early 2026 to contextualise and interpret quantitative findings.

The evidence from all these sources is triangulated to inform the overall narrative regarding the impacts of the CGP. The robustness of the evaluation is increased through the overall weight and breadth of the combined evidence base.

Mixed Methods approach

Key findings

The CGP has had a positive impact on many creative businesses supported by the programme. It has increased businesses’ investment readiness, by increasing their business confidence, understanding of finance and awareness of intellectual property. It has improved business management practices and increased innovation, and these are expected to have a positive impact on business growth in future.

There is, however, little evidence the CGP has had a substantive impact on demand for equity investment, which was an ambition of the programme. Demand for equity finance and external finance more generally has fallen over the past year, as has the proportion of businesses that have received external finance. This may be because the CGP has been operating against the headwinds of a more challenging economic context.

Impressions of the impact of the CGP among earlier-supported businesses have, for the most part, not deteriorated over time. Nearly half (47%) of survey respondents report being more positive about the impact of the CGP on their business compared to a year ago, while only 9% are now less positive. That said, perceptions of the impact of the CGP on business growth are lower, and demand for equity finance has fallen since a year ago.

Business growth takes time, and businesses access finance when it is needed for their growth strategy. It is therefore only over the longer-term that the full impact of the CGP on access to finance among businesses and realised business growth will be evident.

The CGP has built local capacity for supporting creative businesses in the areas of England that have participated in the programme. Supported businesses perceive an increase in stakeholders’ understanding of creative businesses, and an improvement in local infrastructure, that are attributable to the CGP and these benefits are expected to persist beyond the life of the programme.

More detailed findings from this final phase of the evaluation are set out below.

Has the CGP supported businesses to become investment ready?

There are multiple aspects to ‘investment readiness’ including: how attractive a business is to investors, how well a business understands available finance options, whether the business wants investment, and how well the business is able to communicate with investors.

The CGP has increased many supported businesses’ understanding of finance, with over 60% of business support programme participants reporting a positive impact of the programme on their understanding of the investment landscape, and their confidence and knowledge on securing investment. These positive perceptions of the impact of the CGP have persisted over time, remaining unchanged between 2024 and 2025 for earlier supported businesses. This indicates that these positive perceptions are an enduring reflection on the CGP and not biased by short-term optimistic reflections on the programme.

However, increased understanding and confidence does not appear to have resulted in a significant increase in businesses’ desire to secure equity finance. While 47% of later-supported businesses reported being likely to seek equity investment over the next three years when surveyed before CGP support, this was only 37% when surveyed after CGP support. The proportion saying they are likely to approach other external finance providers was also lower after CGP support than before (55% as compared to 61%). This is despite 42% saying that the CGP had increased their likelihood of seeking equity investment and 58% saying the programme had increased their likelihood of seeking external finance. This could indicate challenging economic conditions currently facing creative businesses that have reduced their expected demand for finance compared to previously.

While the CGP looks to have had limited impact on business demand for equity investment, the programme may have increased businesses’ appeal to investors. In addition to increased confidence in their business offer, the CGP has increased the proportion of firms who have a business plan (from 25% before participation to 48% after, among later supported businesses), and increased the proportion of firms who have an IP strategy (from 25% before participation to 41% after). Without these, appeal to investors may be limited. These impacts have all persisted over time for early-supported businesses.

Whether the increased investment readiness is borne out in greater access to finance remains to be seen. CGP grant recipients report positive impacts of the programme already, with 24% of later grant recipients claiming to have received private funding as a result of their CGP grant support. For business support participants there is less evidence of any increase in private finance received. The timing of businesses’ use of finance is dictated by business need, however, rather than by programme participation. It will therefore only be over the longer-term that the true impact of the CGP on finance and realised business growth is evident.

Has the CGP increased business growth?

Noting that it is likely to take some time before impacts on business growth are fully realised, the evaluation has examined ‘leading indicators’ of future growth, including innovation and expectations of growth.

The CGP has contributed to increased innovation among supported businesses. Over 30% of businesses supported in later cohorts strongly agreed that the CGP has led to some form of innovation in their business. Perceptions of the impact on innovation are sustained over time among earlier-supported businesses. These perceptions are commonly driven by a better understanding of innovation and to improvements in business strategy or business model. The CGP grant funding also supported innovation. Among 203 businesses who received grant funding later in the programme, 302 new or improved products and 192 new or improved processes were launched as a result of the CGP grant support they received.

The majority of businesses believe that the CGP had, or will have, a positive impact on their growth potential. Among businesses in later cohorts, 63% report that the CGP had already had or was expected to have over the next 1-2 years a positive impact on revenue growth. Just over half report having or expecting a positive impact on job creation, profitability and access to new markets. However, perceptions of positive impact are lower among later cohorts than among earlier cohorts, and have fallen between 2024 and 2025 for earlier cohorts. This may reflect a more challenging economic environment facing creative businesses over the past year. For example, this could be driven by reduced confidence and willingness to take risks in light of the growth of artificial intelligence, or by external influences on supply chains. Both of these were raised anecdotally by stakeholders as posing increasing challenges for creative businesses.

Positive expectations of growth are a useful early signal of impact, but whether these expectations translate into realised growth can only really be observed over a longer time horizon. Data so far are indicative of stable to modest employment and turnover performance among supported businesses, but longer-term evidence will be needed to assess sustained and attributable growth impacts.

Has the CGP built local capacity for supporting the creative industries?

The CGP has supported many businesses to expand their networks. Around half of businesses in later cohorts formed new partnerships or collaborations as a result of the programme. New partnerships and collaborations are more commonly strategic and collaborative in nature, such as joint projects, shared opportunities or collective problem-solving, rather than purely transactional supply-chain relationships. Most of the new partnerships formed by businesses in earlier cohorts through the CGP persist today. Among earlier business support participants, 54% report still having partnerships or collaborations formed as a result of CGP that are still active today, down only slightly from 65% a year ago.

The CGP has built local capacity to support the creative industries in the 12 areas that participated in the programme. 52% of later-supported businesses perceived an increase in local stakeholders’ understanding of creative businesses, and 46% perceived an improvement in local infrastructure for supporting creative businesses. Around two-thirds of supported businesses believe the CGP has had a positive impact on local stakeholders’ understanding and supporting infrastructure. Qualitative reflections from delivery partners and businesses highlight increased coordination between local actors, improved understanding of the needs of creative businesses, and the development of data and resources that may persist beyond the life of the programme in the areas that have participated.

Five of the CGP areas have received funding through the new Creative Places Growth Fund to invest in the creative industries. The expanded networks and knowledge generated through the delivery of CGP are directly informing the design and delivery of continued local programmes to support the creative industries in those areas.

1. Introduction

The CGP was a £43 million initiative aimed at supporting the development of businesses in the creative industries with high-growth potential in England (outside London). It was launched in 2022 by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and ran until March 2026.

This report presents the final findings of an independent impact evaluation of the Create Growth Programme (CGP). This has examined what changes have occurred as a result of the CGP and whether the programme has achieved (or looks set to achieve) its intended outcomes.

An earlier report provided an early impact assessment, examining immediate and short-term impacts on businesses and investors, as well as leading indicators of future impacts. The quantitative analysis focussed on earlier-supported businesses (those who participated in the programme prior to summer 2024) and examined impacts as of summer 2024. The quantitative evidence was combined with extensive qualitative insights and a selection of case studies.

This report extends that impact evaluation evidence. The focus is on two elements:

• Examining the immediate and short-term impacts of the programme for businesses who were supported in later cohorts. This is important as impacts may have changed as the CGP matured in the original regions and as it was rolled out in expansion regions.
• Examining the short- to medium-term outcomes for businesses who were supported early in the programme. This is important to explore evidence of impacts that take longer to manifest, and to understand whether perceptions of impacts have changed over time. The early impact assessment found positive impacts of the CGP on business outcomes, based in part on supported businesses’ perceptions. However, businesses may have been biased towards optimism after finishing the programme, and that may now have worn off. It is therefore valuable to explore how perceptions have changed to understand whether any positive perceptions of the CGP were short-term impressions or more enduring reflections on the programme.

Through both these elements the additional analyses build on the earlier impact evaluation evidence. The new analyses are primarily quantitative in nature and do not provide the same level of depth on lived experiences of the CGP, or insights relating to delivery processes, as the earlier evaluation report. Therefore, while this report summarises the evaluation evidence as a whole at a high-level, additional qualitative detail can be found in the earlier evaluation report.

Three evaluation questions are addressed in this evaluation report:

• Has the CGP increased business investment readiness?
• Has the CGP increased business growth?
• Has the CGP built local capacity for supporting the creative industries going forwards?

A fourth evaluation question – has the CGP increased willingness to invest in the creative industries outside London – was also explored in the earlier impact evaluation.

This report is structured as follows:

• Chapter 2 provides a brief overview of the Create Growth Programme (CGP)
• Chapter 3 summarises the data and methodology used for the evaluation. Further detail on these is provided in Annex A and Annex B.
• Chapters 4 to 6 presents the findings for each theme of the impact evaluation.
• Chapter 7 summarises the additional takeaways provided by this evaluation report relative to the earlier impact evaluation evidence, and the overall conclusions of the evaluation.

2. The Create Growth Programme

The Create Growth Programme (CGP) was a £43 million initiative aimed at supporting the development of businesses with high-growth potential in the creative industries across England (outside of London).

The programme provided 12 ‘regions’ with a bespoke package of capital, business support and investor capacity building to support high-growth potential business to grow, build investor networks, and access finance. The programme initially started in 6 regions in late 2022, and was subsequently extended to support a further 6 regions from March 2024. The CGP concluded in March 2026. The areas participating in the CGP are shown in the map in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Local areas participating in the CGP

Source: Frontier Economics.

Note: The “East of England” area includes Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire. The “East Midlands” area includes Leicestershire, Derbyshire & Greater Lincolnshire. The “South East” area includes Essex, Kent, East Sussex and West Sussex. The “North East” area includes Durham, Northumberland, Gateshead, Newcastle Upon Tyne, North and South Tyneside and Sunderland. The “West of England and Cornwall” area includes two programmes delivered separately

The initial guidance from DCMS was that “high-growth potential” creative businesses could be identified as those meeting the following criteria:

• Turnover growth of 10% year on year over approximately 3 years.
• Employing at least 2 people over the last two years (full-time, part-time or freelance).
• Created a revenue generating product, launched a new platform or service or reached a market of scale.
• Generated sales revenue in the last two years.

There were three strands to the CGP, as illustrated in Figure 2: a finance strand, a business support strand, and an investor support strand.

Figure 2 Components of the CGP

The finance strand made finance available for business innovation projects that will act as a stimulus for growth and investment. This funding was made available through funding competitions operated by Innovate UK, which are only open to businesses in the creative industries in the 12 participating regions. There were various funding competitions:

• Funding competition 1 was a small grants competition, offering funding of £10,000 to £30,000 for projects of 3-6 months duration. The competition was open between November 2022 and February 2023, and funded projects between June 2023 and December 2023.
• Funding competition 2 was an investor partnership competition, providing grant funding for projects that had a confirmed investor partner providing matched investment. Eligible projects were of 6-8 months duration, with a total cost of between £100,000 and £750,000. The competition was open between October 2023 and January 2024, with supported projects running between June 2024 and February 2025.
• Funding competition 3 was another small grant competition, offering funding of £10,000 to £30,000 for projects of 3-5 months duration. The competition was open between October 2023 and January 2024, with funded projects being undertaken between November 2024 and March 2025.
• In addition, some CGP funding was used to make grants available to creative businesses in CGP regions through the Creative Catalyst programme in 2024. This was a national Innovate UK small grants competition, offering funding up to £50,000 for projects conducted by creative businesses, or businesses that support the creative industries. The competition was open from January to March 2024, and funded 3-6 month projects finishing by the end of March 2025.
• Funding competition 4 was a round of support open to applications from March to May 2025, offering funding through two strands. The “small projects” strand provided 100% grant funding for innovation projects costing between £20,000 and £50,000. The large projects strand supported innovation projects with total eligible costs between £50,000 and £200,000, with an element of match funding required (a minimum of 30% for micro and small organisations, and a minimum 40% match funding for medium sized organisations). Funded projects were undertaken between October 2025 and March 2026.

The business support strand consists of a range of business support programmes that were designed and run by local delivery teams in the 12 participating regions. The exact package of activities offered as part of the programme varied across local regions, although there were some core consistent support types such as masterclasses, peer group support and mentoring. Each region supported several cohorts of high-growth potential businesses on its programme throughout the life of the CGP, with typically around 20 businesses per cohort. The programmes vary in length, from several days to 12 months.

The investor support package was delivered by Innovate UK Business Connect, in collaboration with the local regions. This strand of the programme involves investor mapping activities to identify relevant investors, activities to inform investors about opportunities in the creative industries (e.g. webinars), and activities to connect potential investors with creative businesses (e.g. through pitch events or other networking opportunities). The investors engaged in the programme may be located anywhere in the UK or overseas, but the outreach and events are focused on connecting investors with creative business investment opportunities within the regions that are participating in the CGP.

2.1 Theory of change

The aims of the CGP were to:

• Support high growth potential businesses to become investment ready, by developing businesses’ knowledge, skills and access to capital.
• Increase the number of investors willing to invest in creative businesses outside of London, by educating and developing investor networks.
• Build local capacity for supporting creative businesses in regions to drive local growth outside of London.

The overall intent is to support high growth potential creative businesses to achieve their scaling ambitions and help drive the economic growth of the creative sector across England.

The Theory of Change for CGP is summarised in the logic model set out in Figure 3. This describes how the activities of the CGP are expected to feed through into desired impacts – in other words, articulating the pathways or mechanisms through which impacts are expected to be realised. The evaluation then seeks to verify this with empirical evidence.

The logic model separates out:

• Inputs: the time, money and support required to conduct the programme.
• Activities: the day-to-day activities of the CGP delivery partners.
• Outputs: the observable and tangible results of the programme.
• Outcomes: the specific changes that the CGP aims to deliver.
• Impacts: the ultimate objectives of the programme.

The logic model sets out how the activities of the programme are expected to lead to outputs, and to the desired outcomes and impacts.

The finance strand is expected to deliver grant funding and investor partnerships, which increase the number of innovation projects being undertaken by supported businesses. The investor partnership competition is expected to change businesses’ awareness of investor opportunities and increase the number of projects with equity investment. - This would then be expected to feed through into increased business innovation, which could feed directly to greater business growth. This could also feed through into changed growth objectives or changed attractiveness to investors, increasing private finance use and further enabling business growth.

Business support programmes are expected to change businesses’ management or business skills, and their understanding of finance options and investor perspectives. - This could feed through into business innovation (particularly regarding management and organisational practices) and changed business growth. Or this could result in changes in demand for private finance or changes in the attractiveness of businesses to investors, either of which could increase private finance use (again, potentially further enabling business growth).

The investor focused activities are expected to change the awareness of creative opportunities among investors and increase their understanding of investing in the sector. - This could feed through into increased willingness to invest in creative businesses, and consequently an increase in private finance use among creative businesses (again, enabling business growth).

Each of these three pathways above could be expected to feed through into there being a greater number of more financially sustainable high-growth businesses, and lead to there being a greater number of creative businesses backed by private investment. The logic model also sets out that the CGP is expected to increase delivery partner and policy understanding of creative businesses and investor perspectives, as a result of delivering the various activities. This can be expected to feed through into better policies and programmes to support the creative industries and improved local capacity for supporting local businesses.

Figure 3 Create Growth Programme logic model

3. Methodology

The impact evaluation of the CGP has taken a mixed methods approach, synthesising evidence from multiple data sources and analytical methods. The aim is to assess what outcomes have changed and understand the extent to which observed changes can be attributed to the CGP. Triangulating evidence across approaches provides more robust and comprehensive evidence than relying on a single approach, particularly in the absence of a clear proxy for what would have happened to the same group of businesses had they not received CGP support.

Mixed Methods approach

The evaluation provides evidence on two main aspects:

• Immediate to short-term impacts for later supported businesses and later grant recipients; and
• Short- to medium-term impacts for earlier-supported businesses, including evidence on how perceived and realised outcomes evolve over time.

The data and evidence are analysed within a contribution analysis framework. Contribution analysis argues that a programme can reasonably be argued to have contributed to an outcome if programme activities are delivered as per the Theory of Change, pathways to impact are supported by evidence on observed results and underlying assumptions, and other potentially influencing factors have been considered. This evaluation therefore brings together new evidence on later-supported businesses, new longer-term evidence on earlier-supported businesses and the evidence from the earlier evaluation, and assesses the CGP’s contribution to observed outcomes in the context of the programme’s theory of change.

The analysis in this final evaluation report is predominantly quantitative, drawing on four main sources of evidence:

• Primary survey data: A bespoke survey of businesses that engaged with the CGP was conducted at multiple points in time. Baseline data were collected when businesses were onboarded for CGP support, followed by surveys in summer 2024 and autumn 2025. This data enables before-after comparisons to see how outcomes have changed over time and provides self-reported perceptions of the impact of the programme. The survey asked some open ‘free-text’ questions, allowing respondents to provide some qualitative perspectives.
• Innovate UK monitoring data: Innovate UK collected data from all recipients of CGP grant funding upon completion of their project. Data for relevant grant recipients was shared with the evaluation. This provides self-reported perceptions of the impact of grant support on innovation outputs and aspects of business growth.
• The Data City data: This is a proprietary platform that has collated a database of UK company information, based on company filings with Companies House and funding and investment data from Dealroom.co. Relevant CGP-supported firms are identified in this data to enable time-series analysis of employment and finance received. Benchmarking analysis compares time-series data for earlier-CGP-supported businesses with wider creative businesses.
• Insights from delivery teams: Qualitative insights were collected from discussions with delivery partners in early 2026. These perspectives were used to contextualise and help interpret some of the quantitative findings.

Evidence from all approaches, alongside findings from the earlier evaluation report, is triangulated to inform the overall narrative on CGP impacts.

While results differ slightly from previously published statistics, this reflects the use of slightly different analytical samples in different parts of the analysis (for example, by restricting some comparisons to business support programme participants only) to ensure like-for-like comparisons across cohorts. Robustness of the evaluation is increased through the overall weight and breadth of the combined evidence base from the earlier evaluation and new data sources.

This evaluation does not explore differences in impacts by region or creative sub-sector. While such analysis could provide additional insight, sample sizes within individual regions and sectors are insufficient to support robust or reliable disaggregation, and the focus is therefore on programme-wide impacts across supported businesses.

3.1 Analysis for later-supported businesses

Later-supported businesses are defined as those who participated on the CGP business support programmes between July 2024 and March 2025. Businesses supported by the CGP after March 2025 are excluded from this evaluation, as it is not reasonable to expect impacts to have been realised by Autumn 2025 when the data for this evaluation were collected.

Data on later-supported businesses after their CGP support was collected through the 2025 primary survey. In total, there were 156 responses to the survey from businesses that participated in a later cohort of the business support programmes and had not previously been supported by the CGP. Of these, 122 also provided baseline data prior to CGP participation.

Two types of analysis are conducted:

• Self-reported impacts: The 2025 survey collected data on businesses perceptions of the impact of CGP support across a range of outcomes such as innovation, growth expectations and finance behaviour. These data are analysed descriptively for all later-supported businesses that responded to the relevant questions in the 2025 primary survey.
• Before-after comparisons: For selected metrics captured both at baseline and in the 2025 primary survey (e.g. intentions to access finance in future), outcomes before and after CGP support are compared. For this analysis attention is restricted to the subset of businesses for which data are available at both points in time.

No attempt has been made to weight these survey data in analysis. There is limited information available on the population of supported businesses to test the representativeness of responding businesses.

Findings for later-supported businesses are compared with equivalent analysis for earlier-supported businesses using the 2024 primary survey. This provides insights on how the immediate- to short-term impacts of the CGP differ for the earlier- and later-supported businesses.

The statistics presented for the earlier-supported businesses may differ to the figures reported in the earlier evaluation. This is because here the statistics for earlier-supported businesses relate to business support participants only, to ensure like-for-like comparisons with the later-cohort businesses analysed.

3.2 Analysis for later grant recipients

Later grant recipients are those who received funding through Competition 3 and the 2024 Creative Catalyst programme. Recipients of funding from Competition 4 are not included as their projects were not all complete at the time of this evaluation.

For later grant recipients, the analysis draws on Innovate UK monitoring data. This provides self-reported perceptions on innovation outputs and the business growth impacts of CGP grant support. It has not been possible to make direct comparisons between earlier and later grant recipients, in terms of their perceptions of the impact of CGP, as the questions asked by Innovate UK in their monitoring data have changed over time.

3.3 Analysis for earlier-supported businesses

Earlier-supported businesses are defined as those that completed their business support programme (or the intensive phase of support) before July 2024, and had started the programme at least two months earlier, and businesses who had received funding from the first Innovate UK funding competition.

These businesses formed the focus of the earlier impact evaluation and were surveyed following CGP support in summer 2024. These businesses were re-contacted through the 2025 primary survey.

Two types of analysis are used:

• Time-series analysis of self-reported impacts: For the 56 businesses responding to both the 2024 and 2025 surveys, changes in perceived CGP impacts over time are examined, allowing assessment of whether early perceptions persist, strengthen or weaken.
• Time-series analysis (before-after-after comparisons) of outcomes: For a subset of 51 businesses with baseline, 2024 and 2025 data, selected outcomes are compared across three points in time: pre-CGP, shortly after CGP support and one year later. This provides evidence on longer term changes in outcomes of interest.

As with the analysis of survey data for the later-supported businesses, no attempt has been made to weight these survey data in analysis.

It is worth noting that some earlier-supported businesses continue to interact with the CGP after their ‘formal’ period of support. A majority (71%) of earlier-supported businesses who responded to the evaluation survey in 2025 report ongoing engagement with a mentor established through the CGP, making this the most common form of continued engagement. Around half report broader ongoing engagement with the CGP-related activities:

• 52% participated in other CGP-run events in their region.
• 48% report other forms of engagement since July 2024.
• 43% participated in investor showcase or networking events.
• 41% took part in a CGP alumni programme.

Changes in perceptions of, and actual, impact over time may therefore reflect some of this continued engagement.

To complement the survey-based evidence, which is limited to those who responded to the survey, secondary data from The Data City is used. Of the 1,239 businesses who were supported by the CGP business support programmes prior to March 2025, which received funding through the first Innovate UK competition, 81% were identified on The Data City platform. This included 329 businesses who participated in early business support cohorts or received early grant funding. Time-series analysis of employment data is conducted for those businesses that were consistently identified in the data over the period 2021 to 2024 (137 businesses). This is benchmarked against the wider UK creative sector, identified using Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes. Finance data for CGP businesses is also examined. These data and comparisons do not provide evidence of the causal impact of the CGP, but do provide useful context on relative performance of CGP-supported businesses.

4. Findings: Has the CGP increased business investment readiness?

Key findings

• The CGP has continued to support businesses’ clarity and confidence in their business offer and growth potential. 79% of survey respondents among later-supported cohorts agreed that the programme increased their confidence in their business offer and potential for growth. These perceptions of positive impacts largely persist over time. Among earlier-supported businesses who responded to the evaluation survey in both 2024 and 2025, 89% agreed that the CGP increased their confidence in their business offer and potential for growth in 2024 and 79% still agreed with this in 2025.
• The CGP has improved businesses’ understanding of finance and confidence around securing investment. 69% of later-supported respondents reported improved understanding of the investment landscape and 60% agreed the CGP had increased their confidence in securing investment. These perceptions have also persisted over time, remaining unchanged between 2024 and 2025 among earlier-supported respondents.
• Increased understanding and confidence still do not appear to have translated into an increase in expected demand for equity or other external finance. Quantitative evidence shows a decline in the proportion of later-supported businesses expecting to seek equity or other external investment after CGP support as compared to before. While expectations among earlier-supported cohorts had initially increased after CGP support, the proportion saying they are likely to seek equity investment in future has declined over the past year.
• The CGP may have increased businesses’ appeal to investors. In addition to increased confidence among businesses, the proportion of businesses with a formal business plan and an IP strategy increases after CGP participation in later-supported cohorts. This is in line with improvements observed among earlier-supported businesses, and the improvements for earlier-supported businesses persist over time.
• There is still limited evidence of widespread increases in external finance received. However, this is an impact that takes time to be realised and will be dependent on the wider economic context.

A key question for the evaluation is the extent to which the regionally delivered CGP business support programmes increased “investment readiness”. Investment readiness was described in the Unleashing Creativity report by Creative UK and the Creative Industries Policy and Evidence Centre as “a combination of desire for growth, suitability for investment and ability to present and explain a business to investors”.

The evaluation has explored various indicators of businesses’ investment readiness, including their confidence and clarity in their business offer, their understanding of finance options and skills to navigate investment opportunities effectively, and their demand for external finance. The evaluation also explored finance received by businesses, although it is acknowledged up front that it may take some years for any impact of the CGP on businesses actual receipt of finance to be realised.

4.1 Businesses’ confidence and clarity in their business offer

The CGP has continued to increase businesses’ clarity and confidence in their business offer in their growth potential.

Businesses who completed the evaluation surveys were typically positive about the impact of the CGP on their business confidence. 79% of respondents in later-supported cohorts agreed that the CGP increased their confidence in their business offer and potential for growth, with 44% strongly agreeing. This is broadly similar to earlier-supported cohorts, in which 82% of respondents agreed that the CGP increased their confidence in their business offer and potential for growth, with 48% strongly agreeing.

The earlier impact evaluation captured many qualitative insights on ways in which the CGP increased business confidence and potential for growth. Similar themes were echoed by businesses who participated in later cohorts of the programme.

“The most significant impact has been the complete shift in my mindset… I know how to plan, strategise, and react to challenges with confidence.”

The perceived impact of the CGP on confidence and clarity in their business offer largely persists over time.

It is important to explore how perceptions of impact have changed over time for earlier-supported businesses. CGP participants may be biased towards being optimistic about the impact of the programme shortly after participation, and this may wear off over time as memories fade or businesses realise that some expected benefits are not born out.

In fact, the perceived positive impacts of the CGP largely persist over time: among earlier-supported businesses who responded to the evaluation survey in both 2024 and 2025, 89% believed that the CGP increased their confidence in their business offer and potential for growth when surveyed in 2024, and 79% still believed this to be the case in 2025. The positive perceptions are therefore not just a short-term impression for most, but an enduring reflection on the programme.

4.2 Businesses’ understanding of finance

The CGP has continued to increase businesses’ understanding of finance and their confidence around securing investment.

Business respondents to the evaluation surveys are also typically positive about the impact of the programme on their understanding of finance. Figure 4 highlights that 69% of businesses from later-supported cohorts agreed that the CGP increased their understanding of the investment landscape and what is appropriate for their business. 60% agreed that the CGP increased their knowledge and confidence around securing investment. These are similar proportions as given a year earlier by businesses that had participated in the earlier-supported cohorts (74% and 66% respectively).

Figure 4 Self-reported impact of CGP on investment understanding and knowledge

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data.

Note: Sample includes business support recipients from both earlier-supported and later-supported cohorts

The perceptions of the impact of the CGP on understanding of investment persist over time, with earlier-supported businesses continuing to believe that the CGP has had a positive impact on their understanding of finance and their confidence around securing investment.

Among earlier-supported businesses who responded to both evaluation surveys, the share who agreed that the CGP increased their understanding of the investment landscape and what is appropriate for their business was unchanged over time, at 74%. Similarly, the share of respondents who believed that the CGP increased their knowledge and confidence around securing investment was similar, with 66% agreeing in the 2024 follow-up survey and 64% agreeing in the 2025 survey.

4.3 Demand for equity finance

While the CGP appears to have increased participants’ understanding of finance, this has not translated into an overall increase in expected demand for equity and other external finance.

This was a finding of the earlier impact evaluation that has been reinforced here.

Many businesses self-report a positive impact of the CGP on their likelihood of seeking finance. Over a third (42%) of survey respondents from later-supported cohorts agreed that the CGP had increased their likelihood of seeking equity investment. Over half (58%) agreed that the CGP had increased their likelihood of seeking other external finance. These are similar to the responses among earlier-supported cohorts of businesses in 2024, when 47% reported that CGP had increased their likelihood of seeking equity finance and 56% their likelihood of seeking other finance.

Some businesses described qualitatively in response to the survey that the programme has made them more likely to seek equity investment.

“The CGP has given us the vocabulary and knowledge to seek private investment, and to significantly streamline the way we run the business. We are more strategic, more ambitious, and more likely to use debt and equity finance to take risks in order to achieve our growth goals.”

However, comparing expectations of future external finance use before and after CGP support does not suggest an increase in overall expected use of external finance for later-supported cohorts. Figure 5 shows 36% of later-supported survey respondents reported that they were likely to seek equity investment over the next three years when surveyed after CGP support. This is lower than the 47% who reported that they were likely to do so when surveyed prior to CGP support. The proportion who reported they were likely to approach other external finance providers in the next three years was also lower after CGP support than before (55% as compared to 61%).

Figure 5 Expectations of seeking external finance in the next three years (later-supported cohorts)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data.

Note: Sample includes business support recipients from later-supported cohorts.

The proportion of businesses who say they are likely to seek equity investment or approach external finance providers has fallen after CGP support for later-supported businesses, and has fallen over the last year for earlier-supported businesses. This may suggest a more challenging economic environment facing businesses in 2025 as compared to 2024.

Changes in expectations of seeking finance are less favourable among later-supported businesses than was the case for earlier-supported businesses. Among earlier-supported businesses there was a small rise after CGP support in the proportion expecting to seek equity finance in the next three years (from 48% to 54%), while the proportion likely to approach other external finance providers in the next three years remained similar (from 66% to 64%).

Qualitative insights confirm that some businesses felt the CGP had increased their understanding, but that they did not think equity finance was suitable for their business.

“It confirmed that without a big change of approach (something we do not want creatively) the types of investment being talked about were not suitable for us. It was still very useful, to think of things in a more biz-minded way.”

“Because the focus of the programme is on finding and raising equity investment and equity investors in [my region] do not understand my industry, and after the programme there is no opportunity for business growth via grants or low interest loans, I have moved a substantial part of the business [abroad] where there is better opportunities for growth.”

Other businesses, and delivery partners, suggested that there may be impacts on equity use over a longer time horizon, as some businesses may realise commercial opportunities first and then progress to wanting external finance in future. This may explain why a large proportion of businesses reported that the CGP had increased their likelihood of seeking equity finance even where there was no increase in the proportion saying they were likely to seek external finance over the next three years.

“I am much more confident now about how to approach seeking finance, even though I’m not ready yet for that.”

Looking at earlier-supported businesses does not yet provide evidence of increased equity use over the longer term. Figure 6 shows that, among those who responded to the evaluation survey in both 2024 and 2025, 56% agreed that the CGP had made them more likely to seek equity investment in future in 2024. By 2025 this had fallen to 39%. In 2024, 62% agreed that the CGP had made them more likely to seek other external finance, but this fell to 46% in 2025.

Figure 6 Expectations of seeking external finance in the next three years (earlier-supported cohorts)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data.

Note: Sample includes business support and grant funding recipients from earlier-supported cohorts that responded to the survey at all points in time. ‘Agree’ consists of businesses that responded to the survey with “Somewhat agree” or “Strongly agree”.

In terms of expectations of finance use over the next three years, these have also fallen. The proportion of earlier-supported businesses reporting they are likely to seek equity investment fell from 61% in 2024 to 49% in 2025. The proportion saying they were likely to approach external finance providers fell from 67% to 47%.

These changes over time could reflect changing perceptions of the impact of the programme, with initial impressions and optimism about seeking finance having worn off. However, this could also be indicative of changing context and economic environment in 2025 as compared to 2024. That would be consistent with the slightly less positive perceptions shortly after programme participation that are seen among the later-supported businesses than the earlier-supported businesses. It is also consistent with a decline in the perceived impact of the CGP on business growth, which is discussed in section 5.2. In qualitative feedback, delivery partners suggested that business confidence and appetite to take risks among the creative sector was lower in late 2025 than late 2024.

4.4 Investment readiness

While the CGP appears to have had limited impact on the demand for equity investment, it may have increased the likelihood that those seeking investment are able to secure investment, by making businesses more appealing to investors.

There are several indicators of increasing businesses’ appeal to investors.

• Businesses’ confidence and clarity in their business offer has increased (discussed in section 4.1) which is likely to have improved their ability to make an appealing case to investors.
• The proportion of respondents in later-supported cohorts that have a formal business plan increased from 34% before CGP participation to 48% after. This is in line with the outcomes in earlier-supported cohorts, in which the proportion of respondents who have a formal business plan increased from 40% to 57% after CGP support.
• Among later-supported cohorts, the share of respondents with an intellectual property (IP) strategy increased from 25% before participating in the CGP to 41% after. This is again in line with outcomes seen in earlier-supported cohorts, where the proportion with an IP strategy rose from 24% to 44%.

These changes in business practices persist over time. Among earlier-supported businesses that responded to the evaluation survey in both 2024 and 2025, 57% still reported having ‘a formal business plan which is kept up-to-date and regularly reviewed’ in 2024, compared to 61% in 2024 (and 40% pre-CGP support). The proportion with an IP strategy increased, from 41% in 2024 to 47% in 2025 (higher than the 19% pre-CGP support). This points to the CGP having an enduring impact on how attractive many supported businesses are to investors.

Qualitative feedback indicated that many businesses supported by CGP had positive reflections on the impact of the programme on their understanding of IP in particular.

“I feel the programme gave me a better understanding of what intellectual property and assets that can be considered IP are.”

“The workshops and masterclasses allowed me to see new opportunities around my core offering, particularly changing my thinking about I develop and maximise IP.”

4.5 Investment received

There is limited evidence to date of a widespread increase in investment received.

It still remains to be seen whether the CGP has had a material impact on investment received by participating businesses. This may take some years to be evident, as obtaining external finance is a process that can take some time, even from the point that a business has decided that the time is right to use external finance to support their ambitions.

Among businesses that participated in later cohorts of the business support programmes, finance use in the short term has not increased. Only 16% of respondents reported receiving external finance over the past year when surveyed following CGP support, compared to 26% of respondents at baseline. This outcome differs in comparison to earlier-supported cohorts, in which the proportion of respondents receiving external finance in the follow-up survey and baseline is broadly similar (24% and 27%, respectively). This decline in finance receipt, as with declines in expectations of seeking finance (discussed in section 4.3), could indicate a more challenging environment facing creative businesses in 2025 as compared to 2024.

Among earlier-supported businesses who responded to both the 2024 and 2025 surveys, the proportion reporting receipt of external finance in any given year declined, from 30% at baseline to 20% in 2024, and 16% in 2025. However, external finance is not typically sought (or received) every year, so yearly figures should therefore be interpreted with caution. Looking instead at cumulative receipt of external finance since CGP support, 29% of earlier-supported businesses report having received external finance in either 2024 or 2025. While this cumulative measure cannot be directly compared to baseline levels of finance receipt over the past year, it likely provides a more appropriate indication of the share of businesses that have secured finance in the period following CGP participation.

Innovate UK monitoring data of businesses that received grant funding from the later competitions (Competitions 3 and Creative Catalyst 2024) indicates a positive self-reported impact on businesses’ ability to obtain further public and private funding. 24% of grant recipients reported receiving private funding as a result of their CGP grant support, and 23% reported having received further public funding as a result of their CGP grant support.

Businesses’ use of external finance has also been examined using secondary data from The Data City. The advantage of this data is that it is not reliant on firms responding to a survey, and therefore a greater proportion of CGP-supported businesses are identified in The Data City data than responded to the evaluation survey. However, the disadvantage is that not all private finance obtained by firms will be detected and recorded in The Data City data. The platform records funding that has some public trail, so is more likely to capture finance such as equity rounds and Venture Capital funding than it is to capture all quiet angel investment, debt finance, or bank lending. Given the size and growth stage of CGP-supported businesses, they are more likely to attract angel investment (or non-equity finance, as discussed in section 4.3) than VC investment. This means that The Data City data likely underreports the private finance raised by CGP-supported businesses.

The Data City data suggests that there has not been widespread receipt of private finance among CGP-supported businesses so far. Only seven businesses supported either in early-cohorts of the business support programmes, or through the first Innovate UK funding competition, are identified as having received external finance between 2023 and 2025. The total funding received is in excess of £3 million, with the vast majority of that having been received by two of the businesses.

A comparison to private financing in the wider UK creative industries sector suggests that CGP-supported businesses are more likely to obtain private financing than the average business. In 2024, 0.5% of earlier-CGP-supported companies obtained private financing, compared to 0.1% of businesses in the wider creative industries sector. However, this would be expected even without any positive impact of the CGP, since the programme sought to support high-growth potential businesses who would have been more likely than average to seek finance anyway.

In terms of public funding received, published Innovate UK project data indicate that earlier-supported CGP businesses were associated with 24 instances of Innovate UK grant funding from 2024 onwards. Of these, 21 awards were made through CGP-related competitions (indicating that those businesses benefitted from multiple strands of the programme), with the remaining awards secured through other Innovate UK funding competitions.

5. Findings: Has the CGP increased business growth?

Key findings

• The CGP has led to increases in innovation within supported businesses and innovation can be a leading indicator of future economic growth. Over 30% of later-supported businesses who responded to the evaluation survey strongly agreed that the CGP had led to innovation of some form for their business. Perceptions of impacts on innovation appear to be sustained over time. When asked why they felt engagement with the CGP had, or would, lead to innovation for their businesses, over half of responses could be categorised as relating to a better understanding of innovation and nearly a third (30%) of responses could be categorised as relating to an improved business strategy or business model.
• The majority of businesses believe that the CGP has had, or will have, a positive impact on their growth potential. 63% of respondents in later-supported cohorts report that they believed the CGP had a positive impact on revenue growth, while just over half of respondents reported a positive impact on job creation, on profitability, and on access to new markets. However, perceptions of positive impact are lower among later-supported cohorts than earlier-supported cohorts, and are lower in 2025 than in 2024 for earlier-supported cohorts. This may indicate that the environment facing creative businesses has become more challenging over the past year.
• Data indicates stable to modest employment and turnover performance among supported businesses, but longer-term evidence will be needed to assess sustained and attributable growth impacts. Between 2022 and 2024, earlier-supported businesses maintained broadly stable average employment, in contrast to declining average employment between 2023 and 2024 in the wider creative industry sector over the same period. While these patterns are indicative rather than causal, they could suggest that earlier-supported businesses may have been more resilient during a period of weaker performance in the wider creative industries sector. In self-reported survey data, the majority of earlier-supported businesses reported that turnover and employment had either increased or remained stable over the previous 12 months in both 2024 and 2025.

The second evaluation theme asks whether the CGP has had an impact on business growth, since this is an ultimate aim of the policy. Impacts on business growth as measured by turnover and employment may take years to be evident, as would evidence on ‘leading indicators’ of future business growth – such as changes in outcomes that would be expected to influence growth (e.g. business planning and innovation) and perceived impacts on future growth.

5.1 Increases in innovation

The CGP has increased innovation among supported businesses.

Innovation is the development of ideas that result in new products or services, new processes for producing or marketing products or services, or new practices for organising or running a business. Innovation may be completely new or may just be new to a particular firm. Innovation is a relevant outcome to consider, as it can be a driver of business growth, by unlocking new revenue streams, lowering costs or boosting productivity. There is an extensive literature that has documented a link between innovation and firm growth, while noting the complexity of the relationship.

Over 30% of surveyed businesses in later-supported cohorts strongly agreed that the CGP had led to innovation of some form for their business. Figure 7 shows that 37% of respondents strongly agreed that the CGP had led to (or will over the next 1-2 years lead to) new ways of commercialising an idea or product, and new business model or process innovation. A third of respondents strongly agreed that the CGP had led to or will lead to new products. Just under 30% of respondents strongly agreed that the CGP had led to or will lead to new or additional intellectual property or assets. These proportions are broadly in line with what respondents from earlier-supported cohorts reported in 2024.

Figure 7 Self-reported impact of CGP on innovation

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data.

Note: Sample includes business support recipients from both earlier-supported and later-supported cohorts.

Increases in innovation can also be seen when comparing levels of innovation before and after CGP support. Figure 8 shows that, among respondents in later-supported cohorts, 48% reported improved marketing practices over the past 12 months after CGP support. Before CGP support, 28% of businesses reported this type of innovation over the previous three years. 25% reported new or significantly improved production processes or distribution activities over the past 12 months when asked after CGP support, compared to 23% reporting this innovation over the previous three years when asked before CGP support. In relation to new or significantly improved organisational or management practices, the reported figures were 40% when asked after CGP support relative to 33% prior to CGP support. These differences in levels of innovation pre- and post-CGP support are again in line with the previous responses of earlier-supported cohorts.

Levels of product or service innovation are not higher in the post-CGP survey than the baseline survey. However, the post-CGP survey asks about innovation over the past 12 months, while the baseline survey asks about innovation over the past three years. 51% of business having introduced new goods or services over the past year (after CGP support) compares favourably with 66% of businesses reporting at baseline having done so over the previous three years.

Figure 8 Levels of innovation among later-supported cohorts (before and after CGP support)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data.

Note: Sample includes business supported recipients from later-supported cohorts.

CGP grant recipients are also positive about the impact of their CGP funding on their innovation. Innovate UK monitoring data from later grant funding recipients reveals the majority of businesses expect increased innovation as a result of the support received: 96% of respondents expect new products, services or processes within 2 years, with this proportion increasing to 99% within 5 years. Some of this innovation has already taken place. Among the 203 businesses that received grant funding:

• 302 new or improved products were launched as a result of the support.
• 192 new or improved services were launched as a result of the support.
• 270 new or improved processes were launched as a result of the support.
• 284 new products and services were introduced to the UK market as a result of the support.
• 223 new products and services were introduced to the global market as a result of the support.

Qualitative insights from grant recipients also emphasise the value of the grant support for innovation and expected future growth.

“The main benefit was the confidence to take on high-risk R&D that we could not have resourced otherwise. Over time, the impact has grown as the work has given us clearer direction, new IP in production methods, and a roadmap towards a future commercial product. The programme has also raised our profile with potential partners and helped us demonstrate credibility in an emerging market. Overall, the impact has evolved from early-stage support and validation into tangible progress towards innovation that we believe will lead to new revenue opportunities and growth for the business.”

Impacts of the CGP on innovation look likely to persist over time.

Following earlier-supported businesses over time suggests that the early perceptions of the impacts of CGP on innovation largely persist, shown in Figure 9. Among earlier-supported businesses who responded to both the 2024 and 2025 survey, the perceived impact of the CGP fell slightly for some forms of innovation, but increased slightly for others. For example, in 2025, 55% of earlier-supported respondents agreed that the CGP had led to (or would over the next year lead to) new products. This is down from 64% in the 2024 survey who thought the CGP had led (or would lead over the next 1-2 years) to new products. In 2025, 48% agreed that the CGP had led to or will lead to new or additional intellectual property or assets (down from 56% in 2024). Agreement increases for business model/process innovation to 73% (69% in the first), while for new ways of commercialising remains broadly stable at 73% (75% in the first follow-up).

Overall, perceptions of the CGP’s impact on innovation remain relatively strong over time. The moderate declines observed for some innovation types likely reflect a reduction in forward-looking expectations as initial optimism bias steadies, and given that earlier survey responses captured both realised and anticipated effects.

Figure 9 Self-reported impact of CGP on innovation (early supported businesses)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data

Note: Sample includes business support and grant funding recipients from earlier-supported cohorts that responded to the survey at all points in time.

Respondents to the 2025 survey were asked why they felt engagement with the CGP had, or would, lead to innovation for their businesses. Nearly a third (32%) of respondents mentioned funding or financial support provided. However, over half (57%) of responses could be categorised as relating to a better understanding of innovation, such as increased confidence in development and IP, and nearly a third (30%) of responses could be categorised as relating specifically to an improved business strategy or business model. This is important as these are factors that will persist beyond the life of the CGP.

5.2 Expectations of increases in future growth

A majority of businesses continue to believe the CGP has had, or will have, a positive impact on their growth prospects, though perceptions are weaker among later-supported businesses and have waned over time for earlier-supported cohorts.

The majority of businesses believe that the CGP has had, or will have, a positive impact on their growth. Figure 10 shows that 63% of respondents in later-supported cohorts report that they believed the CGP had, or would have over the next 1-2 years, a positive impact on revenue growth, with 19% reporting a significant positive impact. 51% and 54% reported a positive impact on job creation and profitability, respectively. 51% reported a positive impact on access to new markets.

These responses are slightly less positive than those from respondents in earlier-supported cohorts in 2024. For example, among earlier-supported cohorts, 74% of respondents believed the CGP had a positive impact on revenue growth, with 31% reporting a significant positive impact.

Figure 10 Self-reported impact on business growth (early- vs. later-cohorts)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data.

Note: Sample includes business support recipients from both earlier-supported and later-supported cohorts.

Comparing the survey responses between businesses in the original CGP regions and businesses in the expansion regions, perceptions of impact of the CGP business growth are generally marginally more positive among businesses in new regions, as shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11 Self-reported impact on business growth (original vs. expansion regions)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data.

Note: Sample includes business support recipients from later-supported cohorts.

Following earlier cohort businesses over time, a majority of earlier-supported businesses still perceive in 2025 that the CGP has had a positive impact on their business growth prospects. However, perceptions of the impact of the CGP on business growth have waned slightly over time (illustrated in Figure 12).

The proportion of businesses who perceive a significant positive impact falls between the 2024 and 2025 surveys for revenue growth (38% to 14%) and job creation (33% to18%). They remain broadly consistent for business profitability and access to new markets.

Overall positive perceptions remain, but at lower levels. The share of businesses reporting either a significant or moderate positive impact declines from 80% to 66% for revenue growth, 78% to 61% for job creation, 75% to 52% for profitability, and 64% to 50% for access to new markets.

Figure 12 Self-reported impact of CGP on business growth (early supported businesses)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data

Note: Sample includes business support and grant funding recipients from earlier-supported cohorts that responded to the survey at all points in time.

The decline in the perceived impact of the CGP on business growth for earlier-supported businesses may indicate that initial optimism bias felt soon after the end of CGP support has now worn off. However, given that later-supported businesses are also less positive about the perceived impact of the CGP on growth, it may be that the environment facing businesses has become more challenging. Delivery partners suggested that business confidence and appetite to take risks among the creative sector was lower in late 2025 than late 2024. Anecdotally some of this is attributed to the growth of Artificial Intelligence, and the reluctance of businesses to increase employment if they were not sure they could sustain a new job in the medium term. Delivery partners also highlighted external influences on supply chains, including that routes to commissioning in the TV, film and gaming sectors have become more distributed, posing challenges to creative businesses in those sectors accessing markets.

Qualitative perceptions highlight some of the reasons why businesses think the CGP will have a positive impact on their growth.

“Running a business outside a major city… I assumed certain markets and opportunities were off-limits simply because of geography. This support hasn’t just given me tools; it’s given me the confidence to act on opportunities I once thought were out of reach and to compete nationally and internationally.”

“The programme has also opened my eyes to new revenue models I hadn’t previously considered. I’ve completely re-assessed how I package and sell my services.”

“Working with my mentor helped structure a strategy and position the business to explore new revenue streams and take the risk of investing time and money in R&D to create a new product outside of our original field of expertise.”

5.3 Realised business growth

Data indicates stable to modest employment and turnover performance among supported businesses, but longer-term evidence will be needed to assess sustained and attributable growth impacts.

Many grant recipients report positive impacts of their CGP support on their turnover and employment. Drawing on Innovate UK monitoring data from later grant recipients, 33% of businesses that received grant funding reported a positive impact on turnover as a result of the support. Across these businesses, total additional turnover as a result of CGP support was reported to be £4.3m, an average additional turnover of £23,000 per business reporting a positive impact. 40% of businesses also reported cost savings as a result of the support. Total cost savings across these businesses was £3.2m, with an average of £17,000 per business. 44% of businesses reported a positive impact on FTE growth as a result of the support. Across these businesses, total increase in FTEs as a result of the support was 146, with an average increase in FTEs of 0.7 per business. However, some of the reported increase in employment may be directly attributable to the project funded by the grant support, and therefore it remains to be seen how these positive impacts persist over time.

For business support participants, positive expectations of growth (discussed in the previous section) are a useful early signal of potential impact, but whether these expectations translate into realised growth can only really be observed over a longer time horizon.

Data from earlier-supported businesses provides an initial indication of employment and turnover outcomes. Figure 13 shows that the majority of earlier-supported businesses reported in 2025 that turnover and employment either increased or remained stable over the last 12 months. 82% of respondents reported that FTE employment increased or stayed the same (29% reported an increase), while 82% reported turnover had increased or stayed the same (43% reported an increase). While most businesses were stable or growing, this is a fewer proportion of businesses reporting employment growth than in 2024.

Figure 13 Reported changes in turnover and FTE over the last 12 months (early supported businesses)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data.

Note: Sample includes business support and grant funding recipients from earlier-supported cohorts that responded to the survey at all points in time.

While the survey evidence provides useful insight into realised growth, it is limited to businesses that responded to the evaluation survey. To broaden the evidence base, secondary data from The Data City is used to assess employment outcomes for a wider sample of CGP-supported businesses. Turnover data are not consistently available for smaller firms and so turnover is not examined.

Figure 14 indicates that earlier-CGP-supported businesses showed relative stability in employee headcount between 2021 and 2024. The Data City data for earlier-supported businesses observed across all four years indicate average employee headcount increased from 7.0 to 7.9 employees between 2021 and 2022, and then remained stable at 7.9 through to 2024. Unfortunately, data for 2025 is not yet available, as this information has typically not yet been reported to Companies House by businesses.

Although a direct comparison is not available to understand what employment outcomes would have looked like in the absence of CGP support for this group of businesses, average employment over time is examined for three ‘benchmarking groups’. These are: (i) later-CGP-supported businesses (who had not yet been supported by the programme); (ii) all creative businesses in CGP-supported regions; and (iii) the wider creative industries sector across the whole UK. For the latter, estimates of average employee headcount are presented using The Data City data and using DCMS data. Figure 14 shows that later-CGP-supported businesses had consistent growth in their average number of employees, from 4.5 to 5.9, between 2021 and 2024. Wider creative businesses in CGP-supported regions showed only modest growth over the period. The wider UK creative industries sector saw growth in employment in 2021 to 2023, but a fall in the average number of employees from 2023 to 2024.

These results are indicative rather than causal, and the early-CGP supported businesses are not directly comparable with all creative businesses. However, they suggest that earlier-CGP-supported businesses experienced relatively stable employment during a period when employment in the wider creative industries sector appears to have softened.

Figure 14 Average employee headcount, 2021 - 2024

1Source: Frontier Economics analysis of The Data City data.

Note: Samples include businesses that have complete data between 2021 and 2024. The number of businesses in each sample are: (i) 137 in early-CGP; (ii) 176 in later-CGP; (iii) 25,313 in CGP regions only; and (iv) 746,699 in UK creative industries sector.

Qualitative feedback suggests that positive impacts on business growth may not be manifest as increases in employment. For example, businesses may look to increase productivity, rather than employment. Furthermore, it is important to bear in mind that many creative businesses are small and therefore changes in employment would imply very large percentage scale increases. Finally, several respondents indicated that in challenging times, maintaining the businesses may be a positive outcome.

“I am aware of several other small production companies like me who have had to close their doors. But through the CGP I am still following [operating]. Without the programme I fear that I perhaps would no longer be running.”

6. Findings: Has the CGP built local capacity for supporting the creative industry going forwards?

Key findings

• The CGP has supported many businesses to expand their networks. Around half of later-supported businesses that responded to the survey reported at least one new partnership or collaboration as a result of the programme, though this is slightly lower than the proportion among earlier-supported businesses (65%). These partnerships and collaborations are more commonly strategic partnerships rather than just new supply-chain linkages with suppliers or customers. The evidence from earlier-supported businesses suggests many of these partnerships persist over time. Among those who responded to the survey in 2024 and 2025, 54% reported having partnerships or collaborations formed as a result of the programme that were still active, down slightly from 65% in 2024.
• CGP-supported businesses perceive positive changes in the local ecosystem for creative businesses, including improved stakeholder understanding and strengthened supporting infrastructure. A majority report that the CGP has had a positive impact in both areas, with evidence from earlier-supported and later-supported cohorts suggesting modest improvements over time. Delivery partner reflections highlighted increased coordination, greater understanding, and data or other resources that may persist beyond the programme in the 12 areas of England supported by CGP.

The evaluation has explored two aspects of local capacity for supporting the creative industries going forward: networking and collaboration between creative businesses, and local stakeholders’ understanding of creative businesses and supporting infrastructure.

6.1 Local networking and collaboration between businesses

The CGP has continued to support new partnerships and collaborations among later-supported cohorts.

Around half (51%) of later-supported cohort businesses reported that they had formed new partnerships or collaborations as a result of the programme. Figure 15 shows that 25% of respondents reported forming one new partnership, 18% forming 2-3 new partnerships, and 7% forming 4 or more new partnerships.

Figure 15 Self-reported impact of CGP on partnerships and collaborations among later-supported cohorts

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data

Note: Sample includes business support recipients from later-supported cohorts.

The proportion of businesses in later-cohorts reporting new partnerships or collaborations (51%) is slightly lower that what was reported by earlier-supported cohorts, among whom 65% of businesses reported that they had formed new partnerships or collaborations as a result of the programme.

Comparing the survey responses of later-supported businesses in the original CGP regions and in the expansion regions, the reported impact of the CGP on partnerships and collaborations is slightly more positive among businesses in the original regions (shown in Figure 16).

Figure 16 Self-reported impact of CGP partnerships and collaborations among later-supported cohorts (original vs. expansion regions)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data

Note: Sample includes business support recipients from later-supported cohorts.

Evidence from the earlier-supported businesses suggests most partnerships and collaborations made through the CGP have been sustained over time.

54% of earlier-supported businesses who responded to the 2025 survey reported still having active partnerships or collaborations formed as a result of the programme. This is down from the 65% who reported in 2024 having made new partnerships or collaborations, but suggests most connections made have been maintained so far.

Qualitative feedback from many businesses supports the finding that networks established through the CGP have persisted over time.

“[The CGP] is still impacting me today with the connections I made. My network has become more expanded as time goes on, directly linked to the people involved in the CGP.”

“Connecting with other businesses in similar situations had immense value too. We’ve been able to share our struggles and successes, support one another with different perspectives, and these connections have continued beyond the programme through collaborations and mutual recommendations. This peer network has become an invaluable ongoing resource.”

Partnerships are most often collaborative and strategic rather than purely transactional supply-chain linkages.

Figure 17 shows that CGP-supported businesses most commonly characterise partnerships as collaborative in nature. Among earlier-supported businesses, 52% report cooperating on a specific project or business activity, with 66% of later-supported businesses reporting this form of partnership. 48% of earlier-supported and 45% of later-supported businesses report cross-promoting brands or sharing business opportunities. Collective problem-solving is also a notable feature, with 39% of earlier-supported and 42% of later-supported businesses reporting working together to address common challenges or achieve shared objectives.

Purely commercial supply-chain partnerships are less prevalent. Fewer businesses describe partnerships as involving new suppliers (35% of earlier-supported and 19% of later-supported) or new purchasers (19% of earlier-supported and 29% of later-supported).

The building of networks, especially outside of supply chains, could be expected to have enduring benefits for businesses. Shared learning, increased visibility and more business contacts can be expected to support greater business growth, and potentially access to investors, as set out in the theory of change for the CGP.

Figure 17 Characterisation of new partnerships and collaborations formed through the CGP (earlier vs. later-supported businesses)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data

Note: Sample includes business support recipients from both earlier-supported and later-supported cohorts. Earlier-supported businesses were asked to characterise their new partnerships or collaborations formed as a result of the CGP that were still active in 2025 and therefore some differences between the earlier- and later-supported businesses may be expected if particular types of partnerships or collaborations are more likely to persist over time.

6.2 Local understanding of the creative industries and supporting infrastructure

CGP-supported businesses have perceived improvements in general local stakeholders’ understanding of the creative industries and supporting infrastructure, with the majority of businesses believing that the CGP has had a positive impact.

Figure 18 shows that, among later-supported cohorts, 52% of businesses thought that local stakeholders’ understanding of creative businesses had improved over the past two years, with 10% of businesses noting a significant improvement. 46% of businesses thought that local infrastructure for supporting creative businesses has improved over the past two years, with 10% of businesses noting a significant improvement.

Figure 18 Perceptions of changes in local infrastructure and stakeholder understanding of creative businesses (later-supported cohorts)

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data.

Note: Sample includes business support recipients from later-supported cohorts

Self-reported perceptions suggest some of these improvements are at least partially attributable to the CGP. 63% of later-supported businesses reported the CGP as having a positive impact (19% a significant positive impact) on local stakeholders’ understanding of creative businesses. Similarly, 69% of businesses in later-cohorts reported the CGP as having a positive impact (20% a significant positive impact) on local infrastructure for creative businesses.

The perceptions of earlier-supported businesses are similar in 2025 to the perceptions of later-supported businesses. Comparing their own perceptions over time, earlier-supported businesses are slightly more positive about improvements in stakeholder understanding and local infrastructure than when they were asked previously, suggesting that these have continued to improve over time.

Delivery partners also perceive the CGP to have increased local understanding and supporting infrastructure in the 12 participating areas of England. Specific aspects of this include:

• Increased collaboration and cohesion between local partners (such as neighbouring local authorities or between local authorities and industry groups). Some regions are explicitly looking to maintain these new networks after the CGP, through steering boards or strategic groups.
• Increased knowledge of what creative businesses are in the local area, what their needs are and how programmes such as the CGP can help. This included having compiled data on these businesses.
• Increased understanding of a common language that can be used by both businesses and investors.
• Workshop content and other materials that can potentially be re-used to support businesses in future.

Some of these aspects align with qualitative feedback from supported businesses.

“The bigger impact is that [my region] now has an active creative business support ecology. CGP is at the heart of this ecology, working with a number of other initiatives targeting specific groups - women founders, recent graduates and very early-stage creatives etc. This ecology is making a very significant impact, and it is important this is sustained.”

“At the time of participating, I was able to take away exactly what my business needed in that moment. As my business has grown and shifted direction, I’ve found that the relevance of certain topics changes too. Having full access to the programme’s content and materials would be invaluable, as it would allow me to revisit and reapply insights at different stages of development. This flexibility is essential to ensuring the programme continues to have a meaningful and lasting impact over time.”

Five of the twelve CGP areas are receiving funding through the new Creative Places Growth Fund to invest in the creative industries over the three years from March 2026. The expanded networks and knowledge generated through the delivery of CGP are directly informing the design and delivery of the local programmes that will be delivered with this funding to support the creative industries in those areas. In other CGP areas delivery partners highlighted that it was more challenging to build on the CGP, since funding sources for any future activity needed to be identified.

7. Summary and conclusions

This independent impact evaluation has examined what changes have occurred as a result of the CGP and whether the programme has achieved (or looks set to achieve) its intended outcomes. This report builds on an earlier report that provided an early impact assessment, and provides additional evidence on two main areas:

• The immediate to short-term impacts for businesses supported in later cohorts.
• The short- to medium-term impacts for businesses supported early (or in early cohorts) in the programme.

The evidence indicates that the CGP has continued to deliver the positive benefits identified in the earlier evaluation and has been successfully expanded across a wider set of regions.

While individual business experiences vary, the overall weight of evidence suggests that the CGP is likely to have a positive impact on the growth of many supported businesses. This expected impact on growth appears to be achieved largely through the CGP having increased innovation and improved business management practices. Businesses continue to report improvements in confidence, understanding of finance and appreciation of intellectual property.

However, there remains limited evidence of a substantive impact on demand for or receipt of equity investment. While businesses may be better informed about finance options and potentially more attractive to investors, this has not yet translated into an increase in self-reported intentions to seek equity finance or an increase in investment secured. Businesses’ expectations of seeking equity finance are actually lower in the 2025 follow-up survey than before CGP support, though this may reflect a more challenging economic context over the last year.

In terms of private finance more generally, 24% of later grant recipients reported receiving private funding as a result of their CGP grant support. Expected and actual external finance receipt among later-cohorts of business support participants has been lower since CGP support. However, businesses do report the CGP has made them more likely to seek finance, so that may reflect transitory circumstances, and the CGP may still have a positive impact on access to finance over the longer-term.

The evidence for earlier-supported businesses suggests that many positive impacts of the CGP have persisted over time.

Impacts of the CGP on aspects of investment readiness have been sustained, with businesses supported early in the programme still being more likely to report having up-to-date business plans, stronger understanding of finance and greater confidence in their business offer than prior to participation. A majority of businesses also continue to report collaborative relationships formed through the programme, though at slightly lower levels than immediately after programme completion.

Overall impressions of the CGP among earlier-supported businesses have not deteriorated over time (Figure 19). In fact, nearly half (47%) of survey respondents report being more positive about the impact of the CGP on their business compared to a year ago, while only 9% are now less positive. The persistence of positive impressions among participants is notable, as it suggests that earlier reflections on the impact of the CGP were not unduly influenced by optimism bias immediately after participation.

Figure 19 Earlier-supported businesses’ reflections on how their impression of the impact of CGP has changed over time

Source: Frontier Economics based on primary survey data.

Note: Sample includes business support and grant funding recipients from earlier-supported cohorts that responded to the survey at all points in time.

One factor that may also explain the persistence of perceived impacts is the high level of continued engagement with CGP activity beyond core programme delivery. A majority (71%) of earlier-supported businesses who responded to the evaluation survey in 2025 report ongoing engagement with a mentor established through the CGP, making this the most common form of continued engagement. Around half report broader ongoing engagement with the CGP-related activities:

• 52% participated in other CGP-run events in their region.
• 48% report other forms of engagement since July 2024.
• 43% participated in investor showcase or networking events.
• 41% took part in a CGP alumni programme.

For many businesses, the CGP has functioned as an ongoing support network.

Longer-term evidence will be needed to assess sustained and attributable growth impacts.

In terms of realised business growth outcomes, survey and secondary data suggest broadly stable to modest improvements in employment and turnover among earlier-supported businesses. While not demonstrating any causal impact of the CGP, these findings are consistent with the expected direction of impact and suggest that supported firms have remained resilient, particularly during a period in which parts of the wider creative industries experienced weaker employment trends.

There is still limited evidence of widespread increases in private finance receipt attributable to the programme, particularly equity finance. For many businesses this looks to be due to a lack of demand for such finance. For others it is more a question of timing and the stage of business development, and longer-term evidence is required to understand the ultimate impacts of the CGP on finance use.

Overall, the CGP looks likely to achieve some of its aims and ultimate objectives.

The CGP has successfully strengthened business capability, increased innovation and supported the foundations of business growth among creative businesses across participating regions. Longer-term follow-up will be needed to assess whether this ultimately translates into sustained employment growth, turnover growth and greater private finance use.

However, the programme’s aim to significantly increase equity investment into creative businesses outside London has not yet been realised at scale. Future policy development may therefore want to consider how best to build on the capability and knowledge gains achieved through the CGP, while addressing barriers to accessing private finance in the sector.

The CGP has supported many businesses to expand their networks and helped build local capacity to support the creative industries. This should help to support growth in the creative industries in these regions going forward, though this will depend on how well local stakeholders are able to leverage the legacy of the CGP after the end of the programme. This benefit is clearest for the five areas of England that are receiving funding from the Creative Places Growth Fund. The expanded networks and knowledge generated through the delivery of CGP are directly informing the design and delivery of the local programmes to continue supporting creative industries businesses in those areas.

Annex A – Survey methodology

This evaluation used primary data collected from bespoke surveys administered by BMG Research in 2024 and 2025. The methodology for the 2024 survey is described in an annex to the earlier evaluation report. The 2025 survey is described here.

Target population

The survey was conducted with businesses who applied for or received support or assistance through the Create Growth Programme (CGP). The aim was to understand the extent of their interaction and the impact of the CGP on their business.

The survey was sent to businesses who either:

• Were approached for the 2024 survey (which was businesses who applied for funding through the first CGP grant competition, or who participated in a regional business support programme in one of the earlier cohorts).
• Participated in one of the regional business support programmes prior to April 2025.

Delivery partners (regional teams and Innovate UK) provided a total of 1,239 leads for relevant businesses. After removals on the basis of duplication, or where businesses have previously requested not to be contacted, a total of 1,223 were eligible for the survey. Of those, 601 had been previously contacted to complete the 2024 survey, and 153 had previously completed that survey.

Survey fieldwork

The survey was conducted online between the 9th September and 20th October 2025.

All contacts were initially sent an invitation to complete the survey via email. All surveys were sent with a unique link, to prevent duplicate responses. Some regional CGP business support teams sent reminder emails to all businesses in their areas to encourage participation.

From 16th September to 10th October 2025, tele-chasing calls were made to unresponsive leads to encourage online completion. All contacts were called a maximum of 5 times each, with calls spread across multiple days and times to ensure the greatest chance of reaching the contact.

Following the initial email invitation, a further four email reminders were sent, along with up to two SMS reminders where a mobile telephone number was available, from BMG to encourage completion among those who had not yet completed. Some regional CGP delivery teams also sent reminder emails to all businesses in their areas to encourage participation in the survey.

In total, the survey received 256 responses, which represented a completion rate of 21%. The completion rate was 24% among those who had not previously been contacted for the 2024 survey. The completion rate was lower (17%) among those who had been contacted in 2024, as would be expected given the longer time elapsed since their engagement with the CGP. However, among those who responded to the 2024 survey the completion rate was higher, at 47%.

Completion rates varied across the regions, from a low of 5% to a high of 41%. The number of survey completes in any given region is low (ranging from 2 to 33) and therefore no analysis is conducted at the regional level.

Group	Contacts	Completes	Completion rate
All contacts	1223	256	21%
Not contacted for 2024 survey	622	151	24%
Contacted for 2024 survey	601	105	17%
Responded to 2024 survey	153	71	47%

These completion rates are just above the expected range for this kind of survey. Surveys of funding applicants typically have completion rates between 5% and 20%. There are a number of factors which impact completion rates, including the length of time since engagement with the programme, the completeness of the contact database, and the amount of funding sought may all impact completion rates.

Annex B – The Data City analysis

Overview of data source

The Data City is a proprietary platform that collates information on UK companies using company filings submitted to Companies House and funding and investment data from Dealroom.co. The platform provides company-level information including employment, funding events, sector classification and company status.

For this evaluation, The Data City data were used to provide contextual and benchmarking evidence on employment trends and finance receipt among CGP-supported businesses. The data were used to supplement survey-based evidence and extend the analysis beyond survey respondents.

Benchmarking data were downloaded on 20 October 2025. Employment data for CGP supported businesses were most recently downloaded on 12 January 2026, and private financing data were most recently downloaded on 27 January 2026.

Identification and matching of CGP businesses

A total of 1,239 CGP-supported businesses were included in the matching exercise. These were matched to The Data City records using Company Registration Numbers (CRNs). Of these:

• 999 businesses were successfully matched to a The Data City record, representing an 81% match rate.
• 329 matched businesses had employment data available for at least one year.
• 137 businesses had consistent employment data across the period for which analysis was conducted (2021 – 2024). This subset forms the balanced panel used in the time-series employment analysis presented in the report.

Only active firms were included when downloading from The Data City. For the employment time-series analysis, the sample is further restricted to firms with complete data between 2021 and 2024 to ensure like-for-like comparisons across years.

Variables used

Employment

Employment data are based on employee counts reported in Companies House filings. Employment data are more consistently available than turnover data for smaller firms and therefore provide a more reliable basis for longitudinal analysis.

Turnover data were not used for time-series analysis in this evaluation. Many smaller firms do not publicly report turnover in Companies House filings, resulting in substantial missing data. While imputed turnover estimates are available within The Data City, these rely on modelling assumptions and were not used.

Finance

Private finance data include all recorded funding events available within The Data City (sourced from Dealroom.co). These data provide evidence on recorded instances of external finance receipt. However, they may not capture informal, undisclosed or non-public funding arrangements.

Definition of benchmarking groups

To contextualise employment trends among earlier-CGP-supported businesses, benchmarking comparisons were constructed using The Data City data for:

• Later-CGP-supported businesses
• Creative businesses located in CGP-supported regions
• The wider UK creative industries sector

Creative industries were defined using Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes aligned with the DCMS definition of creative industries, as set out in the DCMS Creative Industries Economic Estimates methodology.

Benchmarking groups are intended to provide contextual comparison rather than a counterfactual estimate of programme impact.

Analytical approach and limitations

The Data City analysis provides descriptive time-series evidence on employment and finance outcomes. It does not provide causal estimates of the impact of CGP support.

Key limitations include:

• An 81% match rate between CGP-supported businesses and The Data City records.
• Limited availability of employment data (329 matched firms had employment for at least one year and 137 had consistent data across 2021 to 2024).
• Potential lag in Companies House filings.
• Sector classification based on SIC codes, which may not fully capture all creative activity.
• Incomplete coverage of private finance events where funding is not publicly recorded.

Despite these limitations, the use of The Data City data strengthens the evaluation by enabling broader contextual analysis beyond survey respondents and by benchmarking CGP-supported businesses against trends in the wider creative sector.