Of the ten projects evaluated in-depth, four were given an overall rating of "Good", four were rated "Satisfactory" and two could not be rated because they were at an early stage of operation. However, assuming a realistic level of traffic development, it can be reasonably assumed that they would qualify as "Satisfactory" in the future. No projects were given an overall rating of "Unsatisfactory" or "Poor".
All projects were rated Satisfactory or better against the "Relevance/Efficacy" evaluation criterion. Apart from one project where geological problems caused delays and cost over-runs, completion problems were due to either planning/environmental issues, inadequate project definition by the public sector, or problems in managing the interface between public- and private-sector elements of the same project.
The weakest ratings were against "Efficiency" of the underlying project. No projects were rated Poor for Efficiency, but two were Unsatisfactory, mainly due to traffic demand on road projects being lower than expected. All projects had been tested for their underlying economic value before being considered for investment, and these calculations were validated by the EIB's own appraisals. The Bank's sensitivity analyses typically tested scenarios which were more conservative than either the public-sector Promoter's case or the private-sector Provider's banking case, but in some cases the actual demand has been lower still. In most cases this was due to the economic growth of the country or region being lower than expected. On "Sustainability", only one project is giving cause for concern and is rated "Unsatisfactory".