natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Forvaltningsorganet for Innovation og Netvžrk 04 Forvaltningsorganet for Innovation og Netvžrk (INEA) er beliggende i Bruxelles og blev oprettet i 20133 med henblik p programmeringsperioden 2014-20204. 
The Innovation and Networks Executive Agency 04 Located in Brussels, the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency (INEA) was set up in 20133 for the 2014-2020 programming period4.
Det efterfulgte Forvaltningsorganet for det Transeuropžiske Transportnet (TEN-T EA), som Rdets forordning (EF) nr. 58/2003 af 19. december 2002 om vedtžgterne for de forvaltningsorganer, der skal administrere opgaver i forbindelse med EF-programmer (EFT L 11 af 16.1.2003, s. 
It succeeded the Trans-European Transport Network Executive Agency (TEN-T EA), which had managed the 2007-2013 TEN-T programme (with around 100 staff, and a budget of €7.9 billion Council Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 of 19 December 2002 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programmes (OJ L 11, 16.1.2003, p.
Foruden INEA er der Forvaltningsorganet for Sm og Mellemstore Virksomheder (EASME), Forvaltningsorganet for Undervisning, Audiovisuelle Medier og Kultur (EACEA), Forvaltningsorganet for Forbrugere, Sundhed, Landbrug og Fżdevarer (CHAFEA), Forvaltningsorganet for Forskning (REA) og Forvaltningsorganet for Det Europžiske Forskningsrd (ERCEA). 
In addition to INEA, these are the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME), the Education, Audio-visual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA), the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (CHAFEA), the Research Executive Agency (REA) and the European Research Council Executive Agency (ERCEA).
Kommissionens gennemfżrelsesafgżrelse 2013/801/EU af 23. december 2013 om oprettelse af Forvaltningsorganet for Innovation og Netvžrk og om ophžvelse af afgżrelse 2007/60/EF som žndret ved afgżrelse 2008/593/EF (EUT L 352 af 24.12.2013, s. 
Commission Implementing Decision 2013/801/EU of 23 December 2013 establishing the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency and repealing Decision 2007/60/EC as amended by Decision 2008/593/EC (OJ L 352, 24.12.2013, p.
Kommissionens afgżrelse C(2013) 9235 uddelegerede befżjelser til forvaltningsorganet. 
Commission Decision C(2013) 9235 delegated powers to the Agency.
Fra januar 2014 til december 2024. 
Covering January 2014 to December 2024.
100 medarbejdere og et budget p 7,9 milliarder euro, som blev fordelt p nžsten 700 projekter). 
distributed among nearly 700 projects).
Det er INEA's opgave at stżtte Kommissionen, projektivžrksžtterne og interessenterne ved at sżrge for ekspertise og programforvaltning vedrżrende infrastruktur-, forsknings-og innovationsprojekter inden for transport, energi og telekommunikation og at fremme synergier mellem disse aktiviteter5. 
INEA’s mission is to support the Commission, project promoters and stakeholders by providing expertise and programme management to infrastructure, research and innovation projects in the fields of transport, energy and telecommunications and to promote synergies between these activities5.
INEA spiller sledes en central rolle i den tekniske gennemfżrelse af Kommissionens sektorpolitikker. 
INEA therefore plays a key role in the technical implementation of the Commission’s sectoral policies.
05 INEA hżrer under fire generaldirektorater (GD'er) i Kommissionen, for hvilke det forvalter dele af de delegerede programmer, der er vist i tabel 1. 
05 INEA has four “parent” directorates-general (DGs) at the Commission, for which it manages parts of the delegated programmes shown in Table 1.
Tabel 1 - Programmer delegeret til INEA og de respektive overordnede GD'er Kilde: INEA's arbejdsprogrammer og aftalememorandummet mellem INEA og de overordnede GD'er. 
Table 1 – Programmes delegated to INEA and respective parent DGs Source: INEA work programmes and Memorandum of Understanding between INEA and parent DGs.
06 INEA forbereder og ivžrksžtter indkaldelser af forslag, tilrettelžgger projektevaluerings-og udvžlgelsesprocedurer, udarbejder og underskriver tilskudsaftaler, sikrer teknisk og finansiel opfżlgning p projekter og giver feedback til Kommissionen. 
06 More specifically, INEA prepares and launches calls for proposals, organises project evaluation and selection procedures, prepares and signs grant agreements, ensures the technical and financial follow-up of projects, and gives feedback to the Commission.
Dets rlige administrationsudgifter er p ca. 27 millioner euro, og i 2018 havde det nžsten 300 fuldtidsansatte. 
It has annual administrative expenditure of about €27 million and had nearly 300 full-time staff for 2018.
8 Program Overordnede generaldirektorater Connecting Europe-faciliteten (CEF): transport, energi og telekommunikation GD MOVE (ansvarligt GD), GD ENER og GD CNECT Horisont 2020: transport-og energiforskning GD RTD, GD MOVE, GD ENER og GD CNECT De resterende dele af TEN-T og Marco Polo II for 2007-2013 GD MOVE 5 Bilag til Kommissionens afgżrelse C(2019) 1453 af 25.2.2019, "Approving the 25,2 Work Programme of the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency", del 2. 
8 Programme Parent DGs Connecting Europe Facility (CEF): transport, energy and telecommunications DG MOVE (lead DG), DG ENER, DG CNECT Horizon 2020 (H2020): transport and energy research DG RTD, DG MOVE, DG ENER, DG CNECT Legacy of the 2007-2013 TEN-T and Marco Polo II DG MOVE 5 Annex to Commission Decision C (2019)1453 of 25.2.2019 approving the 2019 Work Programme of the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency, Part 2.
Tabel 2 - Budget delegeret til INEA for perioden 2014-2020 og antal projekter Kilde: Oplysninger fra INEA, januar 2019. 
Table 2 – Budget delegated to INEA for the 2014‐2020 period and number of projects Source: Information from INEA, January 2019.
07 INEA forvalter 93 % af det samlede CEF-budget og 7 % af Horisont 2020-budgettet. 
07 INEA has been entrusted with 93 % of the total CEF budget and 7 % of the H2020 budget.
Tilsammen er der tale om 33,6 milliarder euro, og det er sledes det stżrste budget, der forvaltes af noget EU-forvaltningsorgan. 
These total €33.6 billion, which is the largest budget managed by an EU executive agency.
De to programmer medfinansierer nžsten 2 000 projekter i INEA's portefżlje. 
The two programmes co‐finance nearly 2 000 projects in INEA’s portfolio.
I perioden 2014-2018 tilrettelagde INEA 59 indkaldelser af forslag og evalueringer af 2 272 stżtteberettigede projektforslag i de tre CEF-sektorer. 
In 2014‐2018, across the three CEF sectors, INEA organised 59 calls for proposals and the evaluation of 2 272 eligible project proposals.
Der blev ydet tilskud til 1 233 projekter, og den samlede CEF-stżtte belżb sig til 25,5 milliarder euro (jf. tabel 2). 
Grants were awarded to 1 233 projects, amounting to total CEF support of €25.5 billion (see Table 2).
Connecting Europe-faciliteten 08 CEF, som blev ivžrksat i januar 2014, er et flagskibsprogram i Europa 2020-strategien, som medfinansierer infrastrukturinvesteringer i sektorerne transport, energi og telekommunikation. 
Connecting Europe Facility 08 The CEF, launched in January 2014, is a flagship programme of the Europe 2020 Strategy that co‐finances infrastructure investment in the transport, energy and telecommunications sectors.
09 Inden for dette program er CEF Transport (CEF-T) et vigtigt EU-finansieringsinstrument til gennemfżrelse af EU's politik for transportinfrastruktur. 
09 Within this programme, CEF Transport (CEF-T) is a key EU funding instrument used to implement European transport infrastructure policy.
Dets hovedml er at bidrage til fžrdiggżrelsen af det transeuropžiske transportnet (TEN-T), som omfatter veje, jernbanelinjer, indre vandveje, indlands-og sżhavne, lufthavne og jernbaneterminaler i de 28 medlemsstater og gržnseoverskridende forbindelser til tredjelande. 
Its main objective is to help complete the trans-European transport network (TEN-T), which comprises roads, railway lines, inland waterways, inland and maritime ports, airports and rail-road terminals throughout the 28 Member States, and cross-border links with some third countries.
Hensigten med CEF er at finansiere projekter med EU-mervžrdi, som fjerner flaskehalse, etablerer manglende forbindelsesled og fuldender gržnsekrydsende stržkninger, hovedsagelig inden for bžredygtige transportformer. 
The CEF aims to fund projects with EU added value which remove bottlenecks, bridge missing links and complete cross-border sections, mainly in sustainable modes of transport.
EU's ml er at fžrdiggżre hovednettet senest i 2030 og det samlede net senest i 2050. 
The EU’s aim is to complete the core network by 2030 and the wider comprehensive network by 2050.
10 CEF Energi (CEF-E) tager sigte p at yde finansiel stżtte til gennemfżrelsen af projekter af fžlles interesse, dvs. vigtige energiinfrastrukturprojekter, navnlig vedrżrende gržnseoverskridende el-og gassammenkoblinger, intelligente net og gržnseoverskridende CO2-net, som ikke er kommercielt rentable. 
10 CEF Energy (CEF-E) aims to financially support implementation of projects of common interest, i.e. key energy infrastructure projects, in particular cross-border electricity and gas interconnectors, smart grids and cross-border carbon dioxide networks, which are not commercially viable.
Dets bredere politiske ml er at forbedre konkurrenceevnen ved at fremme yderligere integration p det indre marked for energi og elektricitets-og gasnets interoperabilitet p tvžrs af gržnserne med henblik p at styrke energiforsyningssikkerheden i EU og bidrage til bžredygtig udvikling og miljżbeskyttelse. 
Its broader policy objectives are to increase competitiveness by promoting the further integration of the internal energy market and the interoperability of electricity and gas networks across borders, enhancing the security of energy supply in the EU and contributing to sustainable development and protection of the environment.
11 CEF Telekommunikation (CEF-IKT) har som ml at skabe forbedringer for borgere, virksomheder og offentlige forvaltninger gennem anvendelse af transeuropžisk interoperabel infrastruktur inden for telekommunikation. 
11 The aim of CEF Telecom (CEF-ICT) is to bring improvements for citizens, businesses, and administrations through the deployment of trans-European interoperable infrastructure in the area of telecommunications.
Det har fokus p at levere operationelle tjenester, der er klar til at blive anvendt og vil vžre bžredygtige over tid. 
It focuses on providing operational services which are ready to be deployed and will be sustainable over time.
Med hensyn til konnektivitet skal CEF-IKT stimulere investeringer i etablering og modernisering af bredbndsnet og levere trdlżse forbindelser af hżj kvalitet i lokalsamfund. 10 
In terms of connectivity, CEF-ICT is intended to stimulate investment for deploying and modernising broadband networks and provide high-quality wireless connectivity in local communities. 10
Revisionens omfang og revisionsmetoden 12 Vi udvalgte INEA til revision p grund af stżrrelsen af det budget, som det forvalter i programmeringsperioden 2014-2020, og fordi vi ikke tidligere havde revideret dets performance. 
Audit scope and approach 12 We selected INEA for audit because of the size of the budgets it is managing for the 2014-2020 programming period, and because we had never audited its performance before.
Vi har timet vores beretning sledes, at vi kan bidrage til overvejelserne om det fornyede retsgrundlag for det kommende CEF II-program. 
We have timed our report so as to be able to contribute to the reflections on the renewed legal framework for the upcoming CEF II programme.
13 INEA var den primžre reviderede enhed. 
13 INEA was our principal auditee.
14 Vi undersżgte derfor, om INEA sammen med Kommissionen: o opnr de forventede fordele ved uddelegering af ansvar og udfżrer sine delegerede opgaver o sżrger for solide procedurer i forvaltningen af CEF-programmet. 
14 We therefore examined whether INEA, together with the Commission: o achieves the expected benefits of externalising responsibilities and fulfils the tasks delegated to it; o ensures robust procedures for the management of the CEF programme.
15 Ved revisionen af programforvaltningen fokuserede vi p INEA's bidrag til en produktiv og effektiv gennemfżrelse af CEF, som udgżr hovedparten af INEA's delegerede budget. 
15 For our audit of programme management, we focused on INEA’s contribution to the efficient and effective implementation of the CEF, which makes up the bulk of INEA’s delegated budget.
Vi džkkede ikke Horisont 2020 og de resterende dele af tidligere programmer (Marco Polo II og TEN-T). 
We did not cover H2020 or the legacy programmes (Marco Polo II and TEN-T).
16 Vi gennemfżrte interview med INEA, de overordnede GD'er (MOVE, ENER, CNECT og RTD) og andre interessenter. 
16 We held interviews with INEA, its parent DGs (MOVE, ENER, CNECT and RTD) and other stakeholders.
Blandt disse kan nžvnes de eksterne evaluatorer, der foretager trersvurderingen af INEA, de europžiske TEN-T-koordinatorer, Agenturet for Samarbejde mellem Energireguleringsmyndigheder (ACER) og observatżrerne vedrżrende INEA's evalueringsprocedurer. 
These included the external evaluators in charge of its triennial assessment, TEN-T European coordinators, the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) and observers of INEA’s evaluation procedures.
Vi overvžrede mżder i INEA's styrelseskomit, INEA's rdgivende gruppe om CEF Transport og udvalget om CEF Transport samt mżder mellem de eksterne evaluatorer i forbindelse med CEF-IKT-indkaldelsen i 2018 (vedrżrende deres udarbejdelse af en konsensusrapport). 
We attended meetings of INEA’s Steering Committee, the INEA Advisory Group on CEF Transport, the CEF Transport Committee, and (in the context of their preparation of a consensus report) the external evaluators in the 2018 CEF-ICT call.
17 Vi undersżgte INEA's lovgivningsmžssige rammer samt dets ansvarsopgaver og kontrolsystemer, og vi foretog direkte test af dets performance i forbindelse med forvaltningen af CEF-programmet og dets projekter. 
17 We examined INEA’s regulatory framework, its responsibilities and control systems, and conducted direct testing of its performance in managing the CEF programme and projects.
Vi analyserede ogs Kommissionens rolle i den endelige udvžlgelse af projekter og vurderede performancerammen for overvgning af resultater. 11 
We also analysed the Commission’s role in the final selection of projects and assessed the performance framework for monitoring results.
18 Nžrmere bestemt gjorde vi fżlgende: o Vi foretog en kvantitativ og kvalitativ analyse af den samlede CEF-projektportefżlje. 
18 Specifically, we: o carried out a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the overall CEF project portfolio.
Vi undersżgte projektudvžlgelsesprocedurerne i fem CEF-E-indkaldelser, fire CEF-T-indkaldelser og tre CEF-IKT-indkaldelser. 
We examined the project selection procedures in five CEF-E calls, four 11 CEF-T calls and three CEF-ICT calls.
Vi analyserede procedurerne for gennemfżrelse, annullering og afslutning af projekter. o Vi foretog en omhyggelig gennemgang af 22 projekter baseret p den tilgžngelige dokumentation hos INEA. 
We analysed the procedures for the implementation, cancellation and termination of projects. o reviewed a sample of 22 projects in depth on the basis of the documentation available at INEA.
Vedrżrende otte andre projekter foretog vi endvidere en skrivebordsgennemgang med fokus p udvžlgelsesfasen. 
Moreover, for eight additional projects we carried out a desk review focusing on the selection phase.
Vores kriterier for udvžlgelse af projekter til stikprżven var džkningen af de forskellige CEF-sektorer, EU-stżttens finansielle vžsentlighed, den geografiske džkning, balancen mellem gržnseoverskridende og ikkegržnseoverskridende projekter samt projekternes fžrdiggżrelsesstatus. o Vi analyserede INEA's midtvejsgennemgang af 356 CEF-T-projekter7 og rsrapporterne om CEF-E. 
Our criteria for sampling projects were the coverage of the various CEF sectors, the amount of EU support, geographical coverage, the balance between cross-border and non-cross-border projects and the completion status of projects. o analysed INEA’s mid-term review of 356 CEF-T projects7 and its CEF-E annual reports.
Vi undersżgte dokumentationen vedrżrende projektgennemfżrelsen og žndringer af projekternes fžrdiggżrelsesdatoer og budgetter, og vi undersżgte ogs rsagerne til frigżrelser og forsinkelser i projektgennemfżrelsen. o Vi indsamlede bekržftende bevis fra forskellige andre kilder, f.eks. trersvurderingen af INEA, som Kommissionen indfżrte i 2018, evalueringsrelaterede dokumenter og rapporter fra Kommissionens Interne Revisionstjeneste. 
We examined the documentation on project implementation and changes to project completion dates and budgets; we also investigated the reasons for decommitments and project implementation delays. o gathered corroborative evidence from various other sources, such as the triennial evaluation of INEA launched by the Commission in 2018, evaluation-related documents and reports by the Commission’s Internal Audit Service.
12 7 Gennemgangen fokuserede p de projekter fra de flerrige indkaldelser i 2014 og 2015, der havde de hżjeste EU-tildelinger, dvs. 
12 7 The review focused on projects with the highest EU allocation from the 2014 and 2015 multi-annual calls.
56 % af samtlige CEF-T-projekter med et samlet tilskud p 18 milliarder euro (80 % af det samlede EU-bidrag til CEF-T). 
This meant 56 % of all CEF-T projects, with total grants of €18 billion (80 % of the total EU contribution to CEF-T).
Bemžrkninger INEA leverede de forventede fordele med visse begržnsninger, som skyldtes rammeforhold 19 Vi undersżgte INEA's organisationsstruktur for at f besvaret to spżrgsml: om forvaltningsorganets oprettelse har givet de forventede fordele ved uddelegering af programmer, og om det har udfżrt sine delegerede opgaver. 
Observations INEA delivered expected benefits with some limitations related to framework constraints 19 We examined INEA’s organisational structure from two angles: whether the creation of the Agency has brought the expected benefits of delegating programmes and whether it has fulfilled its delegated tasks.
20 Fżr oprettelsen af forvaltningsorganet foretog Kommissionen en obligatorisk cost-benefit-analyse i 20138. 
20 Before setting up the Agency, the Commission conducted a mandatory cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in 20138.
Cost-benefit-analysen viste, at der var fżlgende hovedfordele ved at uddelegere opgaver til INEA, i stedet for at Kommissionen selv forvaltede programmet: o sammenhžng i programportefżljen og lżbende forenkling af processer og procedurer o effektivitetsgevinster p ca. 54 millioner euro som fżlge af lavere personaleomkostninger i forbindelse med programmernes forvaltning uden for Kommissionen o synergier som fżlge af, at nžrt beslžgtede politiske omrder samles under det samme forvaltningsorgan med sandsynlige effektivitetsgevinster til fżlge. 
The CBA highlighted the following main benefits of delegating tasks to INEA as compared to the Commission managing the programme: o coherence between the programme portfolio and continuous simplification of processes and procedures; o efficiency gains of approximately €54 million due to the lower staff costs required to manage the programmes outside the Commission; o synergies from having closely related policy domains under the umbrella of the same executive agency, with efficiency gains likely to follow.
INEA udviklede standardiserede procedurer, der har forenklet gennemfżrelsen 21 INEA har udviklet standardiserede vžrktżjer og procedurer, der har forenklet programforvaltningen. 
INEA developed standardised procedures that have simplified implementation 21 INEA has developed standardised tools and procedures that have simplified programme management.
F.eks. omfatter TENtec-databasen, der anvendes til overvgning af CEF, veludviklede moduler til elektronisk indsendelse af forslag og til overvgning af projektgennemfżrelsen. 
For instance, the TenTec database used to monitor the CEF has well-developed modules for the electronic submission of proposals and for monitoring project implementation.
INEA har udarbejdet metodologisk vejledning til alle trin i projektforvaltningscyklussen. 
INEA has developed methodological guidance for all steps of the project management cycle.
INEA fungerer som centralt kontaktpunkt for stżttemodtagere ved at sżrge for en helpdesk og yde rdgivning om indsendelse af forslag og rapportering om gennemfżrelse. 
INEA acts as a central contact point for beneficiaries by providing helpdesk and advisory services on the submission of proposals and reporting on implementation.
"Cost-Benefit Analysis for the delegation of certain tasks regarding the implementation of Union Programmes 2014-2020 to the Executive Agencies", august 2013. 
Cost-Benefit Analysis for the delegation of certain tasks regarding the implementation of Union Programmes 2014-2020 to the Executive Agencies, August 2013.
Fżr uddelegeringen af WiFi4EU-initiativet blev der foretaget endnu en cost-benefit-analyse. 
Prior to the delegation of the WiFi4EU initiative, an additional CBA was carried out.
22 INEA har ogs hurtigere procedurer for tilskudsgodkendelse: I perioden 2007-2010 tog det under det tidligere program TEN-T EA gennemsnitlig 10-20 mneder at yde tilskud, mens INEA's gennemsnit i perioden 2014-2017 var 7,7-8 mneder. 
22 INEA also delivers faster grant approval procedures: in 2007-2010, the average time to grant of the predecessor TEN-T EA was 10 to 20 months, whereas INEA’s average, for 2014-2017, was 7.7 to 8 months.
Dette bekržftes af midtvejsevalueringen af CEF for perioden 2014-2020, hvor det konkluderes, at INEA's forvaltning af tilskud har vist sig meget effektiv9. 
This is confirmed by the mid-term evaluation of the 2014-2020 CEF, which concluded that INEA’s management of grants has proved very efficient9.
Den eksterne trersvurdering af INEA viste ogs, at INEA's organisation, ledelse, driftsprocedurer og praksis var forsvarlige, og at de fleste stżttemodtagere havde bemžrket en vis forenkling af procedurerne10. 
The triennial external evaluation of INEA also reported that its organisation and governance, its operating procedures and its practices were sound, and that most beneficiaries had noticed some simplification of procedures10.
INEA's administrative omkostninger ligger under de oprindelige skżn, selv om personaleomkostningerne er en smule hżjere 23 Vi undersżgte INEA's administrative omkostninger for at vurdere, om der er opnet effektivitetsgevinster. 
INEA’s administrative costs are below initial estimates, though staff costs are slightly higher 23 We examined INEA’s administrative costs to assess whether efficiency gains have been achieved.
I perioden 2014-2018 udgjorde de administrative omkostninger i alt 105 millioner euro og l sledes under det oprindelige ml p 111 millioner euro, der var beregnet for de nžvnte effektivitetsgevinster11. 
In 2014-2018, total administrative costs were €105 million, below the initial target of €111 million calculated for the above-mentioned efficiency gains11.
Dette skyldtes hovedsagelig lavere end forventede infrastruktur-og driftsudgifter (6 millioner euro lavere) samt programstżtteudgifter (5 millioner euro lavere). 
This was mainly due to lower than estimated infrastructure and operating expenditure (€6 million less) and programme support expenditure (€5 million less).
Personaleomkostningerne var dog 5 millioner euro (7 %) hżjere end planlagt, fordi det oprindelige skżn var baseret p gennemsnitlige personaleomkostninger uden hensyntagen til lżnindeksering, omklassificering af personale og żgede HR-udgifter. 
However, staff costs were €5 million (7 %) higher than planned, because the initial estimate was based on average staffing costs and took no account of salary indexing, the reclassification of staff and increased HR costs.