natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
According to the World Health Organisation's de«nition,healthisastateofcompletephysical,mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or in«rmity.'
Tento veﾋmi þirok̅ pohﾋad na nèsilie umo™ﾏoval projektom Daphne podrobne skÿmaﾝ mnohotvèrnosﾝ nèsilia a þpeci«ckïnèrodnï,regionèlneamiestneformy,vak̅chsav preva™nej miere vyskytuje.
In short, violence was seen as anything that impeded `complete physical, mental and social well-being' and a breach of the right to `life, safety, freedom, dignity and physical and emo-tional integrity'. This very broad approach to violence allowed Daphne projects to explore in detail the many faces of violence and the speci«cnational,regionalandlocalformsitpre-dominantly takes.
Takto þiroko koncipovanï vyhlèsenie umo™ﾏovalo v rèmci projektov poｲas púsobnosti progra-mu Daphne znaｲnÿ ‹exibilituvpróstupochknèsiliu.Odroku2000saprojektysÿstreｵujÿnaoblasti nèsilia, ktorï prevlèdajÿ v ｲlensk̅ch þtètoch Eà (ｲasto aj mimo Eà), tak™e poskytujÿ próle™itosﾝ odovzdèvaﾝ v̅sledky ｵalej, ale tie™ na oblasti, ktorï sa identi«kovaliakoprioritnïoblasti ｲinnosti vo vlastnej lokalite/krajine púsobenia organizècie zainteresovanej na projek-te.
This may well explain the continued support for Daphne from organisations working at community level and represents a signi«cantstepinbuildingabridgebetweencommunity-level priorities and issues of European importance.
Vysvetﾋuje to trvalÿ podporu, ktorÿ organizècie pracujÿce na miestnej ÿrovni poskytujÿ Da-phne, a predstavuje v̅razn̅ krok pri budovanó prepojenia medzi prioritami na miestnej ÿrov-ni a otèzkami na eurùpskej ÿrovni.
Over the life of the Daphne programme, therefore, projects have been supported that have worked to protect from, and to prevent, these general areas of violence:
Poｲas púsobenia programu Daphne sa podporovali projekty, ktorï sa zameriavali na preven-ciu a ochranu pred nasledujÿcimi vþeobecn̅mi oblasﾝami nèsilia:
‡ sexual violence,
‡ sexuèlne nèsilie
‡ emotional and verbal abuse,
‡ citovï a verbèlne t̅ranie
‡ exclusion and quasi-structural violence,
‡ vylÿｲenie a ¶kvèzi-þtrukturèlneƒ nèsilie
‡ coercion and exploitation,
‡ nètlak a zneu™óvanie
‡ virtual violence,
‡ virtuèlne nèsilie
‡ psychological violence,
‡ psychickï nèsilie
‡ gendered violence,
‡ pohlavne diferencovanï nèsilie
A more detailed list of the forms of violence i d e n t i « e d i n E u r op e , a n d t h e g r o up s m o b i l i s e d t h r o u g h Daphne projects to combat them, can be found in Annex 1.
Podrobnejþó zoznam foriem nèsilia i d e n t i « k o v a n ̅ c h v E u r ù pe a s k up i n y , k t o r ï s a m ob i l i z o v a l i v rèmci projektov Daphne s cieﾋom boja proti tak̅mto formèm nèsilia, sa nachèdza v prólohe 1.
What Europeans think about violence
Po si Eurùpania myslia o nèsiló
Although it soon became clear that the multi-faceted nature of violence was well re‹ectedinprojects submitted to and/or funded by Daphne, it was also obvious that conducting a Euro-barometer exercise to seek more input on Europeans' perceptions of violence would not only complement project activity but also serve as a base for attempting to track some trends in perceptions of violence over time.
Aj napriek tomu, ™e veﾋmi skoro sa ukèzalo, ako sa mnohotvèrna povaha nèsilia odzrkadﾋuje v projektoch predlo™en̅ch do Daphne alebo « n a n c o v a n ̅ c h z D a p h n e , b o l o t i e ™ z r e j m ï , ™ ep r i e s k u m verejnej mienky pod nèzvom Eurobarometer zameran̅ na zóskanie vêｲþieho mno™-stva ÿdajov o vnómanó nèsilia v Eurùpe nebude len doplnkom projektov̅ch ｲinnostó, ale po-slÿ™i ako zèklad pre skÿmanie urｲit̅ch trendov vo vnómanó nèsilia v rúznych ｲasov̅ch obdo-biach.
The disaggregated nature of the data in Eurobarometer studies also allows for some general conclusions to be drawn about how di.erentcountries,age groups and socioeconomic groups might also perceive violence, and their responses to it.
Podrobnè þtruktÿra ÿdajov v rèmci þtÿdió Eurobarometra tie™ umo™ﾏuje zostaviﾝ urｲitï vþeobecnï zèvery o tom, ako asi jednotlivï krajiny, vekovï skupiny a socièlno-ekonomickï skupiny vnómajÿ nèsilie a akè je ich reakcia na nèsilie.
In 1999, therefore, the Daphne initiative cooperated with the Commission services on infor-mation, communication, culture and audiovisual media (Public Opinion Analysis Unit) in de-veloping and commissioning a two-pronged Eurobarometer to gauge public opinion on (i) violence against children, and (ii) domestic violence against women.
Preto v roku 1999 iniciatóva Daphne spolupracovala s odborom Komisie pre informaｲnï, ko-munikaｲnï, kultÿrne a audiovizuèlne mïdiè (jednotkou pre anal̅zy verejnej mienky) na vy-tvorenó a zadanó Eurobarometra skladajÿceho sa z dvoch ｲastó skÿmajÿcich verejnÿ mienku pre oblasﾝ i) nèsilia voｲi deﾝom a ii) domèceho nèsilia voｲi ™enèm.
It was unfortunate that the survey on violence against women was limited to domestic violence only, since this meant that important subjects such as tra/ckingandextra-family(e.g.institutional)violencewerenot included.
Naneþﾝastie prieskum o nè-siló voｲi ™enèm sa obmedzil len na domèce nèsilie, ｲo znamenalo, ™e dúle™itï tïmy, ako je nezèkonnï obchodovanie a nèsilie mimo rodiny (napr. inþtitucionèlne), neboli zahrnutï.
The survey on violence against children covered physical punishment, psychological punish-ment, sexual abuse, physical cruelty and psychological cruelty, although it also sought to «ndout whether Europeans did, in fact, consider all these to constitute `violence' and whether there were di.erencesinthisamongagegroupsandcountries.Itaskedquestionsaboutpo-tential perpetrators: father, mother, stepfather/mother's partner, stepmother/father's partner, brother, sister, other relative, teacher, child-minder, another child, stranger.
Prieskum o nèsiló voｲi deﾝom zahﾕﾏal fyzickï tresty, psychickï tresty, pohlavnï zneu™óvanie, fyzickï t̅ranie a psychickï t̅ranie, hoci sa tie™ pokÿsil zistiﾝ, ｲi ich Eurùpania vlastne pova™o-vali za ¶nèsilieƒ a ｲi vo vnómanó jednotliv̅ch vekov̅ch skupón a krajón boli rozdiely. Klèdol otèzky o mo™n̅ch pèchateﾋoch: otec, matka, nevlastn̅ otec/matkin partner, nevlastnè mat-ka/otcova partnerka, brat, sestra, in̅ próbuzn̅, uｲiteﾋ, opatrovateﾋ, inï dieﾝa, cudzia osoba.
It also looked at how people heard about violence against children, what they thought were the main causes of violence against children, who they thought should intervene, what they knew about laws in their country, and thoughts they had on what could be done to reduce violence against
Zameral sa tie™ na to, kde ﾋudia poｲuli o nèsiló voｲi deﾝom, ｲo pova™ovali za hlavnï próｲiny nèsilia voｲi deﾝom, kto by podﾋa nich mal zasiahnuﾝ, ｲi ﾋudia poznajÿ zèkony vo svojej krajine a akï boli ich podnety na aktivity, ktorï by viedli k znó™eniu miery nèsilia pèchanom na deﾝoch.
The Eurobarometer on domestic violence against women followed essentially the same pat-tern, although it did not seek to explore what Europeans thought constituted domestic vio-lence against women but rather how serious they thought «vedi.erenttypesofalready-de-«nedviolence(psychological,physicalandsexualviolence,threatsofviolenceandrestrictedfreedom) were.
Eurobarometer v oblasti domèceho nèsilia voｲi ™enèm mal v zèsade rovnak̅ vzorec, nebol zameran̅ na to, ｲo podﾋa Eurùpanov tvoró domèce nèsilie voｲi ™enèm, ale predovþetk̅m na zèva™nosﾝ vopred de«novan̅chpiatichdruhovnèsilia(psychickï,fyzickï,sexuèlnenèsilie,vyhrè™anie sa nèsilóm a obmedzovanie slobody).
There was an important question regarding the relationship between violence and `circumstances', in order to gauge whether violence was tolerated in certain circumstances (this question was subsumed into other questions in the children's survey).
Prieskum obsahoval aj dúle™itÿ otèzku o vzﾝa-hu medzi nèsilóm a ¶okolnosﾝamiƒ, aby zistil, ｲi sa nèsilie za ist̅ch okolnostó toleruje (tèto otèz-ka bola zaradenè medzi in̅mi otèzkami v prieskume o detskom nèsiló).
There was also a question that aimed to give some idea of the prevalence of domestic violence by asking respondents whether they themselves knew of someone who had been a victim or perpetra-tor of domestic violence, and where they knew this person (at work, in own family, among friends, etc.).
Zahrnutè bola tie™ otèzka, ktorè mala za cieﾋ zistiﾝ rozþórenie domèceho nèsilia a respondentov sa p̅tala, ｲi osob-ne poznajÿ niekoho, kto sa stal obeﾝou alebo pèchateﾋom domèceho nèsilia a odkiaﾋ tÿto osobu poznajÿ (zo zamestnania, z vlastnej rodiny, spomedzi priateﾋov atｵ.).
Some interesting insights were gained through the two surveys.
V rèmci t̅chto dvoch prieskumov sa zistili urｲitï zaujómavï poznatky:
‡ Most Europeans thought that violence against children was `very common' or `fairly com-mon' (77 % total) and only 1 % had never heard of violence against children.
‡ mnoho Eurùpanov si mysló, ™e nèsilie voｲi deﾝom je ¶veﾋmi ｲast̅mƒ alebo ¶dosﾝ ｲast̅mƒ javom (77 % z celkovïho poｲtu) a len 1 % sa nikdy s nèsilóm voｲi deﾝom nestretlo;
‡ A majority of Europeans, although slightly fewer, thought that domestic violence against women was `very common' or `fairly common' (74 % total) but 4 % had never heard of it.
‡ vêｲþina Eurùpanov sa domnieva, ™e domèce nèsilie voｲi ™enèm je ¶veﾋmi ｲast̅mƒ alebo ¶dosﾝ ｲast̅mƒ javom (74 % z celkovïho poｲtu) a 4 % sa s nóm nikdy nestretli;
‡ In both cases, sexual violence topped the list of what was considered serious: more than 97 % of respondents considered sexual abuse of children to be a form of violence, and 90 % of Europeans considered sexual violence against women to be `very serious'.
‡ v oboch própadoch sa pohlavnï nèsilie nachèdzalo na prvom mieste podﾋa zèva™nosti: viac ako 97 % respondentov pova™ovalo pohlavnï zneu™óvanie detó za formu nèsilia a 90 % Eu-rùpanov pova™ovalo pohlavnï nèsilie voｲi ™enèm za ¶veﾋmi zèva™n̅ problïmƒ;
‡ There was a serious misconception about perpetrators of violence against children: Euro-peans mistakenly believed that it is strangers who are most likely to in‹ictviolenceonchildren (74 %) although in fact most violence is in‹ictedonchildrenbyfamily,friendsorpeople they know.
‡ o pèchateﾋoch nèsilia voｲi deﾝom prevlèdala skutoｲne mylnè predstava: Eurùpania sa ne-sprèvne domnievali, ™e nèsilie na deﾝoch najｲastejþie pèchajÿ cudzie osoby (74 %), hoci v skutoｲnosti najviac nèsilia na deﾝoch pèchajÿ ich rodinnó prósluþnóci, priatelia alebo osoby, ktorï deti poznajÿ;
‡ Europeans consider that physical or psychological violence in‹ictedonchildrenbyteach-ers is a form of violence (75 %), and 59 % regard physical punishment by parents as an act of violence.
‡ Eurùpania pova™ujÿ fyzickï a psychickï nèsilie pèchanï uｲiteﾋmi na deﾝoch za formu nèsi-lia (75 %) a 59 % respondentov pova™uje fyzickï tresty ulo™enï rodiｲmi za nèsiln̅ ｲin;
`Young people have normalised and grown accustomed to violence and the values associated with it.
¶Mladó ﾋudia pova™ujÿ nèsilie za normèlne a zvykli si naﾏ a na hodnoty s nóm spojenï.
Violence is present on an habitual, daily and generalised basis.
Nèsilie je prótomnï v zvyｲajnej, ka™dodennej a vþeobecnej podobe.
It is assumed to be in-evitable and, generally speaking, we are not aware of the problems it causes.
Pova™uje sa za neodvratnï a vo vþe-obecnosti si neuvedomujeme problïmy, ktorï spúsobuje.
From the groups' analysis, a certain permissiveness and social acceptance is inferred and they do not seem to be very informed about the negative consequences of acts of violence, although they are identi«edas problematic„ Violence serves as a mechanism for dialogue between equals.
Z hﾋadiska skupinovej anal̅zy sa usu-dzuje istè liberèlnosﾝ a spoloｲenskè própustnosﾝ nèsilia a tieto skupiny nie sÿ veﾋmi informovanï o negatóvnych nèsledkoch nèsiln̅ch ｲinov, hoci ich identi«kujÿakoproblematickï...Nèsilieslÿ-™i ako istè forma dialùgu medzi rovnocenn̅mi jedincami.
Adolescents form their own code with a di.erentlanguage,aslangthatispartoftheritesofpassage,offorms of behaviour and attitudes that lead them to the adult stage.
Adolescenti si vytvèrajÿ vlastn̅ kùdex s vlastn̅m jazykom, slangom, ktor̅ je sÿｲasﾝou rituèlu prijatia, formou sprèvania sa a postojov, ktorï ich privèdzajÿ do etapy dospelosti.
Violence thus becomes an irrational process that builds identity by operating within a circle of recognition between the members of the group.' [Project 99/055/C]
Nèsilie sa teda stèva iracionèlnym procesom, v ktorom sa formuje identita prostrednóctvom púsobenia vo vnÿtri skupiny a uznania medzi jej ｲlenmi.ƒ [Projekt 99/055/C]
‡ Europeans «nditdi/cultto imaginethatchildrenmightbe violenttowardstheirsiblings,but recognise violence by `another child' as frequently occurring.
‡ pokiaﾋ ide o nèsilie voｲi deﾝom a domèce nèsilie voｲi ™enèm, v̅raznè vêｲþina Eurùpanov pova™uje alkohol (cca 95 %) a drogy (cca 94 %) za hlavnÿ próｲinu takïhoto nèsilia.
95 %) and drugs (approx.
Po je vlastne nèsilie?
‡ This may be linked to the responses which indicated that almost half of all Europeans think that violence against children may be related to the behaviour of the child her/himself (45 %), and that the `provocative behaviour' of women is also a cause of domestic violence against them (46 %).
‡ mú™e to sÿvisieﾝ s odpoveｵami, ktorï ukazujÿ, ™e takmer polovica vþetk̅ch Eurùpanov si mysló, ™e nèsilie voｲi deﾝom mú™e vypl̅vaﾝ so sprèvania samotnïho dieﾝaﾝa (45 %) a ™e ¶provokatóvne sprèvanie saƒ ™ien je tie™ próｲinou domèceho nèsilia voｲi nim (46 %);
`An issue that arose for the project team was that of the ``backlash'' in Ireland.
¶Problïm, s ktor̅m sa stretol projektov̅ tóm, bol ,odpor` v Órsku.
A hostile environ-ment exists within Irish society to explore violence within the home and in young peoples' lives. At present there is a group of men's groups who organise together to destruct the work of many groups in Ireland who work in the area of violence.
V órskej spoloｲnosti pretrvèva nepriateﾋskï naladenie proti prieskumom nèsilia v ™ivote rodón a mlède™e; v sÿｲasnosti tu exis-tujÿ mu™skï zoskupenia, ktorï sa organizujÿ, aby deþtruktóvne púsobili na mnohï skupiny pra-cujÿce v Órsku v oblasti nèsilia.
Their agenda also attacks women's freedom of choice.
Ich program tie™ napèda slobodnÿ voﾋbu ™ien.
The media gives considerable coverage to this group who, as well as attacking wom-en's groups and their supporters, have also challenged the government by taking a court case against them in relation to the one programme that the government has introduced in schools for boys called `'Exploring masculinities''.
Mïdiè venujÿ veﾋkÿ pozornosﾝ takïmuto zoskupeniu, ktorï popri ÿtoｲenó na ™enskï zdru™enia a ich podporo-vateﾋov zaÿtoｲilo aj na vlèdu a vedie proti nej sÿdne pojednèvanie vo veci programu nazvanï-ho ,Skÿmanie mu™nosti`, ktor̅ vlèda zaviedla v þkolèch pre chlapcov.
The project operated within this environment.' [Project 99/044/WC]
Projekt bol umiestnen̅ do tohto prostredia.ƒ [Projekt 99/044/WC]
‡ There were strong feelings that perpetrators of violence against children and domestic violence against women should be punished (94 % and 95 %) but little knowledge of exist-ing laws.
‡ prevlèda silnï presvedｲenie, ™e pèchatelia nèsilia voｲi deﾝom a pèchatelia domèceho nèsi-lia voｲi ™enèm by mali byﾝ potrestanó (94 % a 95 %), no znalosti platnej legislatóvy v tejto oblasti sÿ malï;
‡ The majority of Europeans believed that laws should be more stringently enforced (91 % in both surveys) and there was strong support for the notion that the EU itself should be involved in combating violence against children (72 % `de«nitely')andagainstwomen(67 %).
‡ vêｲþina Eurùpanov je presvedｲenè, ™e prèvo by sa malo prósnejþie presadzovaﾝ (91 % v oboch prieskumoch) a v̅razne podporuje nèzor, ™e do boja proti nèsiliu voｲi deﾝom (72 % ¶rozhodneƒ) a voｲi ™enèm (67 %) by sa mala zapojiﾝ samotnè Eà.
What was clear from the Eurobarometer is that there is a high level of general awareness about violence in Europe and a strong feeling that it is a social phenomenon that is not acceptable.
Z Eurobarometra jasne vyplynulo, ™e v Eurùpe existuje vysokè ÿroveﾏ vþeobecnïho povedo-mia o nèsiló a silnï presvedｲenie, ™e ide o spoloｲensk̅ jav, ktor̅ je neakceptovateﾋn̅.
There was also endorsement of the notion that violence is a multi-faceted phenomenon that has di.erentformsandtriggers,andthattheperpetratorsofviolencearealsodiverse.
Potvrdil sa tie™ nèzor, ™e nèsilie je mnohotvèrny jav, ktor̅ mè rúzne formy a próｲiny, a ™e pèchatelia nèsilia sÿ tie™ rozliｲnó.
There were also worrying signs, however, that the younger the European, the higher the lev-el of violence tolerated, suggesting that tolerance of violence may be increasing and that it may be becoming `normalised'.
Ukèzali sa varovnï signèly, ktorï poukazujÿ na skutoｲnosﾝ, ™e ｲóm je Eurùpan mladþó, t̅m vyþþó je stupeﾏ jeho tolerancie nèsilia. Naznaｲujÿ, ™e tolerancia nèsilia sa mú™e zvyþovaﾝ a ™e nèsilie sa mú™e ¶normalizovaﾝƒ.
There are serious questions unanswered about why this is so (in more speci«careas,forexamplesexualabuseofchildren,thereareindicationsthatmasspublic awareness campaigns may in fact contribute to such `normalisation' and provide a context for the self-justi«cationprocessthatabusersgothrough).Whateverthereasons,thisclearly remains a major challenge for Europe.
Vè™ne otèzky, preｲo je tomu tak, ostèvajÿ nezodpovedanï (v kon-krïtnejþóch oblastiach, ako napróklad pohlavnï zneu™óvanie detó, sÿ nèznaky, ™e masovï kam-pane na zv̅þenie verejnïho povedomia mú™u v skutoｲnosti prispievaﾝ k takejto ¶normalizèciiƒ a poskytovaﾝ pozadie pre proces seba ospravedlﾏovania, ktor̅m nèsilnóci prechèdzajÿ).
) projects funded between 1997 and
V roku 2003 boli analyzovanï v̅stupy a v̅sledky z 30311 projektov zisten̅ch medzi rokmi 1997 a 2003, reprezentujÿcich viac ako
2003, representing more than 1 500 partners.
1 500 partnerov.
This enabled the Commission to have a precise idea of individual results and impacts, but also to con«rmthee.ectivenessandthee/ciencyof the programme.
Toto umo™nilo Komisii zóskaﾝ presnÿ predstavu o jednotliv̅ch v̅sledkoch a vplyvoch, ale tie™ potvrdiﾝ efektivitu a ÿｲinnosﾝ programu.
This continuous evaluation work shows that Daphne is e.ective,i.e.itsresultsandtheirim-pacts contribute to achieving its objectives. The e/ciencyoftheprogrammeisevidencedbythe impressive number of outputs and outcomes, compared with the resources allocated.
Toto nepretr™itï hodnotenie ukèzalo, ™e Daphne je efektóvny projekt, t. j. v̅sledky a jeho vplyv prispieva k dosiahnutiu cieﾋov. àｲinnosﾝ programu je podlo™enè impozantn̅m mno™stvom v̅stupov a v̅sledkov v porovnanó s prósluþn̅m zdrojmi.
Once the project is completed, insuf-«cientdisseminationandpost-projectfundingareimplemented.
Po tom, ako je projekt ukonｲen̅, sÿ zistenia nedostatoｲne rozþirovanï a implementovanï.
Project typology between 1997 and 2003
Typolùgia projektov v obdobó rokov 1997 a™ 2003
The « n a l e v a l u a t i o nffo f t h e D a p h n e p r o g r a m mffe p r o v i d e d p l e n tffy o f d a t a cffo n c e r n i n g t h e p r o j e c t s , their outputs and outcomes.
Zèvereｲnï hodnotenie programu Daphne poskytlo mno™stvo informèció o projektoch, ich vkladoch a v̅sledkoch. V̅sledky sÿ podrobnejþie rozobratï v 4. kapitole.
(a) There is a balance between projects dedicated to children/young people and to women or to combined targets:
a) Projekty boli zameranï na deti/mladistv̅ch, ™eny, própadne na viac skupón sÿｲasne a pro-porcionalita rozdelenia je nasledovnè:
Children and women
Deti a ™eny
Some 39 % of the projects speci«callyaddressedonetypeofend-bene«ciary(children,young people or women).
Pribli™ne 39 % projektov bolo zameran̅ch len na jeden typ koneｲn̅ch prójemcov (deti, mladistvó alebo ™eny).
Grouping the types of end-bene«ciaryshowsthat`children'wereaddressed by 48 % of the projects, young people by 52 % and women by 61 %.
Zoskupenóm jednotliv̅ch typov sa zistilo, ™e 48 % projektov bolo venovan̅ch deﾝom, 52 % mlad̅m ﾋuｵom a 61 % ™enèm.
) Of these 303 funded projects, 218 were analysed in detail, representing 1 212 partners.
Z tþchto 303 sponzorovanþch projektov bolo 218 podrobne analyzovanþch, pri┘om predstavujú 1 212 partnerov.
Other projects could not be contacted for various reasons: bankruptcy, move of the key person, documentation no longer available, etc.
S inþmi projektami nebolo m o Š n ê sa skontaktova╃ z rôznych dôvodov: bankrot, odchod hlavnej zodpovednej osoby, dokumentâcia u Š nie je k dispozîcii at┛.
Of these 218 projects, 148 were completed at the time of the study and could deliver documentation on outputs and outcomes.
Z tþchto 218 projektov bolo 148 ukon┘enþch v ┘ase ùtúdie a mohli doda╃ dokumentâciu o vþsledkoch a zâveroch.
Each type of end-bene«ciaryreferstooneormoresubcategoriesasfollows:
Pri ka™dom type koneｲnïho prójemcu bola oslovenè najmenej jedna z nasledovn̅ch sub-kategùrió:
Asylum seekers
3 0 çiadatelia o azyl
People with disabilities
Postihnutó ﾋudia
Domestic workers
Pracujÿci v domècnosti
People in prostitution
Prostitÿti/prostitÿtky
People in prison or in custody
Vêzni/ﾋudia pod dozorom
Note: `Other' refers to soldiers and their family, isolated women, unaccompanied minors, torture survivors and people with a mentally ill parent.
Do kategùrie ¶ostatnóƒ spadajÿ vojaci a ich rodiny, osamotenï ™eny, neplnoletï deti bez opatery, obete t̅rania a ﾋudia s duþevne chor̅mi rodiｲmi.
(b) 21 % of the projects are multiannual (two or three years), which improves their sustainabil-ity. But these projects weigh heavily on the budget; this is why their number was limited.
b) 21 % projektov bolo viacroｲn̅ch (dvoj alebo trojroｲn̅ch), ｲo mè kladn̅ vplyv na ich udr™a-teﾋnosﾝ.
(d) The average number of partners per projects is six, but 3 % of the projects have 10 or more partners (mainly local partners in these cases).
Projekty tohto typu vþak veﾋmi zaﾝa™ujÿ rozpoｲet, a preto bol ich poｲet limitovan̅; c) Zainteresovan̅ch bolo vþetk̅ch 15 ｲlensk̅ch þtètov (ｲi u™ ako koordinètori alebo ako part-neri) a EFTA/EEE a CEEC organizècie predstavujÿ 6 % z celkovïho poｲtu partnerov; d) Priemern̅ poｲet partnerov spolupracujÿcich na projekte je 6, no na 3 % projektov sa zÿ-ｲastﾏuje 10 a viac partnerov (v t̅chto própadoch ide zvêｲþa o partnerov na lokèlnej ÿrovni).
It appears from the monitoring visit and from the ex-post evaluations that there are usually too many partners for each to be ad-equately involved.
Na zèklade monitoringu a ex post hodnotenó sa zistilo, ™e veﾋk̅ poｲet partnerov je prekè™-kou toho, aby sa ka™d̅ z nich na projekte podieﾋal v dostatoｲnej miere.
In addition, it adds to the management burden of the coordinator to the detriment of mainstreaming of the project activity.
Navyþe to predsta-vuje vyþþiu zèﾝa™ pre koordinètora a negatóvne ovplyvﾏuje aktivity projektu; e) Na projektoch sa zÿｲastnili nasledovnï druhy organizèció (pozri nasledujÿcu stranu).
NGOs have always been the focus of Daphne.
Program Daphne sa v™dy zameriaval na NO.
They represent 56 % of the partners and 65 % of the project coordinators.
Tvoria 56 % z celkovïho poｲtu partnerov a 65 % koordinètorov projektov.
Nevertheless, in 2002 and 2003 the proportion of NGOs as co-ordinators decreased from 65 % to 54 % compared with previous years.
Napriek tomu sa v rokoch 2002 a 2003 poｲet koordinètorov z ne-vlèdnych organizèció v porovnanó s predchèdzajÿcimi rokmi znó™il zo 65 % na 54 %.
Research centres, universities and public institutions increased their presence as coordinators: they each rep-resent about 13 %.
Zv̅þil sa podiel v̅skumn̅ch centier, univerzót a verejn̅ch inþtitÿcii na koordinècii projektov: ka™dè z t̅chto organizèció sa na koordinècii podieﾋa 13 percentami.
This evolution is probably due to two factors: «rst,since2000,publicinstitutions have been allowed to apply; second, as stated by several stakeholders, some NGOs might have been discouraged by the increasing requirements and procedures of the EU funding schemes over the years.
Tento v̅voj je pravdepodobne spúsoben̅ dvoma faktormi: od roku 2000 sa mú™u o podporu uchèdzaﾝ verejnï inþtitÿcie a po druhï, ako potvrdili niekoﾋkï zèujmovï skupiny, niektorï MVO mohli odradiﾝ rokmi rastÿ-ce po™iadavky a ｲoraz zlo™itejþie postupy pri zóskavanó « n a n c i ó o d E à .