natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The expert must sign a Declaration of no conflict of interest and a Declaration of confidentiality before starting the work, by which he/she accepts the present Code of Conduct.
Strokovnjak mora podpisati izjavo o neobstoju navzkrižja interesov in izjavo o zaupnosti, preden začne delati, in s tem potrdi, da bo spoštoval sedanji kodeks ravnanja.
Invited experts who do not sign the declaration will not be allowed to work as an expert.
Povabljeni strokovnjaki, ki ne podpišejo izjave, ne bodo mogli delovati kot strokovnjaki.
In doing so, the expert commits him/herself to strict confidentiality and impartiality concerning his/her tasks.
S tem se strokovnjak zaveže, da bo svoje naloge opravljal strogo zaupno in popolnoma nepristransko.
If an expert has conflicts of interest, he/she must declare such facts to the responsible Commission official as soon as he/she becomes aware of this, and specify the nature of the conflict.
Če je strokovnjak v navzkrižju interesov, mora o teh dejstvih obvestiti pristojnega uradnika Komisije takoj, ko zanje izve, in opredeliti vrsto navzkrižja.
The Commission ensures that, where the nature of any link is such that it could threaten the impartiality of the expert, he/she does not participate as an observer.
Komisija zagotavlja, da takrat, ko je narava neke navezave taka, da bi lahko škodovala nepristranskosti strokovnjaka, tak strokovnjak ne sodeluje kot opazovalec.
Experts may not discuss any proposal with others, including other experts or Commission officials not directly involved in the evaluation process.
Strokovnjaki o predlogih ne smejo razpravljati z drugimi, tudi ne z drugimi strokovnjaki ali uradniki Komisije, ki niso neposredno vključeni v ocenjevalni postopek.
Experts may not communicate with applicants.
Strokovnjaki ne smejo biti v stiku s prijavitelji.
Experts’ advice to the Commission may not be communicated by them to the applicants or to any other person.
Strokovnjaki o svetovanju, ki ga opravijo za Komisijo, ne smejo obveščati vložnikov ali drugih oseb.
Experts are not allowed to disclose any detail of the monitoring and evaluation processes (including names of other experts participating in the evaluation) and their outcomes or of any proposal submitted for evaluation without the express written approval of the Commission.
Strokovnjaki ne smejo razkriti nobenih podrobnosti o postopku spremljanja in ocenjevanja (vključno z imeni drugih strokovnjakov, ki sodelujejo pri ocenjevanju) in rezultatih postopka ali o predlogih, predloženih za ocenjevanje, brez izrecnega pisnega soglasja Komisije.
Where the evaluation takes place in an office or building controlled by the Commission, experts are not allowed to take outside the evaluation building any parts of proposals, copies or notes, either on paper or in electronic form, relating to the evaluation of proposals without the approval of the Commission.
Če ocenjevanje poteka v pisarni ali zgradbi, ki jo nadzira Komisija, strokovnjaki iz zgradbe, kjer se opravlja ocenjevanje, ne smejo odnašati nobenih delov predlogov, kopij ali zapiskov, ki se nanašajo na ocenjevanje predlogov, niti v papirni niti v elektronski obliki, brez soglasja Komisije.
Experts are required at all times to comply strictly with any rules defined by the Commission for ensuring the confidentiality of the evaluation process and its outcomes.
Strokovnjaki morajo vedno strogo upoštevati vsa pravila, ki jih določi Komisija za zagotavljanje zaupnosti ocenjevalnega postopka in njegovih rezultatov.
Failure to comply with these rules may result in exclusion from the immediate and future monitoring and evaluation processes, without prejudice to penalties that may derive from other applicable Regulations.
Neupoštevanje teh pravil lahko vodi k izključitvi iz naslednjega ali prihodnjih postopkov spremljanja in ocenjevanja ne glede na kazni, ki izhajajo iz drugih veljavnih uredb.
Specific conditions — Code of conduct for independent experts acting as evaluators
Posebni pogoji – Kodeks ravnanja za neodvisne strokovnjake v vlogi ocenjevalcev
The task of an expert is to participate in a confidential, fair and equitable evaluation of each proposal according to the procedures described in this guide and in any programme-specific evaluation document.
Naloga ocenjevalca je, da sodeluje pri zaupnem, pravičnem in nepristranskem ocenjevanju vsakega predloga v skladu s postopki, opisanimi v tem priročniku in morebitnih dokumentih o ocenjevanju za posamezen program.
If an expert has a conflict of interest with a proposal, he/she must declare such facts to the responsible Commission official, and specify the nature of the conflict, as soon as he/she becomes aware of this.
Če je strokovnjak pri nekem predlogu v navzkrižju interesov, mora o teh dejstvih obvestiti pristojnega uradnika Komisije takoj, ko zanje izve, in opredeliti vrsto navzkrižja.
In addition the expert signs a declaration at the bottom of the individual evaluation report for each proposal that he/she examines for the Commission notifying that no conflicts of interest for this particular proposal exist.
Poleg tega strokovnjak za vsak predlog podpiše izjavo, ki je na dnu poročila o individualnem ocenjevanju predloga, ki ga ocenjuje za Komisijo, s katero potrjuje, da ni v navzkrižju interesov v zvezi z zadevnim predlogom.
The Commission ensures that, where the nature of any link is such that it could threaten the impartiality of the expert, he/she does not participate in the evaluation of that proposal, and, if necessary, competing proposals.
Komisija zagotovi, da takrat, ko je narava neke navezave taka, da bi lahko škodovala nepristranskosti strokovnjaka, tak strokovnjak ne sodeluje pri ocenjevanju tega predloga ali, če je potrebno, drugih predlogov, ki se potegujejo za financiranje.
Experts may not discuss any proposal with others, including other experts or Commission officials not directly involved in the evaluation of the proposal, except during the formal discussion at the meetings moderated by or with the knowledge and agreement of the responsible Commission official.
Strokovnjaki ne smejo razpravljati o predlogih z drugimi, tudi ne z drugimi strokovnjaki ali uradniki Komisije, ki niso neposredno vključeni v ocenjevanje predloga, razen med uradnimi razpravami na sejah, ki jih vodi pristojni uradnik Komisije, oziroma ob vednosti in s soglasjem pristojnega uradnika Komisije.
Experts may not communicate with applicants, except in the case of panel hearings between experts and applicants organised by the Commission as part of the evaluation process.
Strokovnjaki ne smejo biti v stiku z vložniki, razen na zaslišanjih odbora, ki potekajo med strokovnjaki in vložniki in jih Komisija organizira kot del ocenjevalnega postopka.
No proposal may be amended during the evaluation session.
Med ocenjevanjem ni dovoljeno spreminjati predlogov.
Experts’ advice to the Commission on any proposal may not be communicated by them to the applicants or to any other person.
Strokovnjaki o svetovanju, ki ga opravijo za Komisijo za kateri koli predlog, ne smejo obveščati vložnikov ali drugih oseb.
Experts are not allowed to disclose the names of other experts participating in the evaluation.
Strokovnjaki ne smejo razkriti imen drugih strokovnjakov, ki sodelujejo pri ocenjevanju.
Where it has been decided that proposals are to be posted or made available electronically to experts, who then work from their own or other suitable premises, the expert will be held personally responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of any documents or electronic files sent and returning, erasing or destroying all confidential documents or files upon completing the evaluation as instructed.
Če se določi, da bodo predlogi poslani ali dani na razpolago v elektronski obliki strokovnjakom, ki nato delajo v lastnih ali drugih primernih prostorih, je strokovnjak osebno odgovoren za ohranjanje zaupnosti vseh poslanih dokumentov ali elektronskih datotek, ter za vračanje, brisanje in uničevanje vseh zaupnih dokumentov ali datotek po končanem ocenjevanju v skladu z navodili.
In such instances, experts may seek further information (for example, through the Internet, specialised databases, etc.) in order to allow them to complete their examination of the proposals, provided that the obtaining of such information respects the overall rules for confidentiality and impartiality.
V takih primerih lahko strokovnjaki poiščejo dodatne informacije (na primer po internetu, v specializiranih podatkovnih zbirkah itd.), ki jim bodo pomagale dokončati ocenjevanje predlogov, pod pogojem, da je iskanje takih informacij v skladu s splošnimi pravili o zaupnosti in nepristranskosti.
Experts may not show the contents of proposals or information on applicants to third parties (e.g. colleagues, students, etc.) without the express written approval of the Commission.
Strokovnjaki ne smejo razkriti vsebine predlogov ali informacij o vložnikih tretjim osebam (npr. sodelavcem, študentom itd.) brez izrecnega pisnega soglasja Komisije.
It is strictly forbidden for experts to make contact with applicants.
Strokovnjakom je strogo prepovedano navezovati v stike z vložniki.
Where the evaluation takes place in an office or building controlled by the Commission, experts are not allowed to take outside the evaluation building any parts of proposals, copies or notes, either on paper or in electronic form, relating to the evaluation of proposals.
Če ocenjevanje poteka v pisarni ali zgradbi, ki jo nadzira Komisija, strokovnjaki iz zgradbe, kjer se opravlja ocenjevanje, ne smejo odnašati nobenih delov predlogov, kopij ali zapiskov, ki se nanašajo na ocenjevanje predlogov, niti v papirni niti v elektronski obliki.
Experts may be given the possibility of seeking further information (for example, through the Internet, specialised databases, etc.) to allow them to complete their examination of the proposals, but they may not contact third parties without the express consent of the Commission staff supervising the evaluation.
Strokovnjakom se lahko omogoči iskanje dodatnih informacij (na primer po internetu, v posebnih podatkovnih zbirkah itd.), ki jim bodo pomagale dokončati ocenjevanje predlogov, vendar pa ne smejo navezovati stikov s tretjimi osebami brez izrecnega soglasja osebja Komisije, ki nadzoruje ocenjevanje.
Failure to comply with these rules may result in exclusion from the immediate and future evaluation processes, without prejudice to penalties that may derive from other applicable Regulations.
Neupoštevanje teh pravil lahko vodi k izključitvi iz naslednjega in prihodnjih ocenjevalnih postopkov ne glede na kazni, ki izhajajo iz drugih veljavnih uredb.
Payment provisions for evaluators working remotely
Določbe o plačilu za ocenjevalce, ki delajo na daljavo
CALL [FP7-XXXX-YYY]
RAZPIS [7OP-XXXX-YYY]
This Annex determines the number of days that will be taken into account for the calculation of the honorarium you will be paid by the Commission [1] for work on evaluation tasks undertaken remotely (e.g. at home or place of work).
Ta priloga določa število dni za izračun honorarja, ki vam ga bo izplačala Komisija [1] za ocenjevalno delo, opravljeno na daljavo (npr. od doma ali delovnega mesta).
The relevant number of days is that indicated in this Annex, irrespective of the actual number of days spent undertaking the evaluation [2].
Ustrezno število dni je navedeno v tej prilogi ne glede na dejansko število dni, ki so bili porabljeni za ocenjevanje [2].
You will be evaluating the following type(s) of proposal:
Ocenjevali boste naslednje vrste predlogov:
[Funding scheme A], [Funding scheme B], [etc.]
[shema financiranja A], [shema financiranja B] [itd.]
You will be involved in individual evaluations [possibly] [remote consensus], [and “rapporteur” tasks.]
Vključeni boste v posamezna ocenjevanja [in] [verjetno] [doseganje soglasja na daljavo] [in naloge ‚poročevalca‘.]
The relevant number days of to be taken into account for the calculation of the honorarium will be determined as follows:
Ustrezno število dni, ki se upošteva za izračun honorarja, se določi na naslednji način:
one half-day, in recognition of the time needed to read and assimilate briefing documents,
Polovica dneva za čas, ki je potreben za branje in preučitev delovnih navodil.
a number of days related to the number of proposals for which you complete an individual evaluation (see table below).
Število dni, ki se nanaša na število predlogov, za katere morate dokončati posamezno ocenjevanje (glej spodnjo preglednico).
Note: The following conditions must be satisfied for every proposal if it is to count towards the calculation of the honorarium for individual evaluation:
Opomba: Za vsak predlog, ki se upošteva pri izračunu honorarja za posamezno ocenjevanje, morajo biti izpolnjeni naslednji pogoji:
the proposal was allocated to you by the Commission’s [Panel] Moderator,
Predlog vam je dodelil moderator [odbora] Komisije.
you evaluated the proposal remotely,
Predlog ste ocenili na daljavo.
you submitted an individual assessment form prior to the start of the related consensus meeting/panel or within the required time schedule as indicated by the [Panel] [Call] Coordinator, [other nominated Commission official].
Obrazec za individualno ocenjevanje ste predložili pred začetkom ustrezne seje/odbora za doseganje soglasja ali v okviru zahtevanega časovnega razporeda, kakor navede koordinator [odbora] [razpisa], [drug imenovani uradnik Komisije].
[An additional number of days related to the number of proposals for which you completed a full remote consensus (as well as individual evaluation), if any (see table below).]
[Dodatno število dni v zvezi s številom predlogov, za katere ste dosegli popolno soglasje na daljavo (in individualno ocenjevanje), če je ustrezno (glej spodnjo preglednico).]
Note: The following conditions must be satisfied for a full remote consensus to count towards the calculation of the honorarium:
Opomba: Za popolno doseganje soglasja na daljavo, ki se upošteva pri izračunu honorarja, morajo biti izpolnjeni naslednji pogoji:
the Commission’s [Panel] Moderator specifically requested your participation in a remote consensus,
Moderator [odbora] Komisije je posebej zahteval vaše sodelovanje pri doseganju soglasja na daljavo.
you submitted written comments, scores and opinions related to the draft consensus report,
Predložili ste pisne pripombe, oceno in mnenja v zvezi z osnutkom poročila za soglasje.
you participated in a remote discussion relating to the proposal and the draft consensus report moderated by the Commission’s [Panel] Moderator within the time schedule requested by the Commission’s [Panel] Moderator,
Sodelovali ste pri razpravi na daljavo v zvezi s predlogom in osnutkom poročila za soglasje, ki jo je vodil moderator [odbora] Komisije v okviru časovnega razporeda, ki ga je zahteval moderator [odbora] Komisije.
the consensus report was submitted within the required time schedule].
Poročilo o soglasju je bilo predloženo v okviru zahtevanega časovnega razporeda.]
[An additional half-day for every two proposals where you acted as a “rapporteur” during a remote consensus (if any) (see table below).]
[Dodatna polovica dneva za vsaka dva predloga, pri katerih ste delovali kot ‚poročevalec‘ med doseganjem soglasja na daljavo (če je ustrezno) (glej spodnjo preglednico).]
Note: The following conditions must be satisfied for every proposal if it is to count towards the calculation of the honorarium for “rapporteur” tasks:
Opomba: Za vsak predlog, ki se upošteva pri izračunu honorarja za naloge ‚poročevalca‘, morajo biti izpolnjeni naslednji pogoji:
the Commission’s [Panel] Moderator specifically requested the remote drafting of the consensus report,
Moderator [odbora] Komisije je posebej zahteval sestavo osnutka poročila o soglasju na daljavo.
a consensus report was drafted by the “rapporteur” based on the comments, scores and opinions of all of the individual evaluators relating to the proposal and was made available to the other relevant evaluators for signed approval within the time schedule indicated by the [Panel] [Call] Coordinator, [other nominated Commission official],
‚Poročevalec‘ je sestavil poročilo o soglasju na podlagi pripomb, ocen in mnenj vseh posameznih ocenjevalcev o predlogu in ga dal na razpolago drugim ustreznim ocenjevalcem, da ga pisno potrdijo v okviru časovnega razporeda, ki ga je določil koordinator [odbora] [razpisa], [drug imenovani uradnik Komisije].
the consensus report was submitted within the required time schedule.
Poročilo o soglasju je bilo predloženo v okviru zahtevanega časovnega razporeda.
The table below shows the applicable number of days.
Spodnja preglednica prikazuje število dni, ki se uporablja.
(The table layout and instructions can be tailored if necessary, to give a presentation that is as simple as possible, according to the circumstances of a call.
(Oblika preglednice in navodila se lahko po potrebi prilagodijo zaradi čim preprostejše ponazoritve in glede na okoliščine razpisa.
The rates given in the table will be in line with those set out in the relevant internal control standards.)
Podatki iz preglednice ustrezajo tistim, ki so opredeljeni v zadevnih standardih notranje kontrole.)
To find the applicable number of days:
Za določitev ustreznega števila dni:
Look up the number of days corresponding to the proposals where you carried out an individual evaluation.
Poiščite število dni, ki ustrezajo predlogom, za katere ste opravili individualno ocenjevanje.
[Add to this, using the same rates as above, the number of days corresponding to the proposals where you carried out a full remote consensus.]
[K temu številu, ob upoštevanju zgoraj navedenih razmerij, dodajte število dni, ki ustrezajo predlogom, za katere ste dosegli popolno soglasje na daljavo.]
[Repeat the above steps for each type of proposal, summing the number of relevant days.]
[Zgornje korake ponovite za vsako vrsto predloga in seštejte število ustreznih dni.]
[Add to this number, the number of days due to your “rapporteur” tasks, if any, as indicated in the last row of the table.]
[K temu številu prištejte število dni, ki ste jih porabili za naloge ‚poročevalca‘, če je ustrezno, kakor je navedeno v zadnji vrstici preglednice.]
Add one further half-day, in respect of briefing time.
Dodajte še polovico dneva za čas, porabljen za prejemanje napotkov.
(Include here a worked example, based on the actual table prepared for this call)
(Tu vključite delovni primer na podlagi dejanske preglednice, pripravljene za ta razpis.)
Days counting towards honorarium
Število dni za izračun honorarja
4 etc.
4 itd.
[Funding scheme A: number of proposals]
[Shema financiranja A: število predlogov
[Funding scheme B: number of proposals]
[Shema financiranja B: število predlogov]
“Rapporteur” proposals (any funding scheme)
Predlogi ‚poročevalca‘ (za vse sheme financiranja) 1–2 3–4 5–6 7–8 9–10 11–12
References to the Commission should be considered to include also the Research Executive Agency, where appropriate.
Šteje se, da sklicevanja na ‚Komisijo‘ vključujejo tudi Izvajalsko agencijo za raziskave, kjer je to primerno.
The honorarium is set on the basis of the expected average time needed to evaluate a proposal, at a rate of EUR 450/day, as specified in the appointment letter.
Honorar temelji na pričakovanem povprečnem času, potrebnem za ocenjevanje predloga, po ceni 450 EUR na dan, kakor je navedeno v obvestilu o imenovanju.
EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS SUBMITTED TO THE “PEOPLE” SPECIFIC PROGRAMME
OCENJEVANJE PREDLOGOV, PREDLOŽENIH V OKVIRU POSEBNEGA PROGRAMA ‚LJUDJE‘
Proposals submitted to the “People” specific programme will, in general, be evaluated following the evaluation process described elsewhere in this document.
Predlogi, predloženi v okviru posebnega programa ‚Ljudje‘, se na splošno ocenjujejo v skladu z ocenjevalnim postopkom, opisanim v drugih oddelkih tega dokumenta.
However, due to the wide variety and the specificity of actions within this programme, and in view of the large number of proposals anticipated for some activities, some details of the evaluation procedure will vary from those described elsewhere in this document.
Zaradi široke raznolikosti in specifičnosti ukrepov v tem programu in z vidika velikega števila predlogov, ki se pričakujejo za nekatere aktivnosti, se določene podrobnosti ocenjevalnega postopka razlikujejo od tistih, ki so opisane v drugih oddelkih tega dokumenta.
The principal differences in the proposal evaluation and selection process are summarised below.
Glavne razlike pri postopku ocenjevanja in izbire predlogov so povzete spodaj.
Specific rules and procedures
Posebna pravila in postopki
Two-step evaluation: Procedure to pass proposals from step1 to step2
Ocenjevanje v dveh korakih: Postopek za prehod predlogov od koraka 1 na korak 2
Two-stage submission with two-step evaluation
Dvostopenjski postopek oddaje z ocenjevanjem v dveh korakih
In two stage submissions the number of proposals passing to the second stage will be determined on the basis of the number of proposals that pass the thresholds for the criteria established at the first stage.
Pri dvostopenjskem postopku oddaje se število predlogov, ki se obravnavajo na drugi stopnji, določi glede na število predlogov, ki dosežejo pragove za merila, določena na prvi stopnji.
In addition, for those proposals passing the thresholds, a factor, which will be determined in the work programme, will be applied as a multiple of the number of proposals that could be financed for the particular call (based on the average cost of a proposal from the previous call for the given activity).
Poleg tega se za tiste predloge, ki dosežejo pragove, uporabi faktor, določen v delovnem programu, kot večkratnik števila predlogov, ki bi lahko prejeli sredstva iz določenega razpisa (na podlagi povprečnega stroška predloga iz prejšnjega razpisa za določeno aktivnost).
This factor establishes the number of submissions passing to the second phase, and the corresponding budgetary cut-off level.
Ta faktor določa število predlogov, ki so dosegli drugo fazo, in pripadajočo proračunsko presečno vrednost.
Proposals with a score passing the thresholds and with a score above this cut-off level will pass to the second stage of evaluation where the full set of evaluation criteria will be applied to the second stage submission.
Predlogi, ki po ocenah dosegajo pragove, in katerih rezultat je nad navedeno presečno vrednostjo, se posredujejo na drugo stopnjo ocenjevanja, na kateri se zanje uporablja celoten skupek ocenjevalnih meril na drugi stopnji.
(All proposals with identical scores at the cut off level above will pass through to the second stage of evaluation.)
(Vsi predlogi z enakimi ocenami na presečni ravni se posredujejo na drugo stopnjo ocenjevanja.)
Those proposals failing to reach the thresholds or failing to meet the cut off described above will be rejected.
Zavrnejo se tisti predlogi, ki ne dosegajo pragov ali zgoraj opisane presečne ravni.
Thresholds and weightings to be applied in the first and second stages of evaluation, the criteria to be applied at each stage, and the multiple, will be published in the work programme.
Pragovi in ponderji, ki se uporabljajo na prvi in drugi stopnji ocenjevanja, merila za vsako stopnjo in večkratnik bodo objavljeni v delovnem programu.
Single-stage submission with two-step evaluation
Enostopenjski postopek oddaje z ocenjevanjem v dveh korakih
In one stage submission with two step evaluation, proposals will be evaluated in a first step against a limited number of criteria.
Pri enostopenjskem postopku oddaje z ocenjevanjem v dveh korakih se predlogi ocenjujejo na prvi stopnji na podlagi omejenega števila meril.
The number of proposals passing to the second step of the evaluation will be determined on the basis of the number of proposals that pass the thresholds.
Število predlogov, ki se posredujejo na drugo stopnjo ocenjevanja, se določi glede na število predlogov, ki dosežejo pragove.