natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
They have been defined in association with the ERC Scientific Council, the latter being responsible, inter alia, for establishing the Ideas work programme, the peer review evaluation methods and procedures applying for proposal peer review evaluation under the Ideas Specific Programme and for identifying the independent experts assisting to such peer review evaluation.
Opredeljena so bila v sodelovanju z znanstvenim svetom ERC, ki je med drugim odgovoren za določanje delovnega programa „Zamisli“, metod in postopkov za medsebojni pregled, ki se uporabljajo za medsebojni pregled predlogov v okviru posebnega programa „Zamisli“ in za izbiro neodvisnih strokovnjakov, ki lahko pripomorejo k takemu medsebojnemu pregledu.
They are adopted by the Commission in accordance with the Rules for Participation.
Sprejme jih Komisija v skladu s Pravili za sodelovanje.
Section 1 describes the key principles applying to the process from submission to award: excellence, transparency, fairness and impartiality, efficiency and speed; as well as ethical considerations.
Razdelek 1 opisuje ključna načela, ki se uporabljajo pri postopku od oddaje do dodelitve: odličnost, preglednost, poštenost in nepristranskost, učinkovitost in hitrost ter etična vprašanja.
Section 2 describes the procedures for the submission of proposals and the way they are handled thereafter, including the assessment of eligibility.
Razdelek 2 opisuje postopke za oddajo predlogov in način, na katerega se ti obravnavajo po oddaji, vključno z ocenjevanjem primernosti.
Section 3 describes the peer review evaluation, including the way in which independent experts are selected and appointed, the treatment of potential and actual conflicts of interest, and the organisation of peer review evaluation.
Razdelek 3 opisuje medsebojno ocenjevanje, vključno z načinom, na katerega so izbrani in imenovani neodvisni strokovnjaki, obravnavo morebitnih in dejanskih navzkrižij interesov ter organizacijo medsebojnega ocenjevanja.
It describes also the way in which appeals and complaints will be handled, and the reporting of the peer review evaluation and award of grants.
Opisuje tudi način, na katerega se bodo obravnavali ugovori in pritožbe, poročanje o rezultatih medsebojnega ocenjevanja in dodelitev sredstev.
Section 4 describes the preparation and award of grants.
Razdelek 4 opisuje pripravo in dodelitev sredstev.
The process from proposal submission to the award of grants rests on a number of well-established principles:
Postopek od oddaje predloga do dodelitve sredstev poteka v skladu s številnimi ustaljenimi načeli:
Excellence.
Odličnost.
Projects selected for funding must demonstrate a high scientific and/or technical quality.
Projekti, ki se izberejo za financiranje, morajo izkazovati visoko znanstveno in/ali tehnično kakovost.
Transparency.
Preglednost.
Funding and award decisions must be based on clearly described rules and procedures, and applicant legal entities and principal investigators should receive adequate feedback on the outcome of the peer review evaluation of their proposals.
Odločitve o financiranju in dodelitvi sredstev morajo temeljiti na jasno opisanih pravilih in postopkih, pravne osebe vlagateljice in glavni raziskovalci pa morajo dobiti zadostne povratne informacije o rezultatu medsebojnega pregleda njihovih predlogov.
Fairness and impartiality.
Poštenost in nepristranskost.
All proposals shall be treated consistently and in the same way.
Vsi predlogi morajo biti obravnavani dosledno in enako.
They must be evaluated impartially on their merits, irrespective of their origin or the identity of the submitting entity, the principal investigator or any team member.
Ocenjevati jih je treba nepristransko glede na njihovo vsebino, ne glede na njihov izvor ali identiteto vlagatelja, glavnega raziskovalca ali katerega od članov skupine.
Confidentiality.
Zaupnost.
All proposals and related data, knowledge and documents communicated to the ERCEA must be treated in confidence.
Vse predloge in z njimi povezane podatke, znanje in dokumente, ki se predložijo ERCEA, je treba obravnavati zaupno.
Efficiency and speed.
Učinkovitost in hitrost.
Peer review evaluation, award and grant preparation should be as rapid as possible, commensurate with maintaining the quality of the peer review evaluation, and respecting the legal framework.
Medsebojni pregled, dodelitev in priprava sredstev morajo biti čim hitrejši in skladni z ohranjanjem kakovosti medsebojnega pregleda, pri čemer je treba upoštevati tudi pravni okvir.
Ethical and security considerations.
Etična in varnostna vprašanja.
Any proposal which contravenes fundamental ethical principles, or which fails to comply with the relevant security procedures may be excluded from the process of peer review evaluation, selection and award at any time.
Vsak predlog, ki je v nasprotju s temeljnimi etičnimi načeli ali ne izpolnjuje ustreznih varnostnih postopkov, se lahko kadar koli izključi iz medsebojnega pregleda, izbire in dodelitve.
Proposals are submitted in response to calls for proposals (‘calls’) [7].
Predlogi se oddajo v okviru razpisov za oddajo predlogov (v nadaljnjem besedilu: razpisi) [7].
The content and timing of calls are set out in the Ideas work programme, and are published in the Official Journal of the European Union (‘call text’) on Commission website(s) [8], as well as on the ERC website, which will provide hyperlinks to the Commission website(s).
Vsebina in časovni okvir razpisov sta določena v delovnem programu „Zamisli“ ter se objavita v Uradnem listu Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: „besedilo razpisa“) na spletnem mestu ali mestih Komisije [8] ter na spletnem mestu ERC, kjer bodo na voljo povezave do spletnega mesta ali mest Komisije.
Calls for frontier research projects may specify an indicative budget for the entire call or give indicative budgets for specific areas of research within the frame of the call that will be evaluated by separate Panels of independent experts.
Razpisi za pionirske raziskovalne projekte lahko navajajo okvirni proračun za celoten razpis ali okvirne proračune za določena raziskovalna področja v okviru razpisa, ki jih bodo ocenjevali posebni odbori neodvisnih strokovnjakov.
A call will also specify whether a single or two-stage submission and/or a single or two-step peer review evaluation procedure is to be followed.
Razpis določa tudi, ali je treba izvesti eno- ali dvostopenjski postopek zbiranja predlogov in/ali eno- ali dvofazni postopek medsebojnega pregleda.
In the case of a two-stage submission, only those whose proposals were positively evaluated in a first stage are invited to submit complete proposals in a second stage.
Pri dvostopenjskem postopku so k oddaji končnih predlogov na drugi stopnji povabljeni samo predlogi, ki so bili pozitivno ocenjeni na prvi stopnji.
Due to the bottom-up approach of the Ideas Specific Programme, the ERC expects a large number of proposals in all fields of research.
ERC zaradi pristopa „od spodaj navzgor“ v posebnem programu „Zamisli“ pričakuje veliko število predlogov z vseh raziskovalnih področij.
To enable the ERC to provide the required resources and expertise for the ERC peer review evaluation process, a call may foresee a pre-registration.
Da bi ERC omogočili, da zagotovi potrebne vire in strokovno znanje za medsebojni pregled, lahko razpis zahteva predprijavo.
Pre-registration may entail a statement of the intended subject matter and the envisaged research objectives of the proposal.
Predprijava lahko vključuje izjavo o predvideni temi in predvidenih raziskovalnih ciljih predloga.
Where calls foresee a pre-registration, the potential applicant shall request before the pre-registration deadline the login and the password for the Electronic Proposal Submission Service IT system (currently EPSS, referred to as the ‘electronic submission system’ in the text), needed to submit a proposal.
Kadar razpisi predvidevajo predprijavo, mora morebitni vlagatelj pred tem zahtevati uporabniško ime in geslo za sistem IT za elektronsko storitev za oddajo predlogov (trenutno je to EPSS, v nadaljnjem besedilu: „elektronski sistem za oddajo“), ki sta potrebna za oddajo predloga.
Deadline(s) for pre-registration may be set a few weeks in advance of the call deadline(s) for the submission of proposals.
Rok ali roki za predprijavo se lahko določijo nekaj tednov pred rokom ali roki za oddajo predlogov, določenim(-i) v razpisu.
Pre-registration and submission are two different phases.
Predprijava in oddaja sta dve različni fazi.
If the call foresees a pre-registration but the applicant does not pre-register, the submission of a proposal by that applicant will not be accepted by the electronic submission system.
Če razpis predvideva predprijavo vlagatelja, a se ta predhodno ne prijavi, elektronski sistem za oddajo oddanega predloga ne sprejme.
Where calls do not foresee a pre-registration, the potential applicant shall still register and request a password for the EPSS in order to be able to submit the proposal, before the call deadline.
Kadar razpisi ne predvidevajo predprijave, se morebitni vlagatelj še vedno prijavi in zahteva geslo za EPSS, tako da lahko odda predlog pred razpisnim rokom.
In exceptional cases, the potential applicant may request permission from the ERCEA to submit on paper as provided by Annex A to this Decision.
Izjemoma lahko morebitni vlagatelj zahteva dovoljenje ERCEA, da predlog odda v papirni obliki, kot je določeno v Prilogi A k temu sklepu.
Proposals, and where appropriate pre-registrations, are submitted electronically via the web-based electronic submission system operated by the Commission (currently EPSS).
Oddaja predlogov, in kadar je to ustrezno, predprijava se opravita elektronsko prek spletnega elektronskega sistema za oddajo, ki ga upravlja Komisija (trenutno EPSS).
Proposals for ‘frontier’ research actions will – pursuant to the provisions of the Ideas work programme – involve a Principal Investigator (PI) – a specified individual with scientific responsibility for the project.
Predlogi za „pionirske“ raziskovalne ukrepe bodo v skladu z določbami delovnega programa „Zamisli“ vključevali navedbo glavnega raziskovalca (PI), tj. določenega posameznika, ki je znanstveno odgovoren za projekt.
Proposals are submitted by the PI empowered by the proposed host institution, which is formally the applicant legal entity and to which the grant will be awarded [9].
Predloge predloži glavni raziskovalec, ki ga za to pooblasti predlagana ustanova gostiteljica, ki je formalno pravna oseba vlagateljica in ki ji bodo sredstva dodeljena.
Throughout the submission and peer review evaluation process the PI will be the main channel for communication between the ERCEA and the applicant legal entity.
Pri oddaji in medsebojnem pregledu bo glavni raziskovalec glavni kanal za komunikacijo med ERCEA in pravno osebo vlagateljico.
The preparation and uploading of all the proposal data and the agreement to the conditions of use of the electronic submission system and terms of the peer review evaluation must take place prior to the attempt to submit a proposal.
Priprava in nalaganje vseh podatkov predloga ter strinjanje s pogoji uporabe elektronskega sistema za oddajo in s pogoji medsebojnega pregleda so predpogoj za poskus oddaje predloga.
The electronic submission system will carry out a number of basic verification checks.
Elektronski sistem za oddajo izvede več osnovnih preverjanj.
Only upon completion of these checks will the electronic submission system allow the applicant to submit.
Šele ko konča preverjanja, vlagatelju dovoli oddajo predloga.
These checks do not replace the formal eligibility checks described in section 2.2.6 and cannot assure that the contents of these files respond to the requirements of the call.
To preverjanje ne nadomešča formalnega preverjanja ustreznosti iz odstavka 2.2.6 in ne more zagotoviti, da vsebina teh datotek ustreza zahtevam iz razpisa.
Submission is deemed to take place at the moment the PI initiates the final submission process, as indicated by the electronic submission system, and not at any point prior to this.
Šteje se, da oddaja poteka v trenutku, ko glavni raziskovalec začne zadnji postopek oddaje, kot ga prikaže elektronski sistem za oddajo, nikakor pa ne prej.
Proposals sent on removable electronic storage medium (e.g. CD-ROM or any similar electronic device), by e-mail or by fax will not be regarded as having been submitted, and will not be evaluated.
Predlogi, poslani na izmenljivem elektronskem mediju za shranjevanje podatkov (npr. CD-ROM-u ali drugi podobni elektronski napravi), po elektronski pošti ali faksu, se ne bodo šteli za oddane in ne bodo pregledani.
In exceptional cases, if a PI has no means of accessing the electronic submission system, he/she may request permission from the ERCEA to submit on paper.
Izjemoma lahko glavni raziskovalec ERCEA zaprosi za oddajo predloga v papirni obliki, če nima možnosti dostopa do elektronskega sistema za oddajo.
The procedures related to such a request and formalities on paper submission are laid down in Annex A to these Rules.
Postopek za tako prošnjo in uradni postopki za oddajo v papirni obliki so določeni v Prilogi A k temu pravilniku.
A procedure for the withdrawal of a proposal will be given in the relevant Guide for Applicants.
Postopek za umik predloga bo določen v ustreznem priročniku za vlagatelje.
A withdrawn proposal will not subsequently be considered for peer review evaluation or selection.
Umaknjeni predlog ne bo vključen v medsebojni pregled in postopek izbire.
If more than one submission of the same proposal is received, only the most recent eligible version is evaluated.
Če je prejetih več oddaj istega predloga, se oceni zadnja ustrezna različica predloga.
Proposals shall be kept under secure conditions at all times.
Predlogi se ves čas hranijo pod varnimi pogoji.
When no longer needed, all copies other than those required for archiving and/or auditing purposes shall be destroyed.
Ko niso več potrebni, se vsi izvodi uničijo, razen izvodov za potrebe arhiviranja in/ali revizije.
The Guide for Applicants explains in detail how PIs, team members or applicant legal entities can seek assistance or information on any matter related to a call.
Priročnik za vlagatelje podrobno razlaga, kako lahko glavni raziskovalci, člani skupine ali pravne osebe vlagateljice poiščejo pomoč ali informacije v zvezi z razpisom.
Contact details are provided for National Contact Points, ERCEA and ERC help desks.
Navedeni so kontaktni podatki za nacionalne kontaktne točke, ERCEA in službo za pomoč ERC.
A dedicated help desk is provided for issues related to the electronic submission system.
Za vprašanja o elektronskem sistemu za oddajo je na voljo posebna služba za pomoč.
The date and time of receipt of the last version of submitted proposals are recorded.
Datum in čas sprejetja zadnje različice oddanega predloga se zapišeta.
After the call deadline, an acknowledgement of receipt is sent by e-mail containing:
Po roku, določenem v razpisu, se po elektronski pošti pošlje potrdilo o prejemu, ki vsebuje:
Proposal title and unique proposal identifier (proposal number);
naslov predloga in enolično identifikacijsko oznako predloga (številka predloga),
Identifier of the call to which the proposal was addressed;
identifikacijsko oznako razpisa, na katerega se predlog nanaša,
Date and time of receipt (which is set to the time of the call deadline, for proposals submitted electronically).
datum in čas prejema (ki je pri predlogih, oddanih elektronsko, določen kot rok iz razpisa).
Subsequent to submission, the ERCEA only makes contact with the PI and/or applicant legal entity if this is necessary to clarify questions such as eligibility or to verify administrative or legal data contained in the proposal [10].
Po oddaji ERCEA stik z glavnim raziskovalcem in/ali pravno osebo vlagateljico vzpostavi samo, če je to potrebno za razjasnitev vprašanj, kot je na primer ustreznost, ali če je treba preveriti upravne ali pravne podatke v predlogu.
However, in a two-stage procedure and for retained applications only, the PI empowered by the applicant legal entity may, under conditions specified in the call, be invited to submit a further proposal or further information on the original proposal, and/or to attend an interview.
Kljub temu pa se lahko glavnega raziskovalca, ki ga je pooblastila pravna oseba vlagateljica, v dvostopenjskem postopku oddaje in pri pridržanih predlogih pod razpisnimi pogoji pozove, naj predloži nov predlog ali več informacij o prvotnem predlogu in/ali naj se udeleži razgovora.
Proposals must fulfil all of the eligibility criteria if they are to be retained for peer review evaluation.
Predlogi morajo izpolnjevati vsa merila ustreznosti, da bodo sprejeti v medsebojni pregled.
These criteria are rigorously applied.
Ta merila se strogo upoštevajo.
In the case of two-stage proposal submission, each stage is subject to an eligibility check.
Pri dvostopenjski oddaji predlogov se ustreznost preverja za vsako stopnjo.
All proposals submitted under a call will be subject to checking against the following eligibility criteria:
Za vse predloge, oddane na podlagi razpisa, se preveri, ali izpolnjujejo naslednja merila ustreznosti:
Receipt of proposal before the deadline (date and time established in the call);
ali je bil predlog prejet pred rokom (datum in ura, navedena v razpisu),
Completeness of the proposal, i.e. the presence of all requested parts and forms [11];
ali je predlog popoln, tj. ali vključuje vse zahtevane dele in obrazce [11],
Scope of the call: the content of the proposal must relate to the objectives, to the topics and to the funding scheme set out in the call, as defined in the Ideas work programme.
vsebina razpisa: vsebina predloga mora biti v skladu s cilji, temami in shemo financiranja, ki so določeni v razpisu, kot je opredeljeno v delovnem programu „Zamisli“.
A proposal will only be deemed ineligible on grounds of ‘scope’ in clear-cut cases [12];
Predlog se lahko šteje za neustreznega na podlagi „vsebine“ samo v jasnih primerih [12],
All additional eligibility criteria applying to the call that are specified in the Ideas work programme and in the call fiche.
vsa dodatna merila ustreznosti, ki veljajo za razpis ter so določena v delovnem programu „Zamisli“ in v informacijskem listu razpisa.
If it becomes clear before, during or after the peer review evaluation phase, that one or more of the eligibility criteria has not been met, the proposal is declared ineligible and is withdrawn from any further examination.
Če se pred medsebojnim pregledom, med njim ali po njem izkaže, da ta ne izpolnjuje enega ali več meril ustreznosti, se razglasi za neustreznega in izključi iz nadaljnjega ocenjevanja.
Where there is a doubt on the eligibility of a proposal, the peer review evaluation may proceed pending a final decision on eligibility.
Kjer se pojavi dvom o ustreznosti predloga, se medsebojni pregled lahko nadaljuje do sprejetja končne odločitve o ustreznosti predloga. Ocenjevanje v takih okoliščinah ne zagotavlja, da je predlog ustrezen.
The fact that a proposal is evaluated in such circumstances does not constitute proof of its eligibility.
Če vprašanje ustreznosti ni jasno razrešeno in je treba primer izčrpneje pregledati, se lahko skliče odbor za preverjanje ustreznosti.
If the question of eligibility is not clear-cut and a more comprehensive review of the case is deemed necessary, an eligibility review committee may be convened.
Njegova vloga je zagotoviti skladno pravno razlago takih primerov ter enako obravnavo pravnih oseb vlagateljic in glavnih raziskovalcev, ki sodelujejo pri predlogu.
Those PIs whose proposals are found to be ineligible will be informed of the grounds for such a decision.
Glavni raziskovalci, katerih predlogi ne izpolnjujejo pogojev za ustreznost, bodo obveščeni o razlogih za sprejeto odločitev.
PEER REVIEW EVALUATION
MEDSEBOJNI PREGLED
Proposals are subject to a review by independent experts (peer reviewers) to ensure that only those of the highest quality are selected for funding.
Predloge pregledajo neodvisni strokovnjaki (strokovni ocenjevalci), s čimer se zagotovi, da se sredstva dodelijo samo najbolj kakovostnim predlogom.
An independent expert is an expert who is external to the ERC and the Commission [14], is working in a personal capacity and, in performing his/her work, does not represent any organisation or scientific community.
Neodvisni strokovnjak je strokovnjak, ki ni zaposlen v ERC ali Komisiji [14], deluje na lastno odgovornost in pri svojem delu ne zastopa nobene organizacije ali znanstvene skupnosti.
For the purposes of the peer review evaluation, five types of independent experts are distinguished:
Za namene medsebojnega pregleda razlikujemo pet tipov neodvisnih strokovnjakov:
Chair-persons of the ERC peer review evaluation Panels organise the work within their Panel, chair Panel meetings, and attend a final consolidation meeting.
predsedniki odborov ERC za medsebojne preglede organizirajo delo znotraj odbora, predsedujejo sestankom odbora in se udeležijo končnega usklajevalnega sestanka.
They may also perform individual evaluation of proposals, usually remotely, in preparation for the panel meetings.
Lahko tudi posamezno ocenjujejo predloge, navadno na daljavo, da se pripravijo za sestanek odbora;
Members of the ERC peer review evaluation Panels assist in the preparation of Panel meetings, attend those meetings and may also contribute in the individual evaluation of proposals, usually remotely.
člani odborov ERC za medsebojne preglede pomagajo pripraviti sestanke odborov, se jih udeležujejo in lahko tudi prispevajo pri posameznem ocenjevanju predlogov, navadno na daljavo;
Panel evaluators independent experts who are requested to assist in the individual evaluation of proposals.
ocenjevalci v odboru neodvisni strokovnjaki, ki so pozvani, da pomagajo pri posameznem ocenjevanju predlogov.
Usually, they do not participate in Panel meetings.
Navadno ne sodelujejo na sestankih odbora;
Referees independent experts who perform individual assessments of proposals, only remotely, and are not compensated for the tasks they perform.
izvedenci neodvisni strokovnjaki, ki posamezno ocenjujejo predloge izključno na daljavo in za opravljanje nalog ne prejmejo plačila;
Independent observers independent experts who are requested to examine the peer review evaluation process from the point of view of its working and execution.
neodvisni opazovalci neodvisni strokovnjaki, ki so zaprošeni za preučitev medsebojnega pregleda z vidika njegovega delovanja in izvajanja.
They do not perform assessments of the proposals under evaluation.
Ti strokovnjaki ne ocenjujejo predlogov.
They may attend any meeting within the peer review evaluation process.
Udeležijo se lahko vseh sestankov v okviru medsebojnega pregleda.
Appointment of experts [15]
Imenovanje strokovnjakov [15]
The ERC Scientific Council is responsible for proposing independent experts for the peer review evaluation of frontier research projects [16] pursuant to Article 17(2) of the Rules for Participation, and monitoring of indirect actions implementation within the meaning of Article 27(1) of the Rules for Participation.
Znanstveni svet ERC je odgovoren za predlaganje neodvisnih strokovnjakov za postopek medsebojnega pregleda pionirskih raziskovalnih projektov [16] v skladu s členom 17(2) Pravil za sodelovanje in za spremljanje izvajanja posrednih ukrepov v smislu člena 27(1) Pravil za sodelovanje.
The ERC Scientific Council may rely on its members and on information provided by Panel members or by the ERCEA to identify the independent experts.
Znanstveni svet ERC se lahko pri izbiri neodvisnih strokovnjakov zanaša na svoje člane in informacije, ki jih predložijo člani odbora ali ERCEA.
Based on this proposal the ERCEA will appoint them formally [17].Independent experts are required to have skills and knowledge appropriate to the areas of activity in which they are asked to assist.
Na podlagi tega predloga jih ERCEA formalno imenuje [17].Neodvisni strokovnjaki morajo imeti sposobnosti in znanje, ki so primerni za področja dejavnosti, na katerih je potrebna njihova pomoč.