natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In 2018, the EIF alone signed agreements with venture capital funds committing to invest €1.4 billion. Innovative SMEs 
Leta 2018 je samo ta sklad s skladi tveganega kapitala sklenil pogodbe, s katerimi se je zavezal, da bo vložil 1,4 milijarde EUR. inovativna MSP
Audit scope and approach 24 We decided to look at venture capital markets because of the EU’s increasing involvement of the EU in this policy area which we have not covered before. 
Obseg revizije in revizijski pristop 24 Sodišče se je odločilo za pregled trgov tveganega kapitala, ker jih kljub vse večji vlogi EU na tem področju doslej še ni obravnavalo.
We assessed whether the Commission was making good use of its venture capital instruments by examining whether: (a) the Commission has carried out good quality of the ex ante, interim and ex post evaluations; (b) the investment strategy with which the EU delivered its assistance was comprehensive; (c) the EU instruments have been properly implemented by the EIF. 
Ocenilo je, ali je Komisija dobro izkoristila svoje instrumente tveganega kapitala, pri čemer je preučilo, ali: (a) je Komisija izvedla kakovostna predhodna, vmesna in naknadna vrednotenja; (b) je bila naložbena strategija, ki jo je EU uporabljala v okviru zagotavljanja pomoči, celovita; (c) je Evropski investicijski sklad pravilno izvajal instrumente EU.
25 We expect our report to help the Commission to implement its policy more efficiently and effectively. 
25 Sodišče pričakuje, da bo njegovo poročilo pripomoglo k temu, da bo Komisija učinkoviteje in uspešneje izvajala svojo politiko.
We focused on the 2014-2020 period when assessing the appropriateness of the interventions’ design. For the other aspects, we took into account all centrally managed EU interventions since 1998. 
Sodišče se je pri ocenjevanju ustreznosti zasnove intervencij osredotočilo na obdobje 2014–2020, v zvezi z drugimi vidiki pa je upoštevalo vse centralno upravljane intervencije EU od leta 1998.
Where applicable, we also considered the draft InvestEU programme for the 2021-2027 period. 
Po potrebi je obravnavalo tudi osnutek programa InvestEU za obdobje 2021–2027.
26 To collect audit evidence, we reviewed relevant documentation, including a sample documenting the EIF’s process for selecting venture capital funds. 
26 Da bi Sodišče zbralo revizijske dokaze, je pregledalo ustrezno dokumentacijo, vključno z vzorčnim dokumentom, v katerem je opisan postopek Evropskega investicijskega sklada za izbiro skladov tveganega kapitala.
We also interviewed staff from the Commission, the EIF, France’s Banque Publique d'Investissement, and Invest Europe19, as well as academics and fund managers. 
Opravilo je tudi razgovore z uslužbenci Komisije, Evropskega investicijskega sklada, francoske banke Banque Publique d'Investissement in združenja Invest Europe19, pa tudi z akademiki in upravitelji skladov.
Furthermore, we visited venture capital and start-up associations, promotional banks, ministries and venture capital funds in Denmark and Italy. 
Poleg tega so revizorji obiskali združenja tveganega kapitala in zagonskih podjetij, spodbujevalne banke, ministrstva in sklade tveganega kapitala na Danskem in v Italiji.
17 19 Invest Europe is an association representing Europe’s private equity, venture capital and infrastructure sectors, as well as their investors. 
17 19 Invest Europe je združenje, ki zastopa evropske sektorje zasebnega kapitala, tveganega kapitala in infrastrukture ter njihove vlagatelje.
Observations Weaknesses in ex ante and ex post evaluations 27 Before launching a new intervention, the Commission has to carry out an ex ante evaluation and/or impact assessment, including an analysis of market needs. 
Opažanja Slabosti v predhodnih in naknadnih vrednotenjih 27 Komisija mora pred začetkom izvajanja nove intervencije opraviti predhodno vrednotenje in/ali oceno učinka, ki vključuje analizo potreb trga.
The evaluation and assessment should also analyse the structure and financing needs of companies’ targeted by the instrument, and available sources of funding. 
V vrednotenju in oceni mora analizirati strukturo in finančne potrebe podjetij, na katera je instrument ciljno osredotočen, ter razpoložljive vire financiranja.
Using this information, the Commission can estimate the funding gap and determine the appropriate scale of its support to the venture capital market. 
Komisija lahko na podlagi teh informacij oceni vrzel v financiranju in določi ustrezen obseg podpore za trg tveganega kapitala.
28 The main objective of all EU interventions since 1998 has been to improve access to finance for businesses, in particular SMEs, by supporting entrepreneurship and innovation. 
28 Glavni cilj vseh intervencij EU od leta 1998 je bil izboljšati dostop podjetij, zlasti MSP, do financiranja, in sicer s podpiranjem podjetništva in inovacij.
For each intervention, the Commission is expected to carry out interim and/or ex post evaluations to assess the intervention’s effectiveness. 
Komisija bi morala za vsako intervencijo izvesti vmesno in/ali naknadno vrednotenje, da oceni njeno uspešnost.
Interventions were not based on a proper assessment of market needs 29 We examined whether and how the Commission had determined and quantified the funding gap for the interventions in the current programming period (2014-2020). 
Intervencije niso temeljile na ustrezni oceni potreb trga 29 Sodišče je preučilo, ali in kako je Komisija določila in količinsko opredelila vrzel v financiranju za intervencije v sedanjem programskem obdobju (2014–2020).
We also looked at whether this had been done at both an aggregate EU level and Member State level. 
Poleg tega je preverilo, ali je to izvedla tako na skupni ravni EU kot na ravni držav članic.
Lastly, we analysed whether a funding gap had been established for the different phases in a company’s lifecycle (see Figure 1). 
Na koncu je analiziralo, ali je bila vrzel v financiranju določena za različne faze v življenjskem ciklu podjetja (glej sliko 1).
30 We found that although the Commission had carried out ex ante evaluations and impact assessments and analysed market needs by looking at supply and demand, the quantification of the funding gap was not comprehensive. This was mainly due to the lack of data. 
30 Sodišče je ugotovilo, da je Komisija sicer izvedla predhodna vrednotenja in ocene učinka ter analizirala potrebe trga na podlagi pregleda ponudbe in povpraševanja, vendar količinska opredelitev vrzeli v financiranju ni bila celovita, zlasti zaradi pomanjkanja podatkov.
The Commission also noted “no consensus in the academic literature on whether the low levels of venture capital investments compared to GDP in most EU Member States are predominantly a supply or a demand-side problem, i.e. whether there is insufficient venture capital supply or whether there are insufficient companies to invest in”20. 
Komisija je tudi opozorila, da v strokovni literaturi ni enotnega mnenja glede odgovora na vprašanje, ali je nizka stopnja naložb tveganega kapitala v primerjavi z BDP v večini držav članic EU pretežno problem ponudbe ali povpraševanja, tj. ali je ponudba tveganega kapitala premajhna ali pa ne obstaja dovolj podjetij, v katera bi bilo smiselno vlagati20.
20 JRC Science for Policy Report, “Improving access to finance: which schemes best support the emergence of high-growth innovative enterprises?”, p. 
20 18 Znanstveno in politično poročilo Skupnega raziskovalnega središča (JRC), Improving access to finance: which schemes best support the emergence of high-growth innovative enterprises?, str.
31 For example, in 2011 the Commission carried out an ex ante evaluation and an impact assessment of the centrally managed Equity Facility for Growth (EFG). 
31 Leta 2011 je Komisija na primer izvedla predhodno vrednotenje in oceno učinka za centralno upravljani instrument kapitalska shema za rast.
We found that the underlying study carried out on behalf of the Commission did not explain the reasoning behind its estimate of the funding gap21. 
Sodišče je ugotovilo, da s tem povezana študija, opravljena v imenu Komisije, ni vsebovala utemeljitve za oceno vrzeli v financiranju21.
32 For another centrally managed instrument, the InnovFin Equity Facility (IFE), we found that the 2013 assessment was only carried out after the legislative proposal had been made and an indicative budget had already been discussed among the Commission, the Parliament and the Council. 
32 V zvezi s kapitalskim instrumentom InnovFin Equity (IFE), ki se prav tako upravlja na centralni ravni, je Sodišče ugotovilo, da je bila ocena za leto 2013 opravljena šele po pripravi zakonodajnega predloga in po tem, ko so Komisija, Parlament in Svet že razpravljali o okvirnem proračunu.
33 We also found that when EFSI was launched in 2015, the Commission did not perform a comprehensive ex ante evaluation or an impact assessment of the funding gap or market needs. 
33 Sodišče je tudi ugotovilo, da Komisija ob vzpostavitvi EFSI leta 2015 ni izvedla niti celovitega predhodnega vrednotenja niti ocene učinka vrzeli v financiranju ali potreb trga.
Nor did it conduct such an assessment in 2017, when the EU guarantee was increased by €10 billion (to €26 billion) and the investment period extended from 31 July 2019 to 31 December 202022. 
Takšne ocene ni izvedla niti leta 2017, ko se je jamstvo EU povečalo za 10 milijard EUR (na 26 milijard EUR), naložbeno obdobje pa se je podaljšalo z 31. julija 2019 na 31. december 202022.
34 Also in 2015, a specific assessment was carried out on behalf of the Commission to explore the possibility of using a fund-of-funds structure23. 
34 Leta 2015 je bila v imenu Komisije izvedena tudi posebna ocena, v kateri se je obravnavala možnost, da se uporabi struktura sklada skladov23.
Based on interviews with 105 venture capital fund managers, it showed that opinions were divided on the state and needs of the venture capital market. 
Na podlagi razgovorov s 105 upravitelji skladov tveganega kapitala je bilo ugotovljeno, da imajo ti različna mnenja o stanju in potrebah trga tveganega kapitala.
The assessment neither quantified the funding gap nor addressed the issue of absorption when recommending the financial size of the fund-of-funds to be created. 
V tej oceni pri priporočilu finančne velikosti sklada skladov, ki naj bi bil vzpostavljen, ni bila količinsko opredeljena vrzel v financiranju niti se ni upoštevalo vprašanje črpanja.
35 The Commission has already carried out its ex ante evaluation/impact assessment for the successor venture capital interventions under the future InvestEU programme for the upcoming 2021-2027 period. However, once again, the funding gap has not been quantified. 
35 Komisija je že izvedla predhodno vrednotenje / oceno učinka za intervencije tveganega kapitala za prihodnje obdobje, tj. obdobje 2021–2027, ki bodo nasledile sedanje in se bodo izvajale v okviru prihodnjega programa InvestEU.
21 Annex A to the 2011 report prepared by Economisti Associati srl in collaboration with EIM Business & Policy Research, the Evaluation Partnership, the Centre for Strategy and Evaluation Services, and the Centre for European Studies, p. 
21 22 23 Priloga A k poročilu za leto 2011, ki ga je pripravilo podjetje Economisti Associati srl v sodelovanju z EIM Business & Policy Research, The Evaluation Partnership, Centre for Strategy and Evaluation Services in Centrom za evropske politične študije, str.
22 ECA Opinion No 2/2016, “EFSI: an early proposal to extend and expand”, paragraph 26, and ECA special report 3/2019, “European Fund for Strategic Investments: Action needed to make EFSI a full success”, paragraph 17. 
2/2016 – EFSI: predlog za podaljšanje trajanja in širitev je prezgoden, odstavek 26, in Posebno poročilo Sodišča št. 3/2019 – Evropski sklad za strateške naložbe: za celovit uspeh sklada EFSI so potrebni nadaljnji ukrepi, odstavek 17.
23 Oxford Research Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services, “Assessing the Potential for EU Investment in Venture Capital and Other Risk Capital Fund of Funds”, October 2015. 19 
Oxford Research Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services, Assessing the Potential for EU Investment in Venture Capital and Other Risk Capital Fund of Funds, oktober 2015. 19
36 In our view, increasing budgetary resources for venture capital funds (see Table 1) without properly quantifying the funding gap may lead to the risk that such funds cannot be absorbed (see Box 3). 
36 Po mnenju Sodišča se lahko zaradi povečanja proračunskih sredstev za sklade tveganega kapitala (glej tabelo 1) brez ustrezne količinske opredelitve vrzeli v financiranju pojavi tveganje, da teh sredstev ne bo mogoče črpati (glej okvir 3).
20 Box 3 Increase of public funds without a proper assessment of the market size may lead to a risk of non-absorption The substantial increase of public funds in the venture capital market can lead to a risk of non-absorption if there is a lack of: : (i) venture capital funds to invest in; (ii) interested private investors; (iii) SMEs with growth potential to invest in. 
V vrednotenjih se je običajno poročalo o izložkih in rezultatih, 24 20 Okvir 3 Povečanje javnih sredstev brez ustrezne ocene velikosti trga lahko privede do tveganja nečrpanja Znatno povečanje javnih sredstev na trgu tveganega kapitala lahko privede do tveganja nečrpanja, če ni dovolj: (i) skladov tveganega kapitala, v katere je mogoče vlagati; (ii) zainteresiranih zasebnih vlagateljev in (iii) MSP s potencialom za rast, v katera je mogoče vlagati.
A 2011 study24 revealed that it would be challenging for the EU to invest more than €300 million a year over the 2014-2020 period due to non-absorption risks. 
Študija iz leta 201124 je pokazala, da bi bile naložbe, ki bi presegale 300 milijonov EUR na leto v obdobju 2014–2020, za EU velik izziv zaradi tveganja nečrpanja.
However, the funds allocated by the EU to venture capital are already close to this amount. 
Sredstva, ki jih EU namenja za tvegani kapital, so že blizu tega zneska.
For the period 2014-2020, the average annual investment by the EU interventions totals around €285 million per year (i.e. €1 989 million over 7 years). 
Povprečna vrednost intervencij EU za obdobje 2014–2020 znaša približno 285 milijonov EUR letno (tj. 1 989 milijonov EUR v sedmih letih).
Moreover, the funds allocated to the EFSI SMEW equity product were increased by €1 050 million (see paragraph 07 of Annex II). 
Poleg tega so se sredstva, namenjena produktu lastniškega kapitala dela za MSP v okviru EFSI, povečala za 1 050 milijonov EUR (glej odstavek 07 Priloge II).
The pressure to absorb carries knock-on risks. 
Pritisk v zvezi s črpanjem sredstev ustvarja posredna tveganja.
An ambitious amount may create pressure to commit funds quickly. 
Ambiciozno visok znesek lahko ustvari pritisk za hitro dodeljevanje sredstev.
Since first-time funds or virgin markets require more time for development, this time pressure may lead to a concentration of funds on the “usual” markets or operators, as mature markets and established funds are given priority. 
Ker novoustanovljeni skladi in deviški trgi potrebujejo več časa za razvoj, se lahko zaradi tega časovnega pritiska sredstva skoncentrirajo na ustaljenih trgih ali pri znanih upraviteljih, saj imajo zreli trgi in že uveljavljeni skladi prednost.
Moreover, the 2011 study said "pressure to commit funds may result in the provision of funding to ‘sub-standard’ investees which in due course would inevitably depress returns on investments". 
Tako bi glede na študijo iz leta 2011 pritisk za dodeljevanje sredstev lahko privedel do zagotavljanja financiranja za podstandardna podjetja, v katera se vlaga, kar bi pozneje neizogibno zmanjšalo donose od naložb.
24 2011 report prepared by Economisti Associati srl in collaboration with EIM Business & Policy Research, the Evaluation Partnership, the Centre for Strategy and Evaluation Services, and the Centre for European Studies. 
Poročilo za leto 2011, ki ga je pripravilo podjetje Economisti Associati srl v sodelovanju z EIM Business & Policy Research, The Evaluation Partnership, Centre for Strategy and Evaluation Services in Centrom za evropske politične študije.
Typically, the evaluations reported on outputs and results, such as the number of venture capital funds supported or the number of companies in which the EU-backed venture capital funds had invested. 
kot so število skladov tveganega kapitala, ki so prejeli podporo, ali število podjetij, v katera so vlagali skladi tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU.
However, the evaluations did not analyse the EU intervention’s impact on the venture capital industry or its economic effects (such as growth, innovation, or jobs maintained and created). 
Po drugi strani pa niso zajemala analize učinka intervencij EU na panogo tveganega kapitala ali njihovih gospodarskih učinkov (kot so rast, inovacije ali ohranjena ali ustvarjena delovna mesta).
39 Both ex post evaluations were carried out too early. 
39 Obe naknadni vrednotenji sta bili izvedeni prezgodaj.
For example, the final evaluation covering the High Growth and Innovative SME Facility was issued in 2011. However, the EIF could approve limited partnership agreements with venture capital funds up until 2013 – leaving them around five years to invest in companies. 40 The interim evaluation of GIF and ex post evaluations of ESU 1998 and ESU 2001 were weakened by the limited availability of data. — The early instruments European Technology Facility Start-up 1998 and European Technology Facility Start-up 2001 had no performance indicators. 
Končno vrednotenje o instrumentu za pomoč za hitro rastoča in inovativna MSP je bilo na primer izdano leta 2011, vendar je Evropski investicijski sklad sporazume o omejenem partnerstvu s skladi tveganega kapitala lahko odobril do leta 2013, kar pomeni, da so imeli skladi tveganega kapitala takrat na voljo približno pet let za naložbe v podjetja. 40 Vmesno vrednotenje pomoči za hitro rastoča in inovativna MSP (GIF) ter naknadni vrednotenji programov ESU 1998 in ESU 2001 so bila oslabljena zaradi omejene razpoložljivosti podatkov. — V zvezi z zgodnjimi instrumenti – programom za zagon podjetij s sredstvi Evropske tehnološke pomoči z začetkom leta 1998 (ESU 1998) in programom za zagon podjetij s sredstvi Evropske tehnološke pomoči z začetkom leta 2001 (ESU 2001) – se niso uporabljali nobeni kazalniki smotrnosti.
The ex post evaluation of these instruments recommended the use of well-designed performance indicators. — Although the legal basis of the GIF instrument set indicators and targets, these mainly related to outputs. 
V naknadnem vrednotenju teh instrumentov je bila priporočena uporaba dobro zasnovanih kazalnikov smotrnosti. — Čeprav so bili v pravni podlagi za instrument GIF določeni kazalniki in cilji, so se ti nanašali zlasti na izložke.
The interim evaluation covering the GIF instrument therefore again recommended developing results and impact indicators to allow for a final evaluation of effectiveness. 
V vmesnem vrednotenju instrumenta GIF je zato ponovno priporočeno, da se pripravijo kazalniki rezultatov in učinka, ki bodo omogočili izvedbo končnega vrednotenja uspešnosti.
The Commission added indicators, but the final evaluation could not draw on them as it was carried out within a year of the mid-term evaluation. 
Komisija je dodala kazalnike, ki pa jih ni bilo mogoče uporabiti pri končnem vrednotenju, saj se je to izvajalo v enem letu po vmesnem vrednotenju.
41 The evaluations relied mostly on qualitative methods such as interviews and surveys. 
41 Vrednotenja so večinoma temeljila na kvalitativnih metodah, kot so razgovori in ankete.
While the information gathered was useful, it was not corroborated by quantitative methods. 
Zbrane informacije so bile sicer koristne, vendar niso bile potrjene s kvantitativnimi metodami.
42 The interim and final evaluations carried out by the Commission did not analyse the counterfactual scenario. 
42 Vmesna in končna vrednotenja, ki jih je izvajala Komisija, ne vsebujejo analize hipotetičnega scenarija.
Evaluators did not assess how many jobs were created or 21 
Ocenjevalci niso ocenili, koliko delovnih mest so ustvarila ali ohranila podjetja, ki so prejela sredstva tveganega kapitala, v primerjavi s teoretičnim številom delovnih mest, ki bi bila ustvarjena brez teh sredstev.
43 In 2011, an EU-funded research project25 performed such a counterfactual analysis, which considered venture capital from all sources (not only from the EU), and companies from seven Member States and one non-EU country. 
43 Leta 2011 je bila v okviru raziskovalnega projekta, ki ga je financirala EU25, opravljena hipotetična analiza, v kateri je bil obravnavan tvegani kapital iz vseh virov (ne le iz EU), vključena pa so bila podjetja iz sedmih držav članic EU in ene države nečlanice EU.
The analysis concluded: “Findings generally supported the view that venture capital investors had a considerable positive treatment effect on firms’ growth, productivity, as well as investment and innovation performance. 
V analizi je bilo ugotovljeno, da ugotovitve na splošno potrjujejo stališče, da so vlagatelji tveganega kapitala znatno pozitivno vplivali na rast in produktivnost podjetij ter na smotrnost naložb in inovativnosti.
Venture capital investors helped their portfolio firms to outperform firms not backed by venture capital even during the financial crisis in 2008-2009. 
Vlagatelji tveganega kapitala so podjetjem v svojem portfelju pomagali, da so bila tudi med finančno krizo v obdobju 2008–2009 uspešnejša od podjetij, ki niso imela podpore tveganega kapitala.
They provided their portfolio firms with the resources and competencies necessary to rapidly readjust their product/market offer during the global crisis.” 
Podjetjem v svojem portfelju so zagotovili vire in kompetence, ki so jih potrebovala za hitro prilagoditev svoje ponudbe produktov / tržne ponudbe med svetovno krizo.
44 On a positive note, the EIF published a series of working papers on the economic contribution of EIF-backed investments and the performance of supported start-ups26, including a counterfactual analysis. 
44 Pozitivno je, da je Evropski investicijski sklad objavil vrsto delovnih dokumentov, vključno s hipotetično analizo, o gospodarskem prispevku naložb, ki jih je podprl, in o smotrnosti zagonskih podjetij, ki so to podporo prejela26.
The only caveat is that the papers examined all EIF venture capital investments – not only those backed by the EU. 
Pri tem je edini pridržek, da so bile v teh dokumentih preučene vse naložbe tveganega kapitala Evropskega investicijskega sklada, ne le tiste, ki jih podpira EU.
45 As far as the instruments in the 2014-2020 programming period are concerned, the Commission has set results and impact indicators for EFG, IFE and EFSI. 
45 V zvezi z instrumenti iz programskega obdobja 2014–2020 je Komisija določila kazalnike rezultatov in učinka za kapitalsko shemo za rast, instrument IFE in EFSI.
For EFG and IFE, targets have been set for all indicators except turnover and the number of employees of the beneficiary companies (see Table 2). 
Za kapitalsko shemo za rast in instrument IFE so bili cilji opredeljeni za vse kazalnike, razen glede prometa in števila zaposlenih upravičenih podjetij (glej tabelo 2).
Moreover, the targets for IFE do not only relate to venture capital but combine venture capital and debt financing support, making it difficult to evaluate the performance of each instrument. 
Poleg tega se cilji za instrument IFE ne nanašajo le na tvegani kapital, temveč povezujejo tvegani kapital s podporo za financiranje dolga, kar otežuje vrednotenje smotrnosti posameznega instrumenta.
22 25 VICO project, “Final Report Summary – Financing Entrepreneurial Ventures in Europe: Impact on innovation, employment growth, and competitiveness”, September 2011 (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/88431/reporting/en). 
22 25 26 Projekt VICO, Final Report Summary – Financing Entrepreneurial Ventures in Europe: Impact on innovation, employment growth, and competitiveness, september 2011 (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/88431/reporting/en).