natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Measures defined in operational programmes, notably the selection of projects, are implemented by bodies at Member State level. 
Ukrepe, opredeljene v operativnih pro‐ gramih, zlasti izbiro projektov, izvajajo organi na ravni držav članic.
09 For the purposes of this report, busi‐ ness incubator projects co‐financed by the ERDF can be split into two distinct phases: Phase I: Establishment This phase begins when the grant agreement is signed. 
09 V tem poročilu je mogoče projekte podjetniških inkubatorjev, sofinancira‐ nih iz ESRR, razdeliti v dve fazi: Faza I: ustanovitev Ta faza se začne ob podpisu sporazu‐ ma o dodelitvi nepovratnih sredstev.
The project manager then begins to make plans for the construction (or refurbishment) of the facility and the purchase of the necessary equipment. 
Vodja projekta nato začne načrtovati konstrukcijo (ali prenovo) objektov in nakup potrebne opreme.
It ends when the incubator is equipped, staffed, and physically ready for operation, and when the investment has been settled from a legal and a financial point of view. 
Faza se konča, ko je inkubator opremljen, ima ustrezno osebje, je fizično pripravljen na delovanje ter ko je naložba s prav‐ nega in finančnega vidika urejena.
The incubator is then ready to admit its first tenants. 
Inkubator je tako pripravljen sprejeti prve najemnike.
This phase typi‐ cally lasts for up to 2 years. 
Ta faza običajno traja do dve leti.
Phase II: Operation This phase begins when the incuba‐ tor’s first clients are admitted and the incubation process starts; it lasts until the end of the sustainability period (in other words, until the moment from which the grant conditions no longer oblige the owner of the project to maintain project results or to keep assets for the purposes of incubation activity). 
Faza II: delovanje Ta faza se začne ob sprejetju prvih uporabnikov inkubatorja in začetku procesa inkubiranja; traja do konca obdobja trajnosti (oziroma do trenut‐ ka, od katerega pogoji iz sporazuma za dodelitev nepovratnih sredstev prenehajo zavezovati lastnika projekta, da še naprej uresničuje dogovorjene rezultate projekta ali ohrani sredstva za zagotavljanje dejavnosti inkubator‐ ja).
In the case of the audited projects, this phase ended 5 years after the signature of the grant agreement, and normally lasted for around 3 years after the end of phase I. 
V primeru revidiranih projektov se je ta faza končala pet let po podpisu sporazuma o dodelitvi nepovratnih sredstev in je običajno trajala približno tri leta po zaključku faze I.
Audit scope 10 and objectives 10 The main objective of the audit was to assess whether business incubator facilities co‐financed by the ERDF had successfully supported start‐ups with a high potential for growth. 
Obseg in cilji revizije 10 Glavni cilj revizije je bil oceniti, ali so podjetniški inkubatorji, sofinancirani iz ESRR, uspešno podpirali zagonska podjetja z visokim potencialom rasti.
The Court asked the following three audit ques‐ tions, each relating to a different level of management: (a) Had beneficiaries applied good practices in establishing and oper‐ ating incubators? (b) Had the bodies responsible for managing the ERDF7 put in place effective mechanisms for selecting appropriate incubators to receive support and ensuring their suc‐ cessful operation? (c) Had the Commission taken ap‐ propriate action to maximise the impact of ERDF support on co‐financed incubators? 
Sodišče je postavilo naslednja tri revizijska vprašanja, ki se nanašajo na različne ravni upravljanja: (a) Ali so upravičenci pri ustanavljanju in upravljanju inkubatorjev upora‐ bljali dobre prakse? (b) Ali so organi, pristojni za upravlja‐ nje ESRR,7 uvedli uspešne meha‐ nizme za izbiro ustreznih inkuba‐ torjev, ki naj bi prejeli podporo, in zagotovitev njihovega uspešnega delovanja? (c) Ali je Komisija sprejela ustrezne ukrepe, da bi se čim bolj povečal učinek podpore iz ESRR na sofinan‐ cirane inkubatorje?
11 The audit was carried out at the premises of the European Commission, and in the four Member States which had allocated the largest amounts of ERDF funding to the establishment of business incubators (the Czech Republic, Spain, Poland and the United Kingdom). 
11 Revizija je bila izvedena v prostorih Evropske komisije in v štirih državah članicah, ki so za ustanavljanje podje‐ tniških inkubatorjev dodelile največje zneske sredstev ESRR (Češka, Španija, Poljska in Združeno kraljestvo).
On the basis of an analysis of lists of projects (which was carried out due to the lack of official figures described in paragraph 7), the Court estimates that 1,2 billion euro in fund‐ ing was allocated to actions contribut‐ ing to the establishment of incubators in the four visited Member States in the 2000–13 period. 
Na podlagi analize seznamov projektov (ki je bila narejena, ker ni bilo uradnih številčnih podatkov, kot je opisano v odstavku 7) Sodišče ocenjuje, da je bilo v štirih obiskanih državah članicah za ukrepe, ki so v obdobju 2000–2013 prispevali k ustanavljanju inkubatorjev, dodeljeno 1,2 milijarde EUR sredstev.
12 The Court performed an on‐the‐spot audit of a sample of 27 incubators (see Annex) which had received ERDF support in the 2000–06 program‐ ming period, and which had been in continuous operation for at least 3 years. 
10 12 Sodišče je na vzorcu 27 inkubatorjev (glej Prilogo), ki so v programskem obdobju 2000–2006 prejeli podporo iz ESRR in so že vsaj tri leta neprekinje‐ no delovali, izvedlo revizijo na kraju samem.
The Court examined all aspects of the incubators’ operations, from the planning decisions upon which their construction had been based to the practices and procedures which they had in place. 
Proučilo je vse vidike delova‐ nja inkubatorjev, od planskih odločitev, ki so bile osnova za njihovo izgradnjo, do vzpostavljenih praks in postopkov.
The average total cost of a single project was 6,1 mil‐ lion euro. 
Skupni stroški posameznega projekta so znašali povprečno 6,1 milijona EUR.
Contributions from public funds covered an average of 82 % of this amount: 42 % of the average total cost was covered by the ERDF (a total of 70 million euro); the other 40 % was covered by the Member States. 
82 % tega zneska so povprečno pokri‐ vali prispevki iz javnih sredstev: 42 % povprečnih skupnih stroškov je pokri‐ val ESRR (skupno 70 milijonov EUR), preostalih 40 % pa države članice.
13 The Court also assessed the man‐ agement systems which had been implemented by the six managing authorities responsible for these 27 incubators. 
13 Sodišče je ocenilo tudi sisteme upra‐ vljanja, ki jih je uvedlo šest organov upravljanja, pristojnih za teh 27 inku‐ batorjev.
The assessment focused on the project selection process, on the grant agreement conditions and on how these conditions were sub‐ sequently monitored to ensure that contractual objectives were met. 
Ocenjevanje je bilo osredoto‐ čeno na postopek izbire projektov ter na pogoje sporazumov o dodelitvi ne‐ povratnih sredstev in načine njihovega naknadnega spremljanja za zagotovi‐ tev izpolnjevanja pogodbenih ciljev.
14 The standards used as audit criteria are based on good practices described in the ‘Smart guide’ published by the European Commission, and in other literature which has been published on this topic8. 
14 Standardi, ki so se uporabljali kot revizijska merila, temeljijo na dobrih praksah, opisanih v vodniku, ki ga je objavila Evropska komisija, in drugi literaturi, objavljeni o tej temi8.
7 e.g. managing authorities and intermediary bodies. 
7 Npr. organi upravljanja in posredniški organi.
8 National Business Incubation Association, Best practices in action — Guidelines for Implementing First‐Class Business Incubation Programs, 2nd Edition 2010. 
8 National Business Incubation Association (Ameriško združenje podjetniških inkubatorjev), Best practices in action ‐ Guidelines for Implementing First‐Class Business Incubation Programs (Najboljše prakse v praksi – smernice za izvajanje prvovrstnih programov podjetniškega inkubiranja), 2. izdaja, 2010.
European Commission, Benchmarking of Business Incubators, February 2002 
Evropska komisija, Benchmarking of Business Incubators (Primerjalna analiza podjetniških inkubatorjev), februar 2002.
Audit scope and objectives 11 15 An integral part of the audit was a benchmarking exercise which col‐ lected key figures and indicators in order to assess the performance and efficiency of the operations of selected incubators which had received ERDF support. 
Obseg in cilji revizije 11 15 Sestavni del revizije je bila primerjalna analiza, v okviru katere so bili zbrani ključni številčni podatki in kazalniki za ocenitev smotrnosti poslovanja in učinkovitosti delovanja izbranih inkubatorjev, ki so prejeli podporo iz ESRR.
In total, 49 incubators9 (see Annex) in the four visited Member States as well as in Italy and Germany, two Member States which had also allocated significant amounts of EU co‐funding to the operation of busi‐ ness incubators, submitted detailed information about their operational activity and financial situation. 
Podrobne informacije o opera‐ tivnih dejavnostih in finančnem stanju je predložilo skupno 49 inkubatorjev9 (glej Prilogo) iz štirih obiskanih držav članic ter Italije in Nemčije, držav čla‐ nic, ki sta prav tako precejšnje zneske sofinanciranja EU dodelili delovanju podjetniških inkubatorjev.
16 The 49 ERDF co‐funded incubators in the sample were compared with a benchmark based on the results achieved by the 65 EC‐BIC certified incubators10 which were members of the European Business and Innovation Centre Network (EBN)11, and therefore applying best practice recognised by the Commission, in the six selected Member States. 
16 Navedenih 49 inkubatorjev iz vzorca, sofinanciranih iz ESRR, se je primerja‐ lo na podlagi referenčnih meril, ki so temeljila na rezultatih 65 inkubatorjev z oznako EC‐BIC10, ki so člani Evropske mreže poslovnih in inovacijskih cen‐ trov (EBN)11, torej uporabljajo najboljšo prakso, ki jo priznava Komisija, v šestih izbranih državah članicah.
These 65 incubators are referred to in this report as the ‘benchmarked incubators’. 
Teh 65 in‐ kubatorjev se v tem poročilu imenuje „referenčni inkubatorji“.
17 Audit evidence was collected from interviews with Commission and Member State officials, as well as with project managers. 
17 Revizijski dokazi so bili zbrani na pod‐ lagi razgovorov z uradniki Komisije in držav članic ter z vodji projektov.
Documents obtained from EU and national author‐ ities and business incubators were also reviewed. 
Pre‐ gledani so bili tudi dokumenti, ki so jih predložili organi EU, nacionalni organi in podjetniški inkubatorji.
9 Incubators audited on the spot (21) as well as certain other ERDF co‐funded incubators (28). 
9 Inkubatorji, ki so bili revidirani na kraju samem (21), ter nekateri drugi inkubatorji, sofinancirani iz ESRR (28).
10 In order to be awarded with the EC‐BIC trademark, an incubator must go through an accreditation process which ensures compliance with the EC‐BIC label criteria. 
10 Inkubator dobi oznako EC‐BIC šele po akreditacijskem postopku, s katerim se zagotovi izpolnjevanje meril za oznako EC‐BIC.
11 The EBN is a European non‐governmental association of around 200 incubators. 
11 EBN je evropsko nevladno združenje približno 200 inkubatorjev.
It is the only organisation allowed to certify incubators with the EC‐BIC label, which is recognised by the European Commission. 
Je edina organizacija, ki lahko inkubatorjem izda oznako EC‐BIC, ki jo priznava Evropska komisija.
Observations 12 18 This section begins with an assessment of the performance of the audited incubators. It goes on to describe the observations arising from each one of the Court’s three audit questions. 
Opažanja 12 18 Ta oddelek se začne z oceno smotrno‐ sti poslovanja revidiranih inkubatorjev, nato pa so opisana opažanja na podla‐ gi vsakega od treh revizijskih vprašanj, ki jih je postavilo Sodišče.
The quality of infrastructure was generally good, but incubators’ performance lagged behind 19 The Court assessed the performance of the audited ERDF co‐funded incuba‐ tors in terms of the process of con‐ structing and equipping or refurbish‐ ing them (their output) and in terms of the results which they achieved. 
Kakovost infrastrukture je bila na splošno dobra, smotrnost poslovanja inkubatorjev pa je bila slabša 19 Sodišče je ocenilo, kakšna je bila smotrnost poslovanja revidiranih inkubatorjev, sofinanciranih iz ESRR, pri postopku njihove izgradnje in opremljanja ali prenavljanja (njihovih izložkov) ter v smislu doseženih rezul‐ tatov.
These two dimensions correspond approxi‐ mately to the two phases of the im‐ plementation of an incubator project described in paragraph 9. 
Ti razsežnosti približno ustrezata fazama izvajanja projekta inkubatorja, ki sta opisani v odstavku 9.
In most cases, incubation facilities were well adapted and had been constructed and equipped as planned 20 The Court considers that physical incubator space is especially important for certain high‐growth sectors (e.g. biotechnology, advanced materials) which depend on otherwise unaf‐ fordable equipment being available in the incubator. 
Objekti inkubatorjev so bili večinoma dobro prilagojeni ter izgrajeni in opremljeni po načrtih 20 Sodišče meni, da je fizični prostor inkubatorja posebej pomemben za nekatere sektorje z visoko rastjo (npr. biotehnologijo, sodobne materiale), ki so odvisni od opreme, ki je na voljo v inkubatorju in do katere drugače ne bi mogli priti.
Incubators should be designed to provide a comfortable working and meeting space equipped with general‐purpose office and com‐ munication equipment. 
Inkubatorji bi morali biti načrtovani tako, da nudijo udobne prostore za delo in sestanke, opre‐ mljene s pisarniško opremo za splošne namene in komunikacijsko opremo.
It is also im‐ portant to create shared leisure spaces to encourage tenants to integrate and to maximise the potential for collabo‐ ration and the free exchange of ideas. 
Pomembno je tudi načrtovati skupne prostore za prosti čas, ki bodo naje‐ mnike spodbujali k medsebojnemu povezovanju, ter tako čim bolj pove‐ čati možnosti za sodelovanje in prosto izmenjavo idej.
ERDF co-financed ‘Delta’ building in the Wrocław Technology Park In most cases, audited ERDF incubator projects offered well-adapted working conditions. 
ESRR je sofinanciral stavbo „Delta“ v tehnološkem parku Wrocław Revidirani projekti inkubatorjev, sofinanciranih iz ESRR, so večinoma nudili dobro prilagojene delovne pogoje.
Architect: Anna Kościuk. 
Arhitektka: Anna Kościuk.
Observations 13 21 The vast majority of the visited incuba‐ tors were successfully offering attrac‐ tive working spaces for their clients. 
Fotografija Opažanja 13 21 Velika večina obiskanih inkubatorjev je svojim uporabnikom uspešno nudila privlačne delovne prostore.
The profile of audited facilities ranged from simple office buildings to fully equipped laboratories. 
Revidirani objekti so bili različnih profilov: od preprostih pisarniških prostorov do popolnoma opremljenih laboratorijev.
In all, 23 out of 27 of them were offering working conditions which were adapted to the individual needs of hosted SMEs and encouraged collaboration. 
Skupno jih je 23 od 27 zagotavljalo delovne pogoje, prilagojene potre‐ bam posameznih gostujočih MSP, in spodbujalo medsebojno sodelovanje.
In the arrangement of their physical space, incubators had taken into account the importance of networking: they provided a leisure area for the use of hosted companies where spontaneous networking could occur. 
Inkubatorji so pri ureditvi fizičnih prostorov upoštevali pomen mreženja: podjetjem najemnikom so zagotavljali prostore za prosti čas, ki so omogočali spontano mreženje.
22 The Court’s assessment of this phase also covered the process of plan‐ ning and constructing the audited facilities. 
22 Ocena, ki jo je Sodišče izvedlo o tej fazi, je zajemala tudi postopek načrto‐ vanja in izgradnje revidiranih objektov.
All incubators had been built in accordance with their planning documentation, which in 23 out of 27 cases contained detailed information about the intended characteristics of the facility, and which established fixed construction schedules. 
Vsi inkubatorji so bili zgrajeni v skladu z njihovo dokumentacijo o načrtova‐ nju, ki je v 23 primerih od 27 vsebovala podrobne informacije o načrtovanih značilnostih objektov in v kateri so bili opredeljeni časovni načrti za izgra‐ dnjo.
Most of the incubators (23 out of 27) had been delivered in line with these plans; however, only 15 out of 27 of them had been completed in compliance with the deadlines set out in the project application. 
Večina inkubatorjev (23 od 27) je bila dokončana skladno s temi načrti, a le 15 od 27 tudi v rokih, opredeljenih v projektnih vlogah.
23 The Court did not detect any major cost overruns, and 20 out of 27 pro‐ jects had been completed within their planned budget. 
23 Sodišče ni zasledilo nobenih večjih prekoračitev stroškov in 20 projektov od 27 je bilo končanih v okviru na‐ črtovanega proračuna.
Cost overruns had been covered by applicants’ own re‐ sources and had had no effect on the EU budget. 
Prekoračitve stroškov so prosilci krili iz lastnih virov in niso imele posledic na proračun EU.
Audited business incubators were comparatively less effective 24 The Court assessed the effectiveness and efficiency of incubator projects in phase II by measuring their operational activity and evaluating their outcomes in terms of their main objectives: (a) the number of business plans cre‐ ated with incubator support; (b) the number of start‐ups incubated; (c) the number of jobs created. 
Revidirani podjetniški inkubatorji so bili sorazmerno manj uspešni 24 Sodišče je uspešnost in učinkovitost projektov inkubatorjev v fazi II oceni‐ lo z merjenjem njihovih operativnih dejavnosti in ovrednotenjem njihovih izidov pri doseganju njihovih glavnih ciljev: (a) števila poslovnih načrtov, izdelanih s podporo inkubatorja; (b) števila inkubiranih zagonskih podjetij; (c) števila ustvarjenih delovnih mest.
25 During the reference period, the aver‐ age audited incubator helped to draw up 20 new business plans. 
25 V referenčnem obdobju je povprečen revidirani inkubator pomagali pri obli‐ kovanju 20 novih poslovnih načrtov.
This led to the creation of 15 start‐ups and 27 new jobs. 
Na podlagi teh je bilo ustvarjenih 15 zagonskih podjetij in 27 novih delov‐ nih mest.
On average, 164 people were employed in each audited incubator over the reference period; however, start‐ups accounted for only a small proportion of these. 
V referenčnem obdobju je bilo v vsakem revidiranem inkubatorju zaposlenih povprečno 164 ljudi, pri čemer pa zagonska podjetja predsta‐ vljajo le manjši delež.
Observations 14 26 The effectiveness of the benchmarked EC‐BIC certified incubators, which were of a comparable size to the ones audited by the Court, was much higher. 
Opažanja 14 26 Uspešnost referenčnih inkubatorjev z oznako EC‐BIC, ki so bili po velikosti primerljivi s tistimi, ki jih je revidiralo Sodišče, je bila veliko večja.
The average benchmarked incubator had helped to draw up 101 new business plans and assisted in the establishment of 65 new start‐ups over the reference period; this had led to the creation of 147 new jobs. 
Povprečen referenčni inkubator je v referenčnem obdobju pripomogel k izdelavi 101 no‐ vega poslovnega načrta in ustano‐ vitvi 65 novih zagonskih podjetij, na podlagi česar je bilo ustvarjenih 147 novih delovnih mest.
Sup‐ port offered to businesses beyond the scope of physical incubation (i.e. the provision of pre‐incubation and virtual incubation services to entrepreneurs) had contributed to this high start‐up creation rate. 
K tako visoki stopnji nastanka zagonskih podjetij je pripomogla podpora, zagotovljena podjetjem zunaj obsega fizične inku‐ bacije (tj. zagotavljanje storitev iz pre‐ dinkubacijske faze in storitev virtualne inkubacije podjetnikom).
The value of virtual incu‐ bation is demonstrated by the fact that the number of start‐ups created by the audited incubators greatly exceeds the number of tenants in the incubators. 
Dodano vrednost virtualne inkubacije odraža dejstvo, da število zagonskih podjetij, ki so jih ustanovili referenčni inkuba‐ torji, močno presega število najemni‐ kov v inkubatorjih.
Detailed data on the effectiveness of both groups of incubators is given in the Table. 
Podrobni podatki o uspešnosti obeh skupin inkubatorjev so navedeni v tabeli.
Average outcomes achieved by business incubators Audited ERDF incubators were comparatively less effective. 
Povprečni izidi, ki so jih dosegli podjetniški inkubatorji Revidirani inkubatorji, sofinancirani iz ESRR, so bili sorazmerno manj uspešni.
Pre-incubation activity Enquiries about support Business plans prepared Enterprise creation projects Start-ups created (incl. non tenants) Jobs created in start-ups Jobs created per start-up All tenants in incubator People employed by all tenants Employees per tenant Existing SMEs supported Jobs created in SMEs in post-incubation Jobs created per SME in post-incubation 54 20 0,4 738 101 91 65 147 2,3 35 166 4,7 168 49 0,3 Audited ERDF incubators 92 20 19 Average across Benchmarked incubators Incubation activity 15 27 1,8 26 164 6,4 Post-incubation activity Source: ECA benchmarking data for 2011. Table 
Predinkubacijske dejavnosti Poizvedbe o podpori Pripravljeni poslovni načrti Projekti ustanavljanja podjetij Zagonska podjetja (vključno z nenajemniki) Nova delovna mesta v zagonskih podjetjih Nova delovna mesta na zagonsko podjetje Skupno št. najemnikov v inkubatorju Št. ljudi, ki so jih zaposlili vsi najemniki Št. zaposlenih na najemnika Podpora nudena obstoječim MSP Nova delovna mesta v MSP (poinkubacijska faza) Nova delovna mesta na MSP (poinkubacijska faza) 54 20 0,4 738 101 91 65 147 2,3 35 166 4,7 168 49 0,3 Revidirani inkubatorji, sofinancirani iz ESRR 92 20 19 Povprečje Referenčni inkubatorji Inkubacijske dejavnosti 15 27 1,8 26 164 6,4 Poinkubacijske dejavnosti Vir: Referenčni podatki Sodišča za leto 2011. Tabela
Observations 15 27 To assess efficiency, these results were then examined in the light of the level of resources which had been deployed (operations costs and staff employed). 
Opažanja 15 27 Za oceno učinkovitosti so bili ti rezul‐ tati nato pregledani glede na raven virov, ki so bili uporabljeni (operativni stroški in zaposleno osebje).
The outcome of this measurement was compared with the results achieved by the benchmarked EC‐BIC incubators. 
Izid teh meritev se je primerjal z rezultati, ki so jih dosegli referenčni inkubatorji z oznako EC‐BIC.
Details are given in Chart 2 below. 
Podrobnosti so prika‐ zane v diagramu 2 spodaj.
As an example, the audited incuba‐ tors generated an average of 5,3 jobs for each 100 000 euro of operational cost compared to 9,6 for benchmark incubators, which gives a cost of around 18 000 euro per job, compared to 10 400 euro in the benchmarked incubators. 
Revidirani inkubatorji so na primer ustvarili pov‐ prečno 5,3 delovnega mesta za vsa‐ kih 100 000 EUR operativnih stroškov (v primerjavi z 9,6 delovnega mesta pri referenčnih inkubatorjih), kar pomeni stroške v višini približno 18 000 EUR na delovno mesto, medtem ko je za referenčne inkubatorje ta strošek znašal 10 400 EUR.
There is a difference of a similar magni‐ tude between the incubators audited by the Court and the EC‐BIC incubators used as a benchmark in terms of the cost per business plan created and the cost per new business created. 
Pri stroških na poslovni načrt in stro‐ ških na zagonsko podjetje je razlika med inkubatorji, ki jih je revidiralo Sodišče, in inkubatorji z oznako EC‐BIC, ki so bili uporabljeni za referenco, podobno velika.
Simi‐ lar conclusions can be drawn when the number of staff employed by the incubator is taken as a basis for the calculation. 
Če se kot osnova za izračun uporabi število osebja, zapo‐ slenega v inkubatorju, je mogoče priti do podobnih zaključkov.
Efficiency of incubators’ operations — results for 2011 Audited business incubators were comparatively less efficient. 
Učinkovitost delovanja inkubatorjev – rezultati za leto 2011 Revidirani podjetniški inkubatorji so bili razmeroma manj učinkoviti.