natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
71 After the sustainability period had expired, the entity responsible for project delivery was released from its contractual obligations and was able to dispose freely of the assets which it had obtained. 
71 Subjekta, pristojnega za uresničevanje projekta, pogodbene obveznosti po preteku obdobja trajnosti niso več vezale in je lahko prosto razpolagal s sredstvi, ki jih je dobil.
In the audited projects, 8 out of 27 incubators had partially or entirely stopped their incubation activity after the 5‐year sustainability period expired. 
Med revidira‐ nimi projekti je 8 inkubatorjev od 27 po preteku petletnega obdobja trajno‐ sti delno ali v celoti prenehalo izvajati svoje dejavnosti inkubatorja.
72 In situations like this, the actual ben‐ efit from public funding was trans‐ ferred to facility owners (e.g. private companies, local authorities, chambers of commerce and universities) instead of to local entrepreneurs and start‐ups. 
72 V takih primerih so bile dejanske koristi javnega financiranja prenesene na la‐ stnike objektov (npr. zasebna podjetja, lokalne organe, trgovinske zbornice in univerze), namesto da bi imeli koristi lokalni podjetniki in zagonska podje‐ tja.
The Court estimates that the total value of funding affected in this way may amount to around two fifths of total ERDF investment in the audited business incubation projects, i.e. 30 million euro. 
Sodišče ocenjuje, da lahko skupna vrednost takega financiranja znaša pri‐ bližno dve petini skupnih naložb ESRR v revidiranih projektih podjetniških inkubatorjev, kar je 30 milijonov EUR.
17 The period during which the beneficiary is obliged to respect the commitments provided for in the grant agreement. 
17 Obdobje, v katerem mora upravičenec upoštevati zaveze iz sporazuma o dodelitvi nepovratnih sredstev.
18 The life cycle of the assets in question (mainly buildings) was determined on the basis of depreciation rates applied in the respective Member States. 
18 Življenjski cikel zadevnih sredstev (zlasti stavb) je bil določen na podlagi amortizacijskih stopenj, ki se uporabljajo v posameznih državah članicah.
19 Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 
1260/1999 z dne 21. junija 1999 o splošnih določbah o Strukturnih skladih (UL L 161, 26.6.1999, str.
Good practice — Sustainability period In Poland, the problem of a short sustainability period had been resolved in the 2007–13 programming period in one of the measures included in the horizontal operational programme. 
Dobra praksa – Obdobje trajnosti Na Poljskem so težavo kratkega obdobja trajnosti rešili v programskem obdobju 2007–2013 v okviru enega od ukrepov iz horizontalnega operativnega programa.
The sustainability period laid down in the grant agreement had been extended to 20 years, and project operators were obliged to transfer all public financing received for the construction of the facility to the hosted SMEs over this period in the form of business support. 
Obdobje trajnosti, določeno v sporazumu o dodelitvi nepovratnih sredstev, je bilo podaljšano na 20 let, upravljavci projektov pa so morali javna sredstva, ki so jih prejeli za izgradnjo objekta, v tem obdobju v celoti prenesti na gostujoča MSP v obliki podpore podjetjem.
Box 4 
Okvir 4
Observations 28 Limitations in the dissemination of knowledge by the European Commission hampered the promotion of good practices 73 The Court’s assessment of the Commis‐ sion’s contribution focused on those activities which, in principle, should contribute to the development and im‐ plementation of incubator projects. 
Opažanja 28 Omejitve, s katerimi se je pri razširjanju znanja srečevala Evropska komisija, so ovirale spodbujanje dobrih praks 73 Sodišče se je pri oceni prispevka Ko‐ misije osredotočalo na dejavnosti, ki naj bi načeloma prispevale k razvoju in izvajanju projektov inkubatorjev.
In particular, the Court assessed whether a body of expertise concerning incuba‐ tion activity had been accumulated by the Commission, and whether good practice guidelines based on this expertise had been made available at European level. 
Sodišče je zlasti ocenilo, ali je Komisija zbrala strokovno znanje o dejavnostih inkubatorjev in ali so bile smernice o dobrih praksah, ki temeljijo na tem strokovnem znanju, dane na voljo na ravni EU.
75 Two important initiatives should be mentioned in connection with the management of knowledge: (a) In 2002, the Commission published a benchmarking study provid‐ ing valuable information about the state of European incubators. 
75 V zvezi z upravljanjem znanja je treba omeniti dve pomembni pobudi: (a) Komisija je leta 2000 objavila pri‐ merjalno študijo z dragocenimi in‐ formacijami o stanju inkubatorjev v EU.
The study recommended that the benchmarking exercise should be repeated; however, this was never done. (b) In parallel to the benchmarking ex‐ ercise, the Commission set up a da‐ tabase of incubators20. 
V študiji je bilo priporočeno, da se primerjalna analiza ponovi, vendar to ni bilo storjeno; (b) vzporedno s primerjalno analizo je Komisija pripravila tudi po‐ datkovno zbirko inkubatorjev20.
The data was updated on a yearly basis until 2006, when the system ceased to be developed and updated. 
Podatki so se letno posodabljali do leta 2006, ko se je sistem prenehal razvijati in posodabljati.
Knowledge dissemination 76 Concerning the dissemination of incubator‐related expertise, apart from the benchmarking report men‐ tioned above, a ‘Smart guide to innovation‐based incubators’ was published by the Commission in 2010. 
Širjenje znanja 76 Kar zadeva širjenje strokovnega znanja v zvezi z inkubatorji, je Komisija poleg poročila o primerjalni analizi, omenje‐ nega zgoraj, leta 2010 objavila tudi vodnik po inkubatorjih, temelječih na inovacijah (Smart Guide to innovation‐ based incubators).
The document, which was produced on the basis of the experience of EBN members, describes the main factors and processes which exert the greatest influence on the success of business incubation, and how this can best be measured. 
V dokumentu, ki je nastal na podlagi izkušenj članov Evropske mreže poslovnih in inovacij‐ skih centrov, so opisani glavni dejav‐ niki in procesi, ki najbolj vplivajo na uspeh podjetniškega inkubatorja, ter načini za merjenje tega uspeha.
However, the guide did not provide any performance data or information about the effective‐ ness of this kind of business support. 
Vendar pa v vodniku ni nobenih podatkov o smotrnosti poslovanja ali informacij o uspešnosti tovrstne podpore podje‐ tjem.
The guide was published too late to allow the audited incubators to take it into consideration at the time of their establishment. 
Vodnik je bil objavljen prepozno, da bi ga lahko revidirani inkubatorji upoštevali ob svoji ustanovitvi.
Only a few incubators were even aware of its existence. 
Le nekaj inkubatorjev je vedelo, da sploh obstaja.
Observations 29 77 The initiatives described above dem‐ onstrate that in the last decade the Commission did indeed make some effort to gather data about business incubation. 
Opažanja 29 77 Zgoraj opisane pobude kažejo, da si je Komisija v zadnjem desetletju res nekoliko prizadevala za zbiranje podatkov o podjetniških inkubatorjih.
However, the experience and knowledge gathered was lost due to the lack of continuity in the Commission’s initiatives. 
Vendar pa so se pridobljene izkušnje in znanje zaradi nestalnega značaja pobud Komisije izgubili.
The Commis‐ sion had not carried out any further systematic studies about business incubators, and therefore did not have adequate up‐to‐date knowledge to share. 
Komisija ni izvedla nadaljnjih sistematičnih študij o podjetniških inkubatorjih, zato ni imela ustreznega posodobljenega zna‐ nja, da bi ga širila naprej.
Such knowledge would have been particularly useful to Member States which were intensively develop‐ ing their business incubation network (i.e. Member States which joined the EU in and after 2004). 
Tako znanje bi koristilo zlasti državam članicam, ki so intenzivno razvijale svoje mreže podjetniških inkubatorjev (npr. države članice, ki so k EU pristopile leta 2004 ali pozneje).
78 The Commission does not have an adequate knowledge base which could allow it to assess the effectiveness of business incubators, or to provide advanced support to any business incubator — in particular, to those co‐funded by the ERDF. 
78 Komisija nima ustrezne baze znanja, na podlagi katere bi lahko ocenila uspe‐ šnost podjetniških inkubatorjev ali pa podjetniškim inkubatorjem, zlasti tistim, ki so bili sofinancirani iz ESRR, zagotovila izpopolnjeno podporo.
The fact that the number of incubators is grow‐ ing makes it especially important for the Commission to provide support to incubator operators, managing authorities and Member States alike, in particular by providing examples of good practice, successful incubation programmes or benchmarking data which managing authorities can use during the assessment of proposals for the establishment of future incubators. 
Ker število inkubatorjev raste, je posebej pomembno, da Komisija nudi podporo tako upravljavcem inkubatorjev kot tudi organom upravljanja in državam članicam, in sicer predvsem z zago‐ tavljanjem primerov dobre prakse, uspešnih programov inkubiranja ali re‐ ferenčnih podatkov, ki jih lahko organi upravljanja uporabijo pri ocenjevanju predlogov za ustanovitev prihodnjih inkubatorjev.
Conclusions and 30 recommendations 79 The ERDF has made a significant financial contribution towards the creation of business incubator infra‐ structure, particularly in Member States in which this type of business support was relatively rare. 
Zaključki in priporočila 30 79 ESRR je znatno finančno prispeval k ustvarjanju infrastrukture podjetni‐ ških inkubatorjev, zlasti v državah čla‐ nicah, v katerih je bila ta vrsta podpore podjetjem razmeroma redka.
However, the Court considers that the provision of incubation services — and, con‐ sequently, the wider impact on local businesses — was rather limited, due to financial constraints and the low level of incubation activities. 
Vendar pa Sodišče meni, da je bilo zagotavlja‐ nje storitev inkubatorjev – in posle‐ dično njegov širši učinek na lokalna podjetja – zaradi finančnih omejitev in nizke stopnje dejavnosti inkubatorjev omejeno.
This was mainly explained by a lack of exper‐ tise concerning incubation practices, and by shortcomings in management systems. 
To je bilo pojasnjeno zlasti s pomanjkanjem strokovnega znanja o praksah inkubiranja in pomanjklji‐ vostmi sistemov upravljanja.
In general, audited ERDF co-financed incubator facilities had been established properly, but the business support offered to clients was only moderately successful 80 The performance of the audited incubators was lower than that of the benchmarked incubators. 
Na splošno so bili revidirani inkubatorji, sofinancirani iz ESRR, pravilno ustanovljeni, vendar pa je bila podpora podjetjem, ki so jo nudili uporabnikom, le delno uspešna 80 Smotrnost poslovanja revidiranih inkubatorjev je bila nižja kot smotrnost poslovanja referenčnih inkubatorjev.
Although the ERDF had been effective in deliv‐ ering incubator infrastructure, it had been less successful in ensuring that they provided effective and efficient support to their clients. 
Čeprav je bil ESRR uspešen pri izgra‐ dnji infrastrukture inkubatorjev, pa je bil manj uspešen pri zagotavljanju, da inkubatorji svojim uporabnikom nudijo uspešno in učinkovito podporo.
ERDF‐support‐ ed incubators were operating in mod‐ ern and properly adapted co‐financed facilities, they were more costly to run and required more staff to produce a new start‐up than the benchmarked incubators. 
Inkubatorji, ki so prejeli podporo ESRR, so delovali v sodobnih in ustrezno prilagojenih sofinanciranih objektih, njihovo delovanje pa je bilo dražje in za oblikovanje zagonskega podjetja so potrebovali več osebja kot referenčni inkubatorji.
Audited ERDF incubators had not made sufficient use of good practices 81 There are several possible reasons why the audited incubators were less effective and efficient. 
Revidirani inkubatorji, sofinancirani iz ESRR, niso dovolj uporabljali dobrih praks 81 Za to, zakaj so bili revidirani inkubatorji manj uspešni in učinkoviti, obstaja več možnih razlogov.
Most of the incubators had commenced oper‐ ations relatively recently, and this lack of experience undoubtedly hampered their efficiency. 
Večina inkubatorjev je začela delovati šele pred razmeroma kratkim časom; to pomanjkanje izku‐ šenj je nedvomno vplivalo na njihovo učinkovitost.
The clearest signs of this were weaknesses and gaps in in‐ cubation programmes and inadequate business models, in particular with regard to financial sustainability. 
Najbolj očitna znamenja za to so slabosti in vrzeli v programih inkubiranja ter neustrezni poslov‐ ni modeli, zlasti v zvezi s finančno vzdržnostjo.
This constraint focused the attention of the incubators’ management teams on generating income rather than provid‐ ing quality services for high‐growth potential start‐ups. 
Zaradi te omejitve je bila pozornost ekip, ki vodijo inkubatorje, namesto v zagotavljanje kakovostnih storitev za zagonska podjetja z velikim potencialom rasti usmerjena v ustvar‐ janje dohodka.
This income‐ oriented approach led incubator man‐ agers to relax the eligibility criteria for newcomers. 
Zaradi tega pristopa, usmerjenega v dohodke, so upravljavci inkubatorjev znižali merila upravičeno‐ sti za nova podjetja.
As a result, costly incuba‐ tor support was offered to low‐growth ventures. 
Posledično se je draga podpora za inkubatorje nudila podjetjem z nizkim potencialom rasti.
This further increased inef‐ ficiency in the use of public resources invested in business incubators. 
To je še nadalje povečalo neučinkovi‐ tost uporabe javnih virov, investiranih v podjetniške inkubatorje.
The range of services offered was limited. 
Obseg nudenih storitev je bil omejen.
Most audited incubators did not offer sup‐ port to prospective entrepreneurs at the pre‐incubation stage, or to non‐ resident clients. 
Večina revidiranih inkubatorjev ni nudila pod‐ pore prihodnjim podjetnikom v pred‐ inkubacijski fazi ali nerezidenčnim uporabnikom.
The incubation pro‐ grammes were of a basic nature and did not take into account the specific individual needs or business develop‐ ment objectives of their clients. 
Programi inkubiranja so bili osnovne narave in niso upoštevali posebnih potreb posameznikov ali ciljev poslovnega razvoja uporabnikov.
This had an additional adverse effect on the quality of business sup‐ port offered. 
To je še dodatno negativno vplivalo na kakovost nude‐ ne podpore podjetjem.
Conclusions and recommendations 31 Recommendation 1 The Commission should require Mem‐ ber States to make authorisation for the establishment of new incubators using EU co‐funding dependent on the following considerations: (a) Business incubators should be es‐ tablished on the basis of detailed and realistic business plans, paying particular attention to the sustain‐ ability of their non‐profit incuba‐ tion activity. (b) From the outset, incubation activity should be carried out by suitably skilled staff who can provide relevant individual sup‐ port to clients and potential future entrepreneurs. (c) Incubators should proactively seek and acquire new clients irrespec‐ tive of their geographical origin, focusing on those with innovative business ideas with high growth potential in order to maximise the efficiency of public funding and therefore the value added by EU funds. (d) The incubation process for each client company should start with the preparation of a detailed, tailor‐made incubation pro‐ gramme. 
Zaključki in priporočila 31 Priporočilo 1 Komisija naj od držav članic zahteva, naj bo odobritev ustanovitve novih inkubatorjev z uporabo sofinanciranja EU odvisna od naslednjega: (a) podjetniški inkubatorji naj se usta‐ novijo na podlagi podrobnih in realističnih poslovnih načrtov, pri čemer je treba posebno pozornost nameniti trajnosti njihovih neprofi‐ tnih dejavnosti inkubatorja; (b) dejavnosti inkubatorja naj že od začetka izvaja primerno kvalifici‐ rano osebje, ki lahko zagotavlja ustrezno individualno podporo uporabnikom in morebitnim priho‐ dnjim podjetnikom; (c) inkubatorji naj proaktivno iščejo in pridobivajo nove uporabnike ne glede na njihov geografski polo‐ žaj, pri čemer naj se osredotočajo na tiste z inovativnimi poslovnimi idejami z visokim potencialom rasti, da se čim bolj poveča učinko‐ vitost javnega financiranja in s tem dodana vrednost, ki jo zagotavljajo sredstva EU; (d) proces inkubiranja za posamezna podjetja uporabnike naj se začne z oblikovanjem podrobnega in po‐ sameznemu podjetju prilagojene‐ ga programa inkubiranja.
The implementation of this programme should be fol‐ lowed up, and the degree to which the business’s objectives have been achieved should be assessed. (e) Incubators should offer their services to non‐resident compan‐ ies, thereby allowing incubation support to have a larger impact on the local business community and improving possibilities for networking. (f) Incubators should set up a moni‐ toring system based not only on the data obtained from their own activity, but also on business data produced by supported clients. 
Spremlja naj se izvajanje tega programa in ocenjuje stopnja dosege poslovnih ciljev; (e) inkubatorji naj nudijo svoje sto‐ ritve nerezidenčnim podjetjem ter tako omogočijo širši učinek podpore inkubatorja na lokalno poslovno skupnost in izboljšanje možnosti za mreženje; (f) inkubatorji naj vzpostavijo sis‐ tem spremljanja, ki bo temeljil na podatkih, pridobljenih v okviru njihovih lastnih dejavnosti, in tudi na poslovnih podatkih, ki jih predložijo uporabniki, ki prejemajo podporo.
Management systems had been effective in ensuring that infrastructure was delivered, but not in ensuring the provision of efficient business incubation support 83 In most cases, management systems had been effective in ensuring that physical outputs (e.g. buildings) were delivered on time and according to plan. 
Sistemi upravljanja so uspešno zagotavljali infrastrukturo, ne pa tudi učinkovite podpore podjetniškim inkubatorjem 83 Sistemi upravljanja so v večini prime‐ rov uspešno zagotavljali, da so bili fizični izložki (npr. stavbe) doseženi pravočasno in po načrtu.
However, they did not ensure the effective and efficient delivery of incubation services (e.g. coaching and training). 
Niso pa zagotovili uspešnega in učinkovitega nudenja storitev inkubatorja (npr. usposabljanja in izobraževanja).
Greater emphasis should have been placed on the management of incubation services in the long term. 
Bolj bi bilo treba poudariti dolgoročno upravljanje storitev inkubatorja.
84 The Member State authorities which selected projects for co‐funding paid insufficient attention to the expected outcomes of incubation activity and to the feasibility of the incubators’ business models. 
84 Organi držav članic, ki so izbirali projekte za sofinanciranje, so name‐ nili premalo pozornosti pričakova‐ nim izidom dejavnosti inkubatorjev in izvedljivosti poslovnih modelov inkubatorjev.
This had serious consequences: it affected the objec‐ tives which were established for indi‐ vidual incubators, and had subsequent implications for the sustainability of incubation activities. 
To je imelo hude posle‐ dice, saj je vplivalo na cilje, določene za posamezne inkubatorje, in nato na trajnost dejavnosti inkubatorjev.
This latter issue is particularly concerning, because the length of the sustainability period does not correctly reflect the nature of ERDF co‐financed incubator projects. 
Slednje vprašanje je še posebej zaskr‐ bljujoče, saj dolžina obdobja trajnosti ne odraža ustrezno narave projektov inkubatorjev, sofinanciranih iz ESRR.
One important risk resulting from this is that the systems in place allow a significant part of the value of public funding to pass to incubator own‐ ers after the end of the sustainability period. 
Med pomembnimi tveganji, ki iz tega izhajajo, je tudi to, da vzpostavljeni sistemi omogočajo, da znaten del vrednosti javnih sredstev po preteku obdobja trajnosti preide na lastnike inkubatorjev.
Conclusions and recommendations 32 Recommendation 2 The Commission should require Mem‐ ber State authorities to incorporate the following elements into the design of the procedures for selecting and supervising ERDF co‐financed incuba‐ tor projects: (a) In the project selection criteria, greater emphasis should be placed on the expected results of the pro‐ jects rather than on the delivery of physical outputs. (b) During the project assessment process and when contractual ob‐ ligations are being defined, more use should be made of expert knowledge of business incubation activities. (c) The level of public support should be based on the defined results forecast for the incubator pro‐ ject. 
Zaključki in priporočila 32 Priporočilo 2 Komisija naj od organov držav članic zahteva, naj pri oblikovanju postopkov za izbiro in nadzor projektov inkuba‐ torjev, sofinanciranih iz ESRR, upošte‐ vajo naslednje elemente: (a) pri merilih za izbiro projektov naj se več pozornosti nameni pričako‐ vanim rezultatom projekta in ne zagotovitvi fizičnih izložkov; (b) v postopku ocenjevanja projek‐ tov in pri določitvi pogodbenih obveznosti naj se bolj uporablja strokovno znanje dejavnosti podje‐ tniških inkubatorjev; (c) raven javne podpore naj temelji na opredeljenih rezultatih, ki so bili napovedani za projekt inkubatorja.
The value of ERDF payments should be linked to the results achieved by the incubator. (d) The sustainability period should be adjusted to correspond to the actual life cycle of the business incubator assets co‐financed by the ERDF. 
Višina plačil iz ESRR bi morala biti povezana z rezultati, ki jih doseže inkubator; (d) obdobje trajnosti naj se prilagodi tako, da bo ustrezalo dejanskemu življenjskemu ciklu sredstev podje‐ tniškega inkubatorja, sofinancira‐ nega iz ESRR.
The Commission did not take sufficient steps to facilitate the exchange of knowledge and good practices 85 Although the Commission has made some effort to obtain knowledge about the activities and characteris‐ tics of a large population of business incubators in Europe, the support which it offers does not capitalise on this. 
Komisija ni sprejela zadostnih ukrepov za olajšanje izmenjave znanja in dobrih praks 85 Komisija si je v določeni meri prizade‐ vala za pridobitev informacij o dejav‐ nostih in značilnostih večjega števila podjetniških inkubatorjev v EU, vendar pa podpora, ki jo nudi, ni bila najbolje izkoriščena.
The recently published ‘Smart guide’ provides a valuable overview of the principles of incubation, but it is not sufficiently detailed and it omits important data concerning the incuba‐ tion process, e.g. benchmarking data for key indicators. 
Nedavno objavljeni vodnik daje dragocen pregled o načelih inkubacije, vendar ni dovolj podroben in ne vsebuje pomembnih podatkov o procesu inkubiranja (npr. referenčnih podatkov za ključne kazalnike).
The Commission’s activities in disseminating relevant knowledge and promoting good prac‐ tices were too limited to mitigate the risk of failure for recently established co‐financed incubators. 
Dejav‐ nosti Komisije za širjenje zadevnega znanja in spodbujanje dobrih praks so bile preveč omejene, da bi zmanjšale tveganje neuspeha nedavno ustano‐ vljenih sofinanciranih inkubatorjev.