natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The problem is that the deadlines which are imposed by the basic regulations do not take sufficient account of the fact that it is hard for an agency to reach its ‘cruising speed’ until it has been in existence for two years. So it is not until the second evaluation that the question of performance is dealt with. 
Pri rokih, ki jih predpisuje osnovna uredba, se namreč premalo upošteva dejstvo, da agencija prej kot v dveh letih le s težavo doseže svoj polni delovni ritem. Zato se vprašanje uspešnosti obravnava šele pri drugem ocenjevanju.
In most cases, the agencies themselves have carried out internal evaluations of their projects and have called on outside parties to make evaluations of all their activities for a given period (see Box 9). 
Agencije so v večini primerov same izvedle notranja ocenjevanja svojih projektov, za pripravo ocen o vseh svojih dejavnostih za določeno obdobje pa so zaprosile za zunanjo pomoč (glej okvir 9).
Most of the external evaluations had been commissioned by the agencies themselves. 
Večino zunanjih ocen so naročile agencije same.
In one case, certain consultants had made successive evaluations of the same agency34. 
V enem primeru so določeni svetovalci izvedli zaporedna ocenjevanja v isti agenciji 34.
These situations were not without risk to the evaluators’ independence. 
Takšne situacije niso bile brez tveganja glede neodvisnosti presoje ocenjevalcev.
The conclusions of the eight evaluations that were examined35 were positive overall but in general regretted the vagueness of the objectives being pursued and the lack of performance indicators. 
Zaključki o osmih preučenih ocenjevanjih 35 so bili na splošno pozitivni, vendar je bilo v njih običajno izraženo obžalovanje, da zastavljeni cilji niso jasni in da ni kazalnikov uspešnosti.
For example, in order to assess performance and to compensate for the lack of internal data, the assessors had often conducted enquiries at the agencies’ stakeholders. 
Ocenjevalci so na primer pogosto izvedli poizvedbe pri zainteresiranih straneh, da bi tako ocenili uspešnost poslovanja in nadomestili pomanjkanje notranjih podatkov. 34 EU-OSHA.
35 EU-OHSA (1), Frontex, EEA (1), EFSA (1), Eurofound (2), EMSA, EMEA (1) and ENISA (2) had not yet undergone external evaluations. 
35 EU-OSHA (1), Eurofound (2), ENISA (1), EEA (1), EFSA (1), EMEA (1). EMSA in Frontex še nista bili predmet zunanjih ocenjevanj.
26 BOX 9 ASSESSMENT BY BENCHMARKING – THE EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY (EMEA) The agency belongs to the BEMA (benchmarking of European medicines agencies) network, which has the broad aim of contributing to the development of a world-class regulatory system for pharmaceutical products based on best practice in the sector. 
26 OKVIR 9 OCENJEVANJE S PRIMERJANJEM – EVROPSKA AGENCIJA ZA ZDRAVILA (EMEA) Agencija pripada mreži BEMA (Benchmarking of European Medicines Agencies), katere naloga je prispevati k razvoju svetovno uspešnega sistema odličnosti za regulacijo farmacevtskih izdelkov na podlagi najboljših praks v sektorju.
It stems from the wish to improve performance at all levels by means of comparing know-how and by learning from each other. 
Temelji na želji, da se na vseh ravneh izboljša uspešnost s primerjavo znanj in medsebojnim učenjem.
Using a common evaluation system, each agency has performed a self-assessment by measuring itself against 12 key performance criteria and 44 specific indicators covering all its main activities. 
Vsaka agencija je izvedla samoocenjevanje z uporabo skupnega ocenjevalnega sistema, pri čemer je za primerjavo uporabila 12 ključnih meril uspešnosti in 44 posebnih kazalnikov, ki pokrivajo njene glavne dejavnosti.
A team of three assessors from other agencies in the network has then repeated the assessment by applying the same indicators, thus enabling the areas in which the agency is performing below par to be identified. 
Skupina treh ocenjevalcev iz drugih agencij v mreži je nato ponovila ocenjevanje z uporabo enakih kazalnikov, kar jim je omogočilo, da so ugotovili področja, na katerih je agencija pod povprečjem.
Plans to bring these areas up to standard have then been drawn up with three levels of priority (high, medium, low). 
Za ta področja so se nato pripravili načrti za izboljšanje ravni s tremi prednostnimi stopnjami (visoka, srednja, nizka).
The last assessment exercise took place in 2006. 
Zadnje ocenjevanje je bilo izvedeno leta 2006.
As the agency was found to be performing above par, no action to bring it up to standard was necessary. 
Ker je bilo ugotovljeno, da je bila agencija nad povprečjem, niso bile potrebne nobene izboljšave.
This type of approach allows the thematic networks bringing together a Community agency and national agencies to be strengthened. 
Tovrstni pristop omogoča okrepitev tematskih mrež, ki agencije Skupnosti povezujejo z nacionalnimi agencijami.
In all cases, the evaluation reports had been examined by the agencies’ management bodies. 
Upravni organi agencij so v vseh primerih preučili poročila o ocenjevanju.
However, the drawing-up of action plans for implementing the remedial measures in response to the assessors’ conclusions had not been systematically required by the management bodies. 
Vendar upravni sveti niso sistematično zahtevali priprave akcijskih načrtov za izvajanje popravnih ukrepov v odgovor na zaključke ocenjevalcev.
In September 2003, a ‘meta-evaluation of the agencies’ was published by the Commission on the basis of the external evaluations available at the time. 
Komisija je septembra 2003 objavila „metaoceno agencij“ na podlagi zunanjih ocen, ki so bile takrat na voljo.
The agencies’ management boards had not asked for a systematic examination of the overall recommendations made on this occasion, despite their relevance. 
Upravni sveti agencij kljub pomembnosti priporočil, oblikovanih ob teh priložnosti, niso zahtevali, da se slednja v celoti sistematično preučijo.
Several Commission departments are involved with the agencies: the directorates-general (DG) with which they are associated for the sectoral part, the Budget DG for the financial part and the Personnel and Administration DG36 for all human resources questions. 
Z agencijami sodeluje več služb Komisije: z njimi povezani generalni direktorati za sektorski del, Generalni direktorat za proračun za finančni del in Generalni direktorat za kadrovske zadeve in administracijo 36 za vsa vprašanja glede kadrovskih virov.
The Commission’s Internal Audit Service exercises the same powers with respect to the Community bodies as with respect to Commission departments37 and bases its audits on the same internal control standards (see paragraph 25). 
Služba Komisije za notranjo revizijo ima v zvezi z organi Skupnosti enaka pooblastila kot v zvezi s službami Komisije 37, pri svojih preverjanjih pa se opira na enake standarde notranjega kontroliranja (glej odstavek 25).
Lastly, in the General Secretariat there is a unit responsible for institutional matters which deals with issues concerning relations between the agencies and the Commission. 
Kot zadnje je v generalnem sekretariatu oddelek, ki je zadolžen za institucionalne zadeve in obravnava problematiko odnosov med agencijami in Komisijo.
The agencies encountered difficulties in using the services proposed by the 36 The Commission, for example, has recommended that each agency set up a multiannual staff policy plan, Sec Gen C(2005) 5304. 
Posledično agencije kot celota niso mogle ovrednotiti najboljših sistemov za 36 Komisija je na primer priporočila, da vsaka agencija pripravi večletni načrt za kadrovsko politiko, Sec Gen C(2005) 5304.
37 Article 71(2) of the framework financial regulation for the agencies. 
37 Člen 71(2) okvirne finančne uredbe za agencije.
38 Cf. the meta-evaluation of 2003 made on the basis of the external evaluations available at the time. 
38 Primerjaj z metaoceno iz leta 2003, izvedeno na podlagi zunanjih ocen, ki so bile takrat na voljo.
39 COM(2005) 59, draft interinstitutional agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory agencies. 
39 COM(2005) 59, Osnutek medinstitucionalnega sporazuma o skupnem okviru za evropske regulativne agencije.
In-depth study of this document has been postponed by the Council since 2006. 
Svet je od leta 2006 večkrat odložil temeljito preučitev tega dokumenta.
As a consequence, the agencies as a whole were not in a position to identify the best practice management systems they could adopt, as many of them were too small to determine and develop the management solutions most suited to their needs. 
27 upravljanje, ki bi jih lahko uporabljale, saj so številne med njimi premajhne, da bi lahko določile in izdelale rešitve za upravljanje, ki bi bile najbolje prilagojene njihovim potrebam.
The Commission also plays a role in appraising the results achieved by the agencies. 
Komisija ima tudi vlogo pri vrednotenju rezultatov agencij.
The associated directorates-general are primarily the recipients of the agencies’ work and are able to judge its added value. 
V prvi vrsti so prejemniki dela agencij z njimi povezani generalni direktorati, ki lahko ocenijo njegovo dodano vrednost.
Furthermore, the Commission takes initiatives in order to evaluate38 the agencies’ systems and, if need be, to propose improvements39. 
Komisija poleg tega prevzema pobudo, da bi ovrednotila 38 sistem agencij in po potrebi priporočila izboljšave 39.
Nevertheless, during its audit the Court did not obtain proof that the Commission’s representatives on the agencies’ management boards had asked for the overall recommendations made in the meta-evaluation (see paragraph 40) to be systematically examined. 
Vendar Sodišče med svojo revizijo ni dobilo dokaza o tem, da so predstavniki Komisije v upravnih svetih agencij zahtevali sistematično preučitev vseh priporočil, oblikovanih pri metaoceni (glej odstavek 40).
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 44. 
ZAKLJUČKI IN PRIPOROČILA 44.
One of the key objectives of the major administrative and financial reform carried out by the European Union40 was to make its management more focused on results by overhauling the strategic planning cycle and introducing activity-based budget management. 
Eden ključnih ciljev velike upravne in finančne reforme Evropske unije 40 je bil usmeriti upravljanje k doseganju rezultatov in sicer s preoblikovanjem cikla strateškega načrtovanja in uvedbo upravljanja proračuna po dejavnostih.
DID THE AGENCIES PLAN THEIR ACTIVITIES ADEQUATELY BY SETTING THEMSELVES SPECIFIC AND MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES? 
ALI SO AGENCIJE USTREZNO NAČRTOVALE SVOJE DEJAVNOSTI Z DOLOČANJEM NATANČNIH IN MERLJIVIH CILJEV?
The shortcomings in the planning were not conducive to effectively assessing the results achieved in terms of the objectives. 
Pomanjkljivosti pri načrtovanju niso vodile k uspešnemu ocenjevanju rezultatov glede na cilje.
Multiannual planning was not in widespread use in the agencies. 
Uporaba večletnega načrtovanja, usmerjenega k ciljem rezultatov, v agencijah ni bila razširjena.
The objectives that were pursued were all too often vaguely worded and not properly coordinated with the Community’s sectoral policy priorities. 
Zastavljeni cilji so bili prepogosto nejasno oblikovani in njihova usklajenost s prednostnimi nalogami sektorskih politik Skupnosti ni bila zagotovljena.
Engaging the discharge authority in the dialogue that was needed to ensure the transparency and quality of these public services thus proved difficult (see paragraphs 1 to 9). 
Tako se je izkazalo, da je z organom za razrešnico težko vzpostaviti dialog, ki je potreben za zagotavljanje preglednosti in kakovosti teh javnih storitev (glej odstavke 1 do 9).
Where multiannual programmes did exist, their underlying strategies were not based on explicit ex ante evaluations justifying the priorities that had been selected. 
Kadar so večletni programi obstajali, z njimi povezane strategije niso temeljile na jasnih predhodnih ocenah, ki bi utemeljevale izbrane prednostne naloge.
This being so, the objectives were not always accompanied by indicators which could act as benchmarks over time for the results obtained and for their impact in terms of Community sectoral strategies (see paragraphs 12 40 Commission reform, COM(2000) 200 final of 5.4.2000. and 13). 
Ciljev tako niso vedno spremljali primerni kazalniki, s katerimi bi se lahko merila uspešnost pridobljenih rezultatov v nekem časovnem obdobju in njihov učinek na ravni sektorskih strategij Skupnosti (glej odstavka 12 in 13). 40 Reforma Komisije, COM(2000) 200 konč. z dne 5.4.2000.
The annual programmes did not make a sufficient link between the measures to be taken and the resources to be deployed. 
Dejavnosti, ki se bodo izvedle, v letnih programih niso bile dovolj povezane z viri, ki se bodo uporabili.
Although these work programmes underwent a preparation and adoption procedure that was parallel to that for budgets, they did not constitute a basis for transparent operational management because they failed to indicate the expected cost of the planned action (see paragraphs 14 to 18). 
Čeprav je bil proces priprave in sprejetja teh programov dela vzporeden s procesom za proračune, programi niso predstavljali osnove za pregledno operativno upravljanje, saj v njih niso bili navedeni pričakovani stroški načrtovanih dejavnosti (glej odstavke 14 do 18).
The widespread lack of any activity-based budgeting, which is one of the basic instruments needed for management transparency, acted as a serious brake on the introduction of a performance-oriented culture (see paragraphs 19 and 20). 
Ker na splošno ni bilo k dejavnostim usmerjenega proračuna, ki je eno od temeljnih orodij za zagotavljanje preglednosti pri upravljanju, je bila uvedba k uspešnosti poslovanja usmerjene kulture resno ovirana (glej odstavka 19 in 20).
29 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. 
29 PRIPOROČILA 1.
The agencies should produce a document converting their strategy into a multiannual work programme that has clear objectives and performance indicators corresponding to the requirements of their internal control standard on monitoring performance against objectives and indicators. 
Agencije bi morale pripraviti dokument, s katerim bi svojo strategijo prenesle v večletni program dela, v katerem bi bili navedeni jasni cilji in kazalniki uspešnosti, ki ustrezajo zahtevam njihovega standarda notranje kontrole o spremljanju uspešnosti glede na cilje in kazalnike.
The agencies should make systematic use of ex ante evaluations in order to structure their objectives and the different stages of their multiannual planning. 
Agencije bi morale za oblikovanje svojih ciljev in različnih faz večletnega načrtovanja sistematično izvajati predhodna ocenjevanja.
Performance indicators (outcomes and impact) need to be defined as part of the multiannual planning, whereas activity indicators (volume and timetable of inputs and outputs) should be reserved for the annual planning. 
Kazalnike rezultatov (izidi in učinek) bi bilo treba določiti v okviru večletnega načrtovanja, medtem ko bi morali kazalniki dejavnosti (obseg in časovni razpored vložkov in izdelkov) ostati v okviru letnega načrtovanja.
In the interests of clear programming and transparent management, the agencies should apply the same practices as the Commission by presenting their budgets classified by the purpose of the expenditure according to the ABB/ABM system. 
Agencije bi morale zaradi jasnosti svojega načrtovanja in preglednosti svojega upravljanja svoje proračune predstaviti po namembnosti odhodkov v skladu s sistemom ABB/ABM, kot to dela Komisija.
DID THE AGENCIES INTRODUCE SOUND TOOLS FOR MONITORING THEIR ACTIVITIES? 
ALI SO AGENCIJE UVEDLE ZANESLJIVA ORODJA ZA SPREMLJANJE SVOJIH DEJAVNOSTI?
The monitoring tools still did not provide the transparency needed for permanent supervision of performance. 
Orodja za spremljanje še niso omogočala preglednosti, potrebne za redni nadzor nad uspešnostjo.
‘Scoreboard’ mechanisms had been set up in all the agencies, which was a sign that the management teams were keen to monitor performance. 
Vse agencije so vzpostavile mehanizem ocenjevalnih preglednic, kar kaže, da so si vodstvene skupine prizadevale spremljati uspešnost poslovanja.
Nevertheless, these mechanisms were still inadequate and the experience acquired in using them had not been sufficiently shared between the agencies. 
Vendar ti mehanizmi še vedno niso bili zadostni, agencije pa si niso dovolj izmenjavale z njimi pridobljenih izkušenj.
Introducing monitoring tools did not seem to have been a priority for the agencies’ management bodies (see paragraphs 22 and 24). 
Ne zdi se, da bi bila uvedba orodij za spremljanje ena od splošnih prednostnih nalog upravnih organov agencij (glej odstavka 22 in 24).
Whereas relatively widespread use was made of indicators for resource allocation and the volume of activity, this was not the case for outcome and impact indicators (see paragraphs 26 to 28). 
Kazalniki izidov in učinka se za razliko od kazalnikov dodeljevanja virov in obsega dejavnosti niso veliko uporabljali (glej odstavke 26 do 28).
30 RECOMMENDATIONS 5. 
30 PRIPOROČILA 5.
The agencies should set up management control instruments linked to their work programmes and to their budgets. 
Agencije bi morale uvesti orodja za kontrolo upravljanja, povezana z njihovimi programi dela in proračuni.
Such instruments should enable all the allocated resources to be identified. 
Takšna orodja bi morala zagotavljati pregled nad vsemi dodeljenimi viri.
The experience gained by some of the agencies could beneficially be made use of by others. 
Agencije bi morale koristno uporabiti izkušnje, ki so jih pridobile nekatere med njimi.
The indicators adopted should make it possible to measure the resources deployed and the work carried out as well as the results achieved in terms of outcomes and impact. 
Sprejeti kazalniki bi morali omogočati merjenje tako uporabljenih virov in izvedenega dela kot pridobljenih rezultatov v smislu izidov in učinka.
DID THE AGENCIES REPORT PROPERLY ON THEIR ACTIVITIES AND EVALUATE THEIR RESULTS? 
ALI SO AGENCIJE USTREZNO POROČALE O SVOJIH DEJAVNOSTIH IN OCENJEVALE SVOJE REZULTATE?
The duty to report was always complied with, but appraisal of the actual results was hindered by the shortcomings in planning. 
Obveznost poročanja je bila vedno spoštovana, na ocenjevanje dejanskih rezultatov pa so vplivale pomanjkljivosti pri načrtovanju.
The activity reports submitted by the directors were too often merely descriptive. 
Poročila o dejavnostih, ki so jih predložili direktorji, so prepogosto vsebovala samo opise.
They dealt more with the type and scope of the work than with performance in terms of the objectives achieved. 
Bolj so se osredotočala na vrsto in obseg dela kot na doseženo uspešnost glede na cilje.
Seldom did these reports address the question of the obstacles that had been encountered and possible repercussions on future programmes (see paragraphs 30 to 32). 
V teh poročilih so bile redko obravnavane nastale težave in možne posledice za prihodnje programe (glej odstavke 30 do 32).
The management bodies were not always proactive in introducing a performance-oriented culture and their lack of relations with the discharge authority did not encourage them to embark on this course of action (see paragraph 33). 
Upravni organi niso bili vedno dejavni pri vzpostavljanju k uspešnosti usmerjene kulture in ker niso imeli odnosov z organom za razrešnico, za to tudi niso imeli nobene spodbude (glej odstavek 33).
31 RECOMMENDATIONS 9. 
31 PRIPOROČILA 9.
In addition to describing the measures that have been taken, the activity reports should offer an assessment of the progress made in terms of achieving the objectives set in the multiannual programmes by using the latter’s performance indicators. 
Poročila o dejavnostih bi morala poleg opisa izvedenih dejavnosti vsebovati tudi oceno napredka pri doseganju ciljev iz večletnih programov ter za to uporabiti kazalnike uspešnosti iz teh programov.
These reports should also give an indication as to how the programmes should, if necessary, be modified in the light of the situations encountered in practice. 
Ta poročila bi morala vsebovati tudi podatke o tem, kako je treba programe po potrebi spremeniti glede na situacije, ki so nastale v praksi.
Internal evaluations of projects usually enabled the management teams to learn from the experience gained from work in the field. 
Notranja ocenjevanja projektov so vodstvenim skupinam običajno omogočala, da se učijo iz izkušenj, pridobljenih na terenu.
Overall evaluations entrusted to external experts were regularly undertaken by all the agencies. 
Vse agencije so redno izvajale celovite ocene, ki so jih zanje izvedli zunanji strokovnjaki.
By and large, their results were positive but most of these evaluations suffered from the weaknesses of the multiannual planning and from the lack of basic data relating to the objectives being pursued. 
Njihove ocene so bile na splošno pozitivne, vendar so na večino njih vplivale slabosti iz večletnega načrtovanja in pomanjkanje osnovnih podatkov v zvezi z zastavljenimi cilji.
The fact that these evaluations were organised by the agencies themselves without any other outside participants (such as the Commission) entailed risks as regards the independence of the experts’ judgement (see paragraphs 35 to 40). 
Dejstvo, da so agencije ta ocenjevanja organizirale same brez vsakršnih zunanjih partnerjev (kot je Komisija), je povzročilo tveganja za neodvisno presojo strokovnjakov (glej odstavke 35 do 40).
This report was adopted by the Court of Auditors in Luxembourg at its meeting of 5 June 2008. 
To poročilo je sprejelo Računsko sodišče v Luxembourgu na svojem zasedanju dne 5. junija 2008.
For the Court of Auditors Vítor Manuel da Silva Caldeira President 32 RECOMMENDATIONS 12. 
Za Računsko sodišče Vítor Manuel da Silva Caldeira Predsednik 32 PRIPOROČILA 12.
The frequency with which periodic overall evaluations are made should be linked to the rhythm of the multiannual programmes and the underlying ex ante evaluations. 
Pogostost celovitih rednih ocenjevanj bi bilo treba povezati z ritmom večletnih programov in z njimi povezanih predhodnih ocenjevanj.
In so doing, the performance indicators laid down in the multiannual programmes could be used as benchmarks when it comes to making the ex post evaluations. 
Tako bi se lahko kazalniki uspešnosti, določeni v večletnih programih, uporabljali kot merila uspešnosti pri izvajanju naknadnih ocenjevanj.
For the sake of independence and consistency, it would be advisable to involve the Commission in performing the periodic overall evaluations. 
Zaradi neodvisnosti in skladnosti bi bilo priporočljivo, da Komisija sodeluje pri izvajanju rednih celovitih ocenjevanj.
The results of these evaluations should be communicated to the discharge authority according to a set timetable. 
Rezultati teh ocenjevanj bi se morali sporočati organu za razrešnico po vnaprej določenem urniku.
On this occasion, the director of the agency should be required to present the conclusions that are drawn from the periodic evaluation. 
Ob tej priložnosti bi moral biti direktor agencije pozvan, da predstavi zaključke, do katerih je prišel na podlagi rednega ocenjevanja.