natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The support provided covers humanitarian and non-humanitarian activities, with a financial allocation of Ű1.4 billion and Ű1.6 billion respectively. 
Zagotovljena podpora je namenjena humanitarnim in nehumanitarnim dejavnostim z dodeljenimi finančnimi sredstvi v višini 1,4 milijarde EUR oziroma 1,6 milijarde EUR.
The Facility coordinates financing from different existing instruments (see Table 2). 
Instrument usklajuje financiranje iz različnih obstoječih instrumentov (glej tabelo 2).
8 9 Articles 4 and 9 of the Commission Decision (C (2015) 9500) as amended by the Commission Decision of 10 February 2016. 
8 9 Člena 4 in 9 Sklepa Komisije (C(2015) 9500), kakor je bil spremenjen s Sklepom Komisije z dne 10. februarja 2016.
The EU Member States contributed these Ű2 billion in the form of externally assigned revenue to the EU budget and the Ű2 billion were assigned to the budget lines of the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance and humanitarian aid. 
Države članice EU so ti 2 milijardi EUR v proračun EU prispevale v obliki zunanjih namenskih prejemkov, ta sredstva pa so bila dodeljena proračunskim vrsticam instrumenta za predpristopno pomoč in humanitarne pomoči.
In legal terms, the Facility is therefore entirely funded by the EU budget. 
V pravnem smislu se instrument torej v celoti financira iz proračuna EU.
Table 2 Đ Sources of the FacilityŐs funds 11 Financing instruments (in million euro) Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance Development Cooperation Instrument Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace Subtotal Non-humanitarian aid (2) EU Budget line Humanitarian aid (1) 23 02 01 22 02 03 21 02 19 02 01 TOTAL (1+2) Contributions from Member States (b) Total budget under the Facility (a+b) 1 090 1 400 910 1 560 20 20 Source: European Commission ŇFirst annual report on the Facility for refugees in TurkeyÓ. 
Tabela 2 – Viri sredstev instrumenta 12 Instrumenti financiranja (v milijonih EUR) Proračunska vrstica EU Humanitarna pomoč (1) 23 02 01 Instrument za predpristopno pomoč Instrument za financiranje razvojnega sodelovanja Instrument za prispevanje k stabilnosti in miru 22 02 03 21 02 19 02 01 Nehumanitarna pomoč skupaj (2) SKUPAJ (1 + 2) Proračun EU (a) 310 650 20 20 690 1 000 Prispevki držav članic (b) 1 090 910 910 2 000 Skupni proračun v okviru instrumenta (a + b) 1 400 1 560 20 20 1 600 3 000 Vir: Evropska komisija, Prvo letno poročilo o instrumentu za begunce v Turčiji Pomoč se osredotoča na šest prednostnih področij: (1) humanitarno pomoč, (2) upravljanje migracij, (3) izobraževanje, (4) zdravstvo, (5) komunalno infrastrukturo in (6) socialno-ekonomsko podporo.10 Projekti, ki se financirajo iz instrumenta, se izberejo in izvajajo v okviru povezanih instrumentov (glej tabelo 2) ter torej v skladu z njihovimi veljavnimi pravili in zahtevami.11 To vključuje izvajanje v okviru regionalnega skrbniškega sklada EU za odziv na sirsko krizo – „EUTF Madad”.12 V Prilogi II je to podrobneje opisano.
This includes implementation through the EU Regional Trust Fund in Response to the Syrian Crisis Đ the ÔEUTF MadadŐ12. Annex II illustrates in more detail how this works. In the EU-Turkey Statement dated 18 March 201613, the Members of the European Council and Turkey confirmed their commitment to implementing the JAP and to ending irregular migration from Turkey to Greece14. 
Člani Evropskega sveta in Turčija so v izjavi EU in Turčije z dne 18. marca 201613 potrdili svojo zavezanost izvajanju skupnega akcijskega načrta in zaustavitvi neregularnih migracij iz Turčije v Grčijo.14 Obenem so se dogovorili tudi, da bi lahko v proračun instrumenta pred Zapisnik z drugega sestanka usmerjevalnega odbora z dne 12. maja 2016.
Article 6(3) of the Commission Decision (C (2015) 9500) as amended by the Commission Decision of 10 February 2016. 
Člen 6(3) Sklepa Komisije (C(2015) 9500), kakor je bil spremenjen s Sklepom Komisije z dne 10. februarja 2016.
The ŐEUTF MadadŐ was created in December 2014 with the objective to address long-term economic, educational and social needs of Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries, including Turkey. 
EUTF Madad je bil vzpostavljen decembra 2014 za obravnavanje dolgoročnih gospodarskih, izobraževalnih in socialnih potreb sirskih beguncev v sosednjih državah, tudi v Turčiji.
Following the establishment of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey, a share of the FacilityŐs funds is implemented via the ÔEUTF MadadŐ. 
Po vzpostavitvi instrumenta za begunce v Turčiji se del njegovih sredstev izvaja v okviru EUTF Madad.
The text of the second EU-Turkey statement is available at: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/18/eu-turkey-statement/pdf In April 2018, the Commission reported that Ôthe irregular arrivals [from Turkey to Greece] remain 97 % lower than the period before the Statement became operationalŐ. 
Besedilo druge izjave EU in Turčije je na voljo na spletni povezavi: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/sl/press/press-releases/2016/03/18/eu-turkey-statement/pdf Komisija je aprila 2018 poročala, da število neregularnih prihodov [iz Turčije v Grčijo] ostaja 97 % nižje kot v obdobju pred začetkom izvajanja izjave.
additional Ű3 billion funding could be added to the FacilityŐs budget before the end of 2018. 
koncem leta 2018 dodali še 3 milijarde EUR.
On 28 June 2018, the European Council agreed to launch the second tranche of the FacilityŐs budget. 
Evropski svet se je 28. junija 2018 strinjal, da bo izplačal drugo tranšo proračuna instrumenta.
The FacilityŐs Steering Committee The Facility is governed by a Steering Committee, which is chaired by the Commission, and includes representatives from all EU Member States. 
Usmerjevalni odbor instrumenta Instrument upravlja usmerjevalni odbor, ki mu predseduje Komisija, sestavljajo pa ga predstavniki iz vseh držav članic EU.
Representatives from Turkey attend its meetings in an advisory capacity and participate to the discussions related to the implementation of the support. 
Predstavniki Turčije se sestankov odbora udeležujejo v svetovalni vlogi in sodelujejo v razpravah, povezanih z izvajanjem podpore.
The Steering CommitteeŐs role is to provide strategic guidance. 
Vloga usmerjevalnega odbora je zagotoviti strateške smernice.
This involves Ôsetting overall priorities, [the] types of actions to be supported, the instruments to be used [...] and the coordination of the actionsŐ financed under the Facility15. It is also in charge of monitoring and assessing the implementation of the actions. 
To zajema „določanje splošnih prioritet, vrst dejavnosti, ki se bodo podprle, instrumentov, ki se bodo uporabili [...] in usklajevanje dejavnosti”, ki se financirajo iz instrumenta.15 Odbor je odgovoren tudi za spremljanje in ocenjevanje izvajanja ukrepov.
The Directorate General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR), with the EU Delegation in Turkey, is responsible for implementing projects funded via IPA, whereas the Directorate General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (DG ECHO) is responsible for the humanitarian strand. 
Generalni direktorat za sosedstvo in širitvena pogajanja (GD NEAR) je z delegacijo EU v Turčiji odgovoren za izvajanje projektov, financiranih z instrumentom za predpristopno pomoč, Generalni direktorat za evropsko civilno zaščito in evropske operacije humanitarne pomoči (GD ECHO) pa je odgovoren za humanitarni sklop.
The Commission is also in charge of the projects implemented via the EUTF Madad. 
Komisija je odgovorna tudi za projekte, ki se izvajajo v okviru EUTF Madad.
AUDIT SCOPE AND APPROACH Our objective was to assess the management of the Facility and the results achieved so far. 
OBSEG REVIZIJE IN REVIZIJSKI PRISTOP Cilj Sodišča je bil oceniti upravljanje instrumenta in dotedanje rezultate.
The audit covered the period from the establishment of the Facility until 31 March 2018. 
Med revizijo je bilo obravnavano obdobje od vzpostavitve instrumenta do 31. marca 2018.
The main audit question was: ÔIs the Facility for Refugees in Turkey effectively supporting refugees in Turkey?Ő. 
Glavno revizijsko vprašanje je bilo: „Ali instrument za begunce v Turčiji uspešno zagotavlja podporo beguncem v Turčiji?“.
(a) Did the set-up and functioning of the Facility as a mechanism contribute to a relevant, swift and well-coordinated support? 
(a) Sta zasnova in delovanje instrumenta kot mehanizma prispevala k ustrezni, hitri in dobro usklajeni podpori?
In order to answer this question, we examined whether the Commission identified the priority needs of refugees and addressed them in a swift and coordinated manner. (b) Have the humanitarian projects funded by the Facility achieved their expected results? 
Da bi Sodišče odgovorilo na to vprašanje, je preučilo, ali je Komisija opredelila prednostne potrebe beguncev in jih obravnavala hitro in usklajeno. (b) So se s humanitarnimi projekti, ki jih financira instrument, dosegli pričakovani rezultati?
In order to answer this question, we examined the implementation, monitoring and results achieved by a sample of projects supported by the Facility. 
Da bi Sodišče odgovorilo na to vprašanje, je preučilo izvajanje, spremljanje in dosežene rezultate na podlagi vzorca projektov, ki jih podpira instrument.
Because most non-humanitarian projects were not yet at a sufficiently advanced stage of implementation at the time of the audit16, we focused this part of our analysis on humanitarian projects. 
Ker večina nehumanitarnih projektov v času revizije še ni bila v dovolj napredni fazi izvajanja16, se je Sodišče v tem delu analize osredotočilo na humanitarne projekte.
We audited a sample of 10 humanitarian projects amounting to Ű458 million (see Annex III A). 
Sodišče je revidiralo vzorec z desetimi humanitarnimi projekti v skupni vrednosti 458 milijonov EUR (glej Prilogo III A).
We selected the sample to have a balanced coverage of projects in terms of financial significance, sectors (basic needs, protection, health, education) and types of implementing partner (UN agencies, INGOs). 
Vzorec je izbralo tako, da je doseglo uravnoteženo pokritost projektov v smislu finančne pomembnosti, sektorjev (osnovne potrebe, zaščita, zdravje, izobraževanje) in vrst izvedbenih partnerjev (agencije ZN, mednarodne nevladne organizacije).
The sample was selected from a total of 45 humanitarian contracts, and represents 33 % of the total amount of contracted humanitarian assistance. 
Vzorec je bil izbran izmed skupaj 45 humanitarnih pogodb in pomeni 33 % skupnega zneska humanitarne pomoči, za katerega so bile sklenjene pogodbe.
The audit included desk reviews and interviews with various Commission departments, the EU Delegation and ECHO offices in Turkey, some EU Member StatesŐ representatives to the Steering Committee of the Facility, the Turkish authorities, international bodies and non-governmental organisations and final beneficiaries17. We visited eight out of the ten projects in our sample during a visit to Turkey in January 201818. The Turkish Ministry of Family and Social Policies (MoFSP) did not grant us access to its database of eligible beneficiaries of the audited cash-transfer projects (the Emergency Social Non-humanitarian assistance mainly relates to longer-term development aid with a focus on education, health, migration management and socio-economic support. 
Revizija je zajemala dokumentacijske preglede in razgovore z različnimi oddelki Komisije, delegacijo EU in uradi ECHO v Turčiji, nekaterimi predstavniki držav članic EU v usmerjevalnem odboru instrumenta, turškimi organi, mednarodnimi organi in nevladnimi organizacijami ter končnimi upravičenci.17 Sodišče je januarja 2018 med obiskom v Turčiji obiskalo osem od desetih projektov v vzorcu.18 Nehumanitarna pomoč se nanaša zlasti na dolgoročnejšo razvojno pomoč s poudarkom na izobraževanju, zdravju, upravljanju migracij in socialno-ekonomski podpori.
Due to their specific nature, they take time to implement, usually between two (for operational actions such as training, health-related equipment, etc.) and four years (for infrastructure-related actions such as health care centres and schools). 
Zaradi posebne narave teh projektov je za njihovo izvajanje potrebnega več časa, običajno od dveh (za operativne dejavnosti, kot so usposabljanje, oprema, povezana z zdravjem itd.) do štirih let (za ukrepe, povezane z infrastrukturo, kot so zdravstveni centri in šole).
Annex III lists all the organisations interviewed during the audit visit to Turkey. 
V Prilogi III so navedene vse organizacije, s katerimi so bili med revizijskim obiskom v Turčiji opravljeni razgovori.
The remaining two were in an impractically remote location. 13 16 17 18 
14 16 17 18 Preostala projekta sta bila na nepraktično oddaljeni lokaciji.
As a result, we could not track final beneficiaries from their registration to payment. 
Zato Sodišče ni moglo spremljati končnih upravičencev od registracije do izplačila.
Further details are provided in paragraph 53. 
Dodatne podrobnosti so navedene v odstavku 53.
In particular, we examined whether the procedures in place for selecting and approving actions streamlined the assistance and ensured complementarity between: i) the different EU spending instruments used and, ii) humanitarian and non-humanitarian support. 
Preučilo je zlasti, ali so vzpostavljeni postopki za izbiro in odobritev dejavnosti racionalizirali pomoč in zagotovili dopolnjevanje med: i) različnimi uporabljenimi instrumenti EU za porabo ter ii) humanitarno in nehumanitarno podporo.
The Facility appropriately addressed the main needs of the refugees, except those needs related to municipal infrastructure and socio-economic support The allocation of Ű3 billion in funding was the result of a political decision agreed between EU Member States and Turkey. 
Instrument je ustrezno obravnaval glavne potrebe beguncev, razen potreb, povezanih s komunalno infrastrukturo in socialno-ekonomsko podporo Dodelitev finančnih sredstev v višini 3 milijard EUR je bila rezultat politične odločitve, ki so jo sprejele države članice EU in Turčija.
14 19 A needs assessment with some limitations The EU Turkey Joint Action Plan (see paragraph 4) required the EU institutions and Turkey to proceed with a comprehensive joint needs assessment before disbursing the Ű3 billion budget20. 
15 19 Ocena potreb z nekaterimi omejitvami V okviru skupnega akcijskega načrta EU in Turčije (glej odstavek 4) so morale institucije EU in Turčija pred izplačilom proračuna v višini 3 milijard EUR izvesti celovito skupno oceno potreb.20 Čeprav so turški organi pri oceni potreb sodelovali, te dejavnosti niso uradno podprli.
The needs assessment was finalised in June 2016. 
Ocena potreb je bila dokončana junija 2016.
It was comprehensive, as it included an assessment of both humanitarian and development needs and provided relevant information on the situation of Syrian refugees, identifying gaps to be addressed taking into account past, ongoing and planned assistance to Syrian people under temporary protection (SuTP) in Turkey. 
Bila je celovita, saj je zajemala oceno humanitarnih in razvojnih potreb ter zagotovila ustrezne informacije o položaju sirskih beguncev, pri čemer je opredelila vrzeli, ki jih je treba obravnavati ob upoštevanju pretekle, tekoče in načrtovane pomoči Sircem, ki uživajo začasno zaščito, v Turčiji.
However, it was not sufficiently rigorous: (a) Most of the numerical data (e.g. sector statistics) in the needs assessment was provided by the Turkish authorities. 
Ni pa bila dovolj temeljita: (a) večino številčnih podatkov (npr. sektorske statistične podatke) pri oceni potreb so zagotovili turški organi.
The consultants who carried out the needs assessment were not able to access primary data. They could therefore not validate the estimated cost of the measures needed to address the needs of refugees and host communities. (b) There was a lack of up-to-date demographic information broken down by gender, age group and location and a lack of information on vulnerabilities (female-headed households, children, elderly people, etc.). 
Svetovalci, ki so izvajali oceno potreb, niso imeli dostopa do primarnih podatkov, zato niso mogli potrditi ocenjenih stroškov ukrepov, potrebnih za obravnavanje potreb beguncev in gostiteljskih skupnosti. (b) Ni bilo dovolj posodobljenih demografskih podatkov, razčlenjenih po spolu, starostni skupini in lokaciji, ter podatkov o ranljivostih (gospodinjstva, ki jih vodijo ženske, otroci, starejše osebe itd.).
The consultants described this as Őa serious hindrance to assessing needs and designing programmes and interventionsŐ. 
Svetovalci so to opisali kot resno oviro za ocenjevanje potreb ter snovanje programov in ukrepov.
For example, in the sector of social support and cohesion, the latest nation-wide vulnerability assessment was from 2013. (c) The needs assessment targeted SuTP and did not address the needs of the non-Syrian refugee population (mainly Afghans and Iraqis). 
Na primer: v sektorju socialne podpore in kohezije je bila zadnja nacionalna ocena ranljivosti izvedena leta 2013. (c) Ocena potreb se je osredotočala na Sirce, ki uživajo začasno zaščito, in ni obravnavala potreb nesirskega begunskega prebivalstva (tj. predvsem Afganistancev in Iračanov).
The vast majority of refugees in Turkey are SuTP (see paragraph 2); SuTP were therefore the primary target group supported under the Facility. 
Velika večina beguncev v Turčiji so Sirci, ki uživajo začasno zaščito (glej odstavek 2); ti Sirci so bili torej glavna ciljna skupina, ki je prejemala podporo v okviru instrumenta.
Nevertheless, this was not in line with the stated aim of the Facility to address the needs of all refugees. 
Kljub temu to ni bilo v skladu z navedenim ciljem instrumenta, tj. obravnavati potrebe vseh beguncev.
15 20 Paragraph 3, part 1 of the EU Turkey JAP. 
16 20 Odstavek 3 prvega dela skupnega akcijskega načrta EU in Turčije.
The priority areas of the Facility (see paragraph 8) were largely aligned with the needs assessment. 
Prednostna področja instrumenta (glej odstavek 8) so bila večinoma usklajena z oceno potreb.
The only exception was Ômigration managementŐ which the Steering Committee selected as a priority area although it was not included in the scope of the needs assessment. 
Edina izjema je bilo „upravljanje migracij”, ki ga je usmerjevalni odbor izbral kot prednostno področje, čeprav ni bilo vključeno v obseg ocene potreb.
Considering that the main objective of the Facility was to support refugees and host communities, and that migration management in Turkey had already been allocated about Ű350 million in support under the IPA (outside the Facility), the grounds for identifying it as a priority area are questionable. 
Glede na to, da je bil glavni cilj instrumenta podpirati begunce in gostiteljske skupnosti ter da je bilo za upravljanje migracij v Turčiji že namenjenih približno 350 milijonov EUR podpore iz instrumenta za predpristopno pomoč (ki ne spada v okvir instrumenta za begunce v Turčiji), je podlaga za opredelitev tega področja kot prednostnega vprašljiva.
In fact, after having funded two migration-management projects, the Steering Committee decided not to allocate any more money to this area. 
Pravzaprav se je usmerjevalni odbor po financiranju dveh projektov za upravljanje migracij odločil, da v ta namen ne bo več dodeljeval sredstev.
The priority areas were broadly defined to ensure the necessary flexibility in a difficult and rapidly changing context. 
Prednostna področja so bila široko opredeljena, da bi zagotovili potrebno prožnost v težavnih in hitro spreminjajočih se razmerah.
The individual projects were aimed at addressing the specific needs of refugees. 
Posamezni projekti so bili namenjeni obravnavanju posebnih potreb beguncev.
We reviewed the rationale for the selection of the 10 audited projects and found that this was indeed the case for all of them (See Annex III B) for details). 
Sodišče je preučilo utemeljitev za izbiro desetih revidiranih projektov in ugotovilo, da je tako pri vseh projektih (glej Prilogo III B za več podrobnosti).
When submitting a proposal for funding, the implementing partner of humanitarian projects must describe the problems, needs and risks identified and how the proposed response is adequate and consistent with the CommissionŐs overall humanitarian strategy in Turkey. 
Izvedbeni partner humanitarnih projektov mora pri predložitvi predloga za financiranje opisati opredeljene probleme, potrebe in tveganja ter ustreznost predlaganega odziva in njegovo skladnost s splošno humanitarno strategijo Komisije v Turčiji.
Box 1 shows how the EUŐs largest humanitarian project funded by the Facility addressed the needs of refugees. 
V okviru 1 je prikazano, kako so se pri največjem humanitarnem projektu EU, financiranem iz instrumenta, obravnavale potrebe beguncev.
16 Box 1 Đ The ESSN: an innovative project design to address the needs of refugees The Emergency Social Safety Net (ESSN) is the largest-ever humanitarian project funded by the EU, aimed at providing assistance to 1.3 million refugees. 
17 Okvir 1 – ESSN: inovativen projekt, namenjen obravnavanju potreb beguncev Mreža socialne varnosti v sili (ESSN) je največji humanitarni projekt, ki ga je doslej financirala EU, namenjen zagotavljanju pomoči 1,3 milijona beguncem.
The project is being implemented in two phases covering the periods from 2016-2018 and from 2018-2019, with a budget of Ű348 million and Ű650 million respectively. 
Projekt se izvaja v dveh fazah v obdobjih 2016–2018 in 2018–2019, njegov proračun pa znaša 348 milijonov EUR oziroma 650 milijonov EUR.
The ESSN addresses basic needs (food, non-food items and services) by providing cash assistance. 
ESSN obravnava osnovne potrebe (tj. hrana, neživilski izdelki in storitve) z zagotavljanjem denarne pomoči.
The project is implemented across Turkey by a UN Agency in collaboration with a local implementing partner and the Turkish authorities. 
Projekt po vsej Turčiji izvaja agencija ZN v sodelovanju z lokalnim izvedbenim partnerjem in turškimi organi.
It is innovative because it is a hybrid humanitarian aid project embedded in the national social-protection system. 
Inovativen je zato, ker gre za hibriden projekt humanitarne pomoči, vključen v nacionalni sistem socialne zaščite.
Two priority areas were insufficiently supported The Facility focused its spending on the priority areas of education, health and humanitarian assistance (mainly the ESSN). These areas made up approximately 90 % of the total contracted amount (see Figure 1). 
Dve prednostni področji nista bili ustrezno podprti Poraba v okviru instrumenta je bila usmerjena v prednostna področja, tj. izobraževanje, zdravstvo in humanitarno pomoč (predvsem ESSN), ki so predstavljala približno 90 % skupnega zneska, za katerega so bile sklenjene pogodbe (glej sliko 1).
Figure 1 Đ Proportion of the FacilityŐs assistance allocated to each priority area (based on contracted amounts) 17 In recent years, despite the perceived risk of misuse of funds, there has been a growing consensus amongst humanitarian stakeholders on the benefits of cash assistance21. This was reflected at the World Humanitarian summit in June 2016, where cash transfers were promoted, when appropriate. 
18 V zadnjih letih kljub zaznanemu tveganju zlorabe sredstev obstaja vse večje soglasje med humanitarnimi deležniki glede koristnosti denarne pomoči.21 To je bilo razvidno na svetovnem humanitarnem vrhu junija 2016, kjer so se, kadar je bilo to ustrezno, spodbujali denarni transferji.
The project targets refugees living outside the camps, whose opportunities to enter the national labour market are limited. 
Projekt je usmerjen v begunce, ki živijo zunaj taborišč in imajo omejene možnosti za vstop na nacionalni trg dela.
It provides a stable and predictable source of income to cover their basic needs, mainly accommodation and food. 
Zagotavlja stabilen in predvidljiv vir dohodka za kritje njihovih osnovnih potreb, zlasti po bivališču in hrani.
In practice, refugees receive a monthly fixed amount (about Ű30 per person). 
Begunci v praksi prejmejo fiksen mesečni znesek (približno 30 € na osebo).
They use a debit card to withdraw cash at ATMs or to pay in shops. 
Plačilno kartico uporabljajo za dvig gotovine na bankomatih ali plačilo nakupa v trgovinah.