natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
While INEA reports delays to the parent DGs, its mandate to take corrective action has not been spelled out in detail. 
Čeprav agencija INEA pristojnim generalnim direktoratom poroča o zamudah, njen mandat za sprejetje popravljalnih ukrepov ni bil podrobno opredeljen.
72 With the 2014-2020 period due to end next year, there is a risk that payments, decommitments and reflows will build up significantly in the coming months. 
72 Ker se bo obdobje 2014–2020 končalo naslednje leto, obstaja tveganje, da se bodo plačila, sprostitve in vračila v prihodnjih mesecih znatno povečali.
This may negatively impact implementation: if decommitments are made too late in the programming period, INEA could have little time to reinject funds into other projects. 
To lahko negativno vpliva na izvajanje: če se sredstva sprostijo prepozno v programskem obdobju, bi lahko imela agencija INEA le malo časa za to, da sredstva ponovno vloži v druge projekte.
73 In our special report 17/2018 on shared management in EU Cohesion funding, we found that measures to enhance absorption towards the end of a programming period may give little consideration to results. 
17/2018 o deljenem upravljanju sredstev EU za kohezijo ugotovilo, da pri ukrepih za povečanje črpanja sredstev proti koncu programskega obdobja obstaja možnost, da niso dovolj osredotočeni na rezultate.
Therefore it is important to use all existing tools to ensure the effective use of funds during the entire implementation period. 
Zato je pomembno, da se uporabljajo vsa obstoječa orodja za zagotovitev uspešne porabe sredstev v celotnem obdobju izvajanja.
We also found that, when a large amount of funding remains to be managed after the start of a successor programme, there may be a knock-on effect delaying that programme’s implementation29. The existing performance framework is not well-suited to demonstrate how projects contribute to programme objectives 74 Mechanisms should be in place to monitor and evaluate whether and how projects contribute to achieving the CEF programme objectives. 
Sodišče je prav tako ugotovilo, da v primeru, ko je velik del sredstev treba upravljati še po začetku naslednjega programa, lahko to posredno vpliva na zamude pri njegovem izvajanju.29 Obstoječi okvir smotrnosti ni primeren za dokazovanje tega, kako projekti prispevajo k ciljem programa 74 Vzpostaviti bi bilo treba mehanizme za spremljanje in vrednotenje tega, ali in kako projekti prispevajo k doseganju ciljev programa IPE.
There should be clarity as to who is in charge of monitoring the results achieved. 
Prav tako bi moralo biti jasno določeno, kdo je odgovoren za spremljanje doseženih rezultatov.
75 The performance framework is not well suited for INEA to monitor whether and how the funded projects contribute to the programme objectives. 
75 Okvir smotrnosti ni primeren za to, da agencija INEA z njim spremlja, ali in kako financirani projekti prispevajo k ciljem programa.
Different legal sources lay out indicators and targets to be monitored, but they are not fully clear or consistent. 
V različnih pravnih virih so navedeni kazalniki in ciljne vrednosti, ki jih je treba spremljati, ki pa niso povsem jasni ali 29 Posebno poročilo št.
76 In 2017, INEA and the parent DGs formed a working group to examine the suitability of the indicators defined in the CEF programme statement. 
76 Leta 2017 so agencija INEA in pristojni generalni direktorati ustanovili delovno skupino za preučitev primernosti kazalnikov, opredeljenih v izjavi o programu IPE.
The working group concluded that no indicator was directly suitable for monitoring purposes: 10 indicators would be suitable with minor improvements, but 34 needed major improvements, or were completely unsuitable or outside the scope of INEA. 
Delovna skupina je ugotovila, da noben kazalnik ni neposredno primeren za spremljanje: deset kazalnikov bi bilo primernih z manjšimi izboljšavami, 34 kazalnikov pa bi bilo treba bistveno izboljšati, je povsem neustreznih ali je zunaj področja uporabe agencije INEA.
For example, although the CEF Regulation provides a general definition of the term “bottleneck” in the field of transport, this is insufficient to measure the performance of projects in this respect30. This may lead to inconsistent reporting between projects of different magnitude (see Box 5). 
Čeprav je v uredbi o IPE na primer navedena splošna definicija izraza ozko grlo na področju prometa, to ne zadostuje za merjenje smotrnosti projektov v zvezi s tem.30 To lahko med projekti različnih velikosti privede do neenotnega poročanja (glej okvir 5).
35 77 In early 2018, INEA submitted a proposal to the parent DGs for new transport and energy indicators for CEF II. 
77 Agencija INEA je v začetku leta 2018 pristojnim generalnim direktoratom predložila predlog novih kazalnikov na področju prometa in energije za IPE II.
However, the process was at a standstill at the time of the audit. 
Vendar je proces v času revizije miroval.
78 Despite these difficulties, INEA carries out some performance monitoring, collecting information from beneficiaries for nine output indicators. 
78 Agencija INEA kljub tem težavam izvaja določeno spremljanje smotrnosti in pri upravičencih zbira informacije za devet kazalnikov izložkov.
To better capture actual project outputs, these indicators differ slightly from those in the CEF Regulation. 
Da bi bili dejanski izložki projektov bolje zajeti, se ti kazalniki rahlo razlikujejo od tistih, ki so določeni v uredbi o IPE.
79 This monitoring, however, mostly focuses on inputs and outputs, such as the number of kilometres or supply points for alternative fuel constructed, and does not capture results, such as generated time-savings or increased traffic volumes. 
79 To spremljanje pa se večinoma osredotoča na vložke in izložke, kot je število zgrajenih kilometrov ali točk za oskrbo z alternativnimi gorivi, in ne zajema rezultatov, kot so časovni prihranek ali povečan obseg prometa.
This is in accordance with INEA’s mandate and delegation acts with its parent DGs. 
To je v skladu z mandatom agencije INEA in akti o prenosu nalog, sklenjenimi z njenimi generalnimi direktorati.
While grant agreements have technical annexes with descriptions of objectives, activities and milestones, they do not include KPIs for evaluating project results, which would significantly enhance performance monitoring. 
Sporazumi o dodelitvi nepovratnih sredstev sicer imajo tehnične priloge z opisi ciljev, dejavnosti in mejnikov, ne vključujejo pa ključnih kazalnikov smotrnosti za vrednotenje rezultatov projektov, kar bi znatno izboljšalo spremljanje smotrnosti.
80 We have already observed in several past reports that project monitoring is mainly output-oriented and fails to assess results31. Thus, there is no systematic information as to whether and how EU co-funded projects, taken individually and/or in the context of the core network corridors, have achieved the expected result-based objectives and impact on economic development. 
80 Sodišče je že v številnih preteklih poročilih ugotovilo, da je spremljanje projektov usmerjeno predvsem k izložkom in ne k ocenjevanju rezultatov.31 Zato ni sistematičnih informacij o tem, ali in kako so projekti, ki jih je sofinancirala EU – glede na to, ali jih obravnavamo posamično in/ali v kontekstu koridorjev jedrnega omrežja – dosegli pričakovane cilje, ki temeljijo na rezultatih, in vplivali na gospodarski razvoj.
37 Conclusions and recommendations 81 INEA has fulfilled the delegated tasks as defined in its mandate and delivered expected benefits, with some limitations, related to framework constraints. 
Zaključki in priporočila 81 Agencija INEA v skladu s svojimi pooblastili opravlja naloge, ki so bile nanjo prenesene, in dosega pričakovane koristi, pri čemer pa obstajajo nekatere omejitve, ki so povezane z omejitvami okvira.
We found shortcomings in the otherwise well organised CEF selection procedures, risks in the implementation of the programme and weaknesses in performance reporting. 
Sodišče je ugotovilo pomanjkljivosti v sicer dobro organiziranih izbirnih postopkih IPE, tveganja pri izvajanju programa ter slabosti pri poročanju o smotrnosti.
82 The expected benefits of externalising responsibilities from the Commission to INEA have been achieved, but with some limitations related to framework constraints. 
82 Pričakovane koristi prenosa izvajanja pristojnosti s Komisije na agencijo INEA so bile dosežene, vendar z nekaterimi omejitvami, povezanimi z omejitvami okvira.
INEA has developed standardised procedures that have simplified the implementation of the delegated programmes. 
Agencija INEA je razvila standardizirane postopke, s katerimi je poenostavila izvajanje programov, ki so bili preneseni nanjo.
Its overall administrative expenditure is below the initial estimates (paragraphs 20 to 24). 
Njeni skupni upravni odhodki so nižji od prvotnih ocen (odstavki 20 do 24).
83 INEA has taken a number of measures to prepare the ground for synergies between H2020 and the CEF, and between the CEF sectors. 
83 Agencija INEA je sprejela številne ukrepe za vzpostavitev sinergij med programom Obzorje 2020 in IPE ter med sektorji IPE.
Despite this, few synergies have been deployed so far, owing to obstacles in the legal framework, unaligned programme objectives and different project readiness levels. 
Kljub temu je bilo doslej zaradi ovir v pravnem okviru, neusklajenih programskih ciljev in različnih stopenj izdelanosti projektov vzpostavljenih le malo sinergij.
INEA and EASME share responsibility for implementing the H2020 energy research programme, and since each agency separately administers its part of the programme, there are administrative costs on both sides (paragraphs 25 to 30). 
Agenciji INEA in EASME sta skupaj odgovorni za izvajanje raziskovalnega programa za energetiko v okviru programa Obzorje 2020. Ker pa svoj del programa upravljata ločeno, to povzroča upravne stroške pri obeh (odstavki 25 do 30).
Recommendation 1 – Improve the potential for synergies (a) The Commission and INEA should, within their remit, remove obstacles to synergies, include the necessary elements in strategic documents and work programmes, and introduce relevant provisions to evaluate the achieved synergies. (b) The Commission should assess whether to delegate the implementation of similar programmes, such as in the energy research field, to only one executive agency in the next programming period. 
Priporočilo 1 – Izboljšati potencial za sinergije (a) Komisija in agencija INEA naj v okviru svojih pristojnosti odpravita ovire za sinergije, v strateške dokumente in delovne programe vključita potrebne elemente ter uvedeta ustrezne določbe za vrednotenje doseženih sinergij. (b) Komisija naj oceni, ali naj izvajanje podobnih programov (na primer v zvezi z raziskavami na področju energetike) v naslednjem programskem obdobju prenese samo na eno izvajalsko agencijo.
Timeframe: start of implementation of the 2021-2027 CEF. 
Časovni okvir: začetek izvajanja IPE za obdobje 2021–2027.
84 INEA has fulfilled the tasks delegated to it and delivered on its key performance indicators. 
84 Agencija INEA izpolnjuje naloge, ki so bile nanjo prenesene, in dosega svoje ključne kazalnike smotrnosti.
However, the existing framework creates constraints. 
Vendar obstoječi okvir ustvarja omejitve.
Since staff numbers are linked to the delegated programmes, INEA does not have sufficient flexibility to reassign staff to the most pressing tasks. Also, INEA’s KPIs are not specifically results-38 
Ker je število uslužbencev vezano na prenesene programe, agencija INEA ni dovolj fleksibilna, da bi uslužbence prerazporejala k najnujnejšim nalogam. Ključni kazalniki smotrnosti 40
39 oriented: they are not specifically targeted to measuring the quality of programme management (paragraphs 31 to 40). 
agencije INEA prav tako niso posebej usmerjeni v rezultate, saj se posebej ne osredotočajo na merjenje kakovosti upravljanja programov (odstavki 31 do 40).
Recommendation 2 – Strengthen the framework for INEA’s management of the delegated programmes (a) To address short-term fluctuations in human resources needs, the Commission should define a framework, which would allow INEA to re-allocate staff more flexibly between and across programmes. (b) The Commission and INEA should make use of more results-oriented goals and indicators. 
Priporočilo 2 – Okrepiti okvir, v skladu s katerim agencija INEA upravlja prenesene programe (a) Komisija naj določi okvir za obravnavo kratkoročnih nihanj pri potrebah po človeških virih, na podlagi katerega bi agencija INEA lahko bolj fleksibilno prerazporejala uslužbence med programi in znotraj njih. (b) Komisija in agencija INEA naj uporabljata cilje in kazalnike, ki so bolj usmerjeni v rezultate.
Timeframe: from 2021. 
Časovni okvir: od leta 2021 naprej.
85 Procedures for the selection of CEF projects are well-organised, but we found implementation weaknesses. 
85 Postopki za izbiro projektov IPE so dobro organizirani, vendar je Sodišče ugotovilo slabosti pri njihovem izvajanju.
They need to be better harmonised across the three CEF sectors. 
Treba jih je bolje uskladiti v vseh treh sektorjih IPE.
In CEF-T, the probability of being selected is independent of the scores given by the external experts’ for recommended projects. 
V sektorju IPE – promet verjetnost izbire ni odvisna od števila točk, ki jih priporočenim projektom podelijo zunanji strokovnjaki.
The reasons for departing from the assessment need to be better documented. Also, differences in the application of award criteria (paragraphs 42 to 56). 
Razloge za odstopanje od ocene je treba bolje dokumentirati kot tudi razlike pri uporabi meril za dodelitev sredstev (odstavki 42 do 56).
Recommendation 3 – Ensure greater harmonisation and transparency of project selection procedures With a view to enhancing project selection procedures, the Commission and INEA should: (a) undertake a structured analysis of the procedures in the three CEF sectors to identify best practices, and potentially harmonise them; (b) define – both for the external and the internal evaluation – in more detail the award criteria; in particular, the maturity criterion should be precisely defined and its assessment should be reinforced. 
Priporočilo 3 – Zagotoviti bolj usklajene in transparentne postopke za izbiro projektov Za izboljšanje postopkov za izbiro projektov naj Komisija in agencija INEA: (a) izvedeta strukturirano analizo postopkov v treh sektorjih IPE, da bi opredelili in morebiti uskladili najboljše prakse; (b) tako za zunanje kot notranje ocenjevanje podrobneje opredelita merila za dodelitev sredstev; zlasti je treba natančno opredeliti merilo izdelanosti, njegovo oceno pa okrepiti.
Other award criteria should be more explicitly formulated and make it possible to demonstrate that selected projects will have a significant impact and EU added value; (c) better document the link between the opinion of external experts and the final assessment by the Commission, with particular reference to the justification of divergences. 
Druga merila za dodelitev sredstev bi morala biti bolj izrecno navedena in omogočati, da se na podlagi njih dokaže, da bodo izbrani projekti imeli pomemben učinek in dodano vrednost EU; (c) bolje dokumentirata povezavo med mnenjem zunanjih strokovnjakov in končno oceno Komisije, s posebnim poudarkom na utemeljitvi odstopanj.
Timeframe: by the end of 2020. 
Časovni okvir: do konca leta 2020.
86 The CEF programme risks not being fully implemented. 
86 Obstaja tveganje, da program IPE ne bo izveden v celoti.
This would mean further pushing into the future the programme’s effects. 
S tem bi bili učinki programa pomaknjeni še dlje v prihodnost.
Experience of the past has shown that measures to enhance absorption towards the end of a programming period risk having less consideration for results. 
Izkušnje iz preteklosti so pokazale, da pri ukrepih za povečanje črpanja sredstev proti koncu programskega obdobja obstaja tveganje nezadostnega upoštevanja rezultatov.
And, a high amount of funds still to be managed after the start of a successor programme can create a knock-on effect of delays. 
Poleg tega se lahko pojavi posredni učinek zamud, če je velik del sredstev treba upravljati še po začetku naslednjega programa.
87 The particularly low rate of payments in CEF-E and CEF-T is linked to the delayed implementation and under-execution of projects. 
87 Posebej nizka stopnja plačil pri IPE – energetika in IPE – promet je povezana z zamudo pri izvajanju projektov in njihovim nezadostnim izvajanjem.
The underlying issue is non-performing projects, which are not able to fully use the funds granted to them. 
Osnovna težava so neuspešni projekti, pri katerih ni mogoče v celoti porabiti sredstev, ki so jim bila dodeljena.
The Commission does not currently plan its calls for proposals on a multiannual basis, resulting in the submission of proposals with different maturity. 
Komisija svojih razpisov za zbiranje predlogov trenutno ne načrtuje na večletni ravni, zaradi česar imajo predloženi predlogi različne stopnje izdelanosti.
88 INEA’s corrective steps for projects that are not on track do not fully address these risks. 
88 Agencija INEA s popravljalnimi ukrepi za projekte, ki imajo zamude, teh tveganj ne obravnava v celoti.
Model grant agreements do not directly link funding to the achievement of milestones. 
V vzorčnih sporazumih o dodelitvi nepovratnih sredstev financiranje ni neposredno odvisno od doseganja mejnikov.
Tools for the in-depth monitoring of projects require enhancement (paragraphs 58 to 73). 
Orodja za poglobljeno spremljanje projektov je treba okrepiti (odstavki 58 do 73).
Recommendation 4 – Set better conditions for timely implementation of the CEF To streamline the multiannual planning of fund allocation and enhance the use of funds: (a) The Commission and INEA should ensure the long-term and coherent planning of commitments and calls; Timeframe: start of implementation of the 2021-2027 CEF. (b) The Commission and INEA should enhance the link between funding and the achievement of project milestones; Timeframe: start of implementation of the 2021-2027 CEF. (c) The Commission should enhance tools for the in-depth monitoring of projects regarding the use of funding. For all CEF sectors, INEA should focus further on the 40 
Priporočilo 4 – Določiti boljše pogoje za pravočasno izvajanje IPE Za racionalizacijo večletnega načrtovanja dodelitev sredstev in večjo porabo sredstev, naj: (a) Komisija in agencija INEA zagotovita dolgoročno in usklajeno načrtovanje v zvezi z odobritvami sredstev in razpisi; Časovni okvir: začetek izvajanja IPE za obdobje 2021–2027. (b) Komisija in agencija INEA okrepita povezavo med financiranjem in doseganjem mejnikov projekta; Časovni okvir: začetek izvajanja IPE za obdobje 2021–2027. (c) Komisija okrepi orodja za poglobljeno spremljanje projektov v zvezi s porabo sredstev.
timely implementation of projects in close cooperation with the parent DGs, Member States and beneficiaries. 
Agencija INEA naj se pri vseh treh sektorjih IPE v tesnem sodelovanju s pristojnimi generalnimi direktorati, državami članicami in upravičenci še naprej osredotoča na pravočasno izvajanje projektov.
The Commission should support INEA in taking corrective steps when projects are not on track. 
Komisija naj agencijo INEA podpira pri sprejetju popravljalnih ukrepov, če so pri projektih zamude.
89 The current performance framework does not sufficiently measure how projects contribute to the achievement of the CEF programme objectives. 
89 S trenutnim okvirom smotrnosti se nezadostno meri, kako projekti prispevajo k doseganju ciljev programa IPE.
INEA monitors indicators which focus mainly on project outputs but do not allow an assessment of the programme efficiency. 
Agencija INEA spremlja kazalnike, ki se osredotočajo predvsem na izložke projektov, ne omogočajo pa ocene učinkovitosti programa.
INEA prepared revised indicators in 2018, but the process has yet to be taken further (paragraphs 75 to 80). 
Agencija INEA je leta 2018 pripravila spremenjene kazalnike, vendar je treba proces še nadaljevati (odstavki 75 do 80).
Recommendation 5 – Redesign the performance framework to better monitor project results (a) Based on experience and lessons learned from TEN-T and CEF projects, INEA and the Commission should define a performance framework that breaks down the objectives of the CEF programme into clear and measurable indicators, covering all CEF sectors, and expected project results. (b) INEA should specify these indicators in call objectives, consider them in the evaluation of project proposals, monitor them through grant agreements and report on them on a regular basis to the Commission. 
Priporočilo 5 – Preoblikovati okvir smotrnosti za boljše spremljanje rezultatov projektov. (a) Na podlagi izkušenj in spoznanj, pridobljenih pri projektih TEN-T in IPE, naj agencija INEA in Komisija opredelita okvir smotrnosti, v katerem bodo cilji programa IPE razčlenjeni na jasne in merljive kazalnike ter ki bo zajemal vse sektorje IPE in pričakovane rezultate projektov. (b) Agencija INEA naj te kazalnike opredeli v ciljih razpisov, jih upošteva pri ocenjevanju predlogov projektov, jih spremlja na podlagi sporazumov o dodelitvi nepovratnih sredstvev in o njih redno poroča Komisiji.
This Report was adopted by Chamber II, headed by Mrs Iliana Ivanova, Member of the Court of Auditors, in Luxembourg at its meeting of 25 September 2019. 
To poročilo je sprejel senat II, ki ga vodi članica Evropskega Računskega sodišča Iliana Ivanova, v Luxembourgu na zasedanju 25. septembra 2019.
For the Court of Auditors Klaus-Heiner Lehne President 41 
Za Evropsko računsko sodišče Klaus-Heiner Lehne Predsednik 43