natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The text tended to focus more on outputs (what the DG did, describing actions taken, their purpose, the products delivered), and on inputs (gross amounts of resources involved), rather than on the assessment of the outcomes of the actions (results on direct addressees and/or impact of the programmes). _____________ (1) Communication ‘Cohesion policy: Strategic Report 2010 on the imple­ mentation of the programmes 2007-2013’ (COM(2010) 110 final, 31.3.2010), p. 
Besedila so bila osredotočena bolj na izložke (kaj je generalni direktorat naredil, opisi izvedenih ukrepov, njihov namen, zagotovljeni proizvodi) in na vložke (bruto zneski vloženih virov) kot na oceno izidov dejavnosti (rezultati pri neposrednih naslovnikih in/ali učinek programov). _____________ (1) Sporočilo „Kohezijska politika: Strateško poročilo o izvajanju programov 2007–2013 za leto 2010“ (COM(2010) 110 konč., 31.3.2010), str.
13; Communication ‘Regional Policy contributing to smart growth in Europe 2020’ (COM(2010) 553 final, 6.10.2010), p. 7. 
13; sporočilo „Prispevek regionalne politike k pametni rasti v okviru strategije Evropa 2020“ (COM(2010) 553 konč., 6.10.2010), str. 7).
In comparison, some more significant information on results and impacts was provided by DG REGIO (qualitative assessment of the implementation of the operational programmes), and, to a lesser extent, by DG RTD (presentation of key results of the FP7 interim evaluation). 
V primerjavi z njim je GD REGIO zagotovil nekaj več pomembnih informacij o rezultatih in učinkih (kvalitativna ocena izvajanja operativnih programov), v manjšem obsegu pa je to storil tudi GD RTD (predstavitev ključnih rezultatov vmesnega vrednotenja 7.
The format of the AAR, because of its nature as a management report, is not suited to include extensive reporting on the results of evaluation activities. 
Ker ima oblika letnega poročila o dejavnostih značilnosti poslovnega poročila, ni primerna za vključitev širšega poročanja o rezultatih dejavnosti vrednotenja.
Nevertheless, if one of those evaluations would provide indications that policy and/or management aspects should be reconsidered, then action would be taken. Only in such cases, this would then also be signalled via the AAR (cf. exception-based reporting). 
Če bi katero od teh vrednotenj vendarle poka­ zalo, da bi bilo treba politične vidike in/ali vidike upravljanja ponovno proučiti, bi se v zvezi s tem ukrepalo. Samo v takih primerih bi se to nato tudi navedlo v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih (primerjaj s poročanjem na podlagi izjem).
In the description of the Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (DG AGRI) policy achievements the focus was set in reporting on the achievement of the priorities while adding some quantifiable data and also some relevant qualitative examples to illustrate such achievements per ABB activity. 
V opisu dosežkov politike Generalnega direktorata za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja (GD AGRI) je bila pozornost usmerjena na poro­ čanje o dosežku prednostnih nalog, pri čemer je bilo dodanih nekaj količinskih podatkov in tudi nekaj zadevnih kvalitativnih primerov za ponazoritev takih dosežkov na dejavnost proračuna na podlagi dejav­ nosti.
However, the information was presented taking into account the target audience — the general public — and therefore some concessions were made for easier readability, with the bulk of the performance information on results given in Annex 6 to the AAR. 8.24. 
Vendar so bili podatki predstavljeni ob upoštevanju ciljnega občinstva, tj. širše javnosti, zato so bili prilagojeni za lažje branje, v Prilogi 6 letnega poročila o dejavnostih pa je bila večina informacij o rezultatih delovne uspešnosti.
DG AGRI considers that there is a good overall stability over the years as regards indicators and targets. 
8.24 GD AGRI meni, da je uporaba kazalnikov in ožjih ciljev v zadnjih letih na splošno precej stabilna.
As underlined by the Court, the change in indicators and targets is an exception resulting from various reasons such as the choice of a more specific and measurable indicator and/or updated information. 
Kot je poudarilo Sodišče, je sprememba kazalnikov in ožjih ciljev izjema, ki je posledica različnih razlogov, kot sta izbira bolj specifičnega in merljivega kazalnika ter/ ali posodobljene informacije.
In the future, it will be paid particular attention to make the rationale for changes in indicators/revision of targets more explicit. 
V prihodnosti bo posebna pozornost namenjena jasnejšemu utemeljevanju sprememb kazalnikov/revizije ožjih ciljev.
All instances of changes between objectives, indicators, and targets in the Management Plan and in the Annual Activity Report of DG RTD are justified. 
Vsi primeri sprememb med cilji, kazalniki in ožjimi cilji v načrtu upravljanja in letnem poročilu o dejavnostih GD RTD so utemeljeni.
This justification could indeed be made more explicit in future AARs. 
Vsekakor bi lahko bila ta utemeljitev v prihodnjih letnih poročilih o dejavnostih jasnejša.
Comparability of performance information For DG AGRI and DG RTD, the objectives, indicators and targets set in the Management Plan were generally the ones used for reporting 8.24. Regarding DG AGRI and DG RTD, the objectives, indicators and targets announced in the Annual Management Plan were generally the ones used to report on performance in the Annual Activity Report. 
Primerljivost informacij o smotrnosti poslovanja V GD AGRI in GD RTD so bili cilji, kazalniki in ožji cilji, opre­ deljeni v načrtu upravljanja, na splošno uporabljeni tudi pri poro­ čanju 8.24 V GD AGRI in GD RTD so bili cilji, kazalniki in ožji cilji, napovedani v letnem načrtu upravljanja, na splošno uporabljeni tudi pri poročanju o smotrnosti poslovanja v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih.
There was however a small number of instances (14) in which there was no explanation for the modification of indicators or targets, resulting from various reasons, like the choice of a more specific and measurable indicator, new policy priorities, or updated information. _____________ (13) Except in the area of the legality of expenditure, where the achievement of an error rate oscillating around 2% was mentioned as an outcome of the systems set in place. 
V nekaj primerih(14) pa ni bilo pojasnil o spremembah kazalnikov ali ožjih ciljev, do katerih je prišlo iz različnih razlogov, kot so izbira bolj speci­ fičnega in merljivega kazalnika, nove prednostne naloge poli­ tike ali posodobljene informacije. _____________ (13) Razen na področju zakonitosti odhodkov, kjer je bila kot izid vzpostavljenih sistemov omenjena dosežena stopnja napake, ki se je gibala okoli 2 %.
(14) Out of the 11 impact indicators in DG AGRI’s Management Plan, two were replaced by another and one target was modified in the Annual Activity Report. 
(14) Dva od 11 kazalnikov učinka iz načrta upravljanja GD AGRI sta bila v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih zamenjana z drugim kazal­ nikom, en ožji cilj pa je bil spremenjen.
DG RTD modified two results indicators and dropped another. 
GD RTD je spremenil dva kazalnika rezultatov, enega pa je opustil.
None of these changes were explained in the respective Annual Activity Reports. 
Nobena od teh sprememb ni bila pojasnjena v letnih poročilih o dejavnostih.
EN 214 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 10.11.2011 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S For DG REGIO, explanations were often not provided in the Annual Activity Report on the adjustments made to indicators and targets 8.25. 
214 UradnilistEvropskeunije 10.11.2011 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A V letnem poročilu o dejavnostih za GD REGIO pogosto ni bilo pojasnil o spremembah kazalnikov in ožjih ciljev 8.25 Cilji, napovedani v načrtu upravljanja za leto 2010, so bili uporabljeni tudi za poročanje o smotrnosti poslovanja v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih.
However, when DG REGIO wanted to reflect policy evolution and adjusted the indicators and targets, the corresponding explanations were not presented in the following 14 out of 16 adjustments examined: T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S 8.25. In general, there is a good stability over years as regards indicators and targets for DG REGIO. 
Toda ko je GD REGIO želel prikazati razvoj politike in je prilagodil kazalnike in ožje cilje, o tem ni bilo ustreznih pojasnil za naslednjih 14 od 16 preučenih prilagoditev: O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E 8.25 Na splošno so kazalniki in ožji cilji za GD REGIO v zadnjih letih precej stabilni.
In the 2010 Annual Activity Report, efforts have been made to present evolution of the known results to progressively attain the multiannual targets. 
V letnem poročilu o dejavnostih za leto 2010 se prizadeva za predstavitev razvoja znanih rezultatov, da bi se postopno dosegli večletni ožji cilji.
Revisions of indicators and targets reflect the ongoing progress towards reporting on and using up-to-date information available in official documents — and are identified by corresponding footnotes, with as much information as deemed appropriate. 
Revizije kazalnikov in ožjih ciljev izražajo neprekinjen napredek pri poročanju o najnovejših informacijah, dostopnih v uradnih doku­ mentih, in o njihovi uporabi ter so opredeljene v ustreznih opombah s primerno količino informacij.
This process was explained in the 2009 AAR (page 21) stating that the core-indicators would be progressively used to follow-up the achievements of Cohesion Policy. 
Ta postopek je bil pojasnjen v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih iz leta 2009 (stran 21), v katerem je nave­ deno, da se bodo osnovni kazalniki postopno uporabljali za sprem­ ljanje dosežkov kohezijske politike.
As a result of the crisis, some programmes adapted their strategies and funding allocations across priorities which had consequences for the related targets, as explained in page 7 of the Annual Activity Report. 
Zaradi krize so nekateri programi prilagodili svoje strategije in dode­ ljevanje proračunskih sredstev po prednostnih nalogah, kar je vplivalo na z njimi povezane ožje cilje, kot je pojasnjeno na strani 7 letnega poročila o dejavnostih.
DG REGIO will seek to ensure that such modifications are captured in the AAR. — Several environmental result indicators have been added for the ERDF activity (reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, flood protection, etc.). 
GD REGIO si bo prizadeval za zagotovitev, da bodo takšne spremembe zajete v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih. — Za dejavnost ESRR (zmanjšanje emisij toplogrednih plinov, zaščita pred poplavami itd.) je bilo dodanih več kazalnikov rezul­ tatov v zvezi z okoljem.
It is a positive revision in line with paragraph 8.18. — At the level of the seven impact indicators, one target had changed between the Management Plan and the Annual Activity Report without providing explanations for the difference. — Regarding the ERDF results indicators, for instance, six (15) were added and one (16) was dropped without explaining the reasons for these adjustments. _____________ (15) Reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, additional capacity of renewable energy production, number of people benefiting from flood protection measures, number of people benefiting from forest fire protection, additional population covered by broadband access, number of projects respecting two of cross-border criteria. 
Revizija je pozitivna skladno z odstavkom 8.18. — Na ravni sedmih kazalnikov učinka se je en ožji cilj v načrtu upravljanja razlikoval od cilja, navedenega v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih, ne da bi bile razlike pojasnjene. — Pri kazalnikih rezultatov za ESRR, na primer, je bilo dodanih šest (15) kazalnikov, eden (16) pa je bil opuščen brez pojasnila o razlogih za te spremembe. _____________ (15) Zmanjšanje emisij toplogrednih plinov, dodatne zmogljivosti za proizvodnjo obnovljive energije, število ljudi, ki jih varujejo ukrepi za zaščito pred poplavami, število ljudi, ki jih varuje zaščita pred gozdnimi požari, dodatno prebivalstvo, ki ima širokopasovni dostop, število projektov, ki upoštevajo dve od čezmejnih meril.
(16) Number of schools reconstructed. 
(16) Število obnovljenih šol.
For the five other changed targets for ERDF indicators (17), different Member States were covered than at the planning stage. 
Pri petih drugih spremenjenih ciljih za kazalnike (17) za ESRR so bile zajete druge države kot v fazi načrtovanja.
For instance, the target for ‘additional population served by new/renovated wastewater projects’ was set at 31,5 million for 16 Member States in the Management Plan, and became 12,5million for 13 Member States in the Annual Activity Report. 
Ožji cilj za dodatno prebivalstvo, ki ga oskrbujejo nove/ obnovljene naprave za odpadno vodo, je bil na primer v načrtu upravljanja določen v višini 31,5 milijona za 16 držav članic, v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih pa se je spremenil v 12,5 milijona za 13 držav članic.
The differences were not explained in the report. 
Razlike v poročilu niso bile pojasnjene.
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S — The Management Plan figures refer to figures at the time of negotiations, while in the Annual Activity Report, DG REGIO was able to report on targets and actual achievements as reported in the 2009 Annual Implementation Reports. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E — Številčni podatki iz načrta upravljanja se nanašajo na številčne podatke iz časa pogajanj, medtem ko je lahko GD REGIO v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih poročal o ožjih ciljih in dejanskih dosežkih tako, kot se je poročalo v letnih poročilih o dejavnostih iz leta 2009.
The new target of 170 000 SMEs represents an improvement of the reporting process as it was initially not possible to set a target when the Management Plan had been drafted. 
Nov ožji cilj glede 170 000 MSP pomeni izboljšanje postopka poročanja, saj prvotno pri oblikovanju načrta upravljanja ni bilo mogoče določiti ožjega cilja.
In the absence of complete indicators at EU level, it is acceptable to present indicators for some Member States only according to Commission instructions and this situation has been accepted by the budgetary authority in the past. 
Če na ravni EU ni popolnih kazalnikov, je sprejemljivo, da se predstavijo kazalniki za nekatere države članice samo po navo­ dilih Komisije, kar je proračunski organ v preteklosti že sprejel.
In the Management Plan, the targets and the latest known results were sometimes presented for two different series of Member States. 
V načrtu upravljanja so bili ožji cilji in najnovejši znani rezultati včasih predstavljeni za dve različni skupini držav članic.
In order to improve the comparability of the latest known results and the targets DG REGIO has adjusted the figures using the same group of Member States. 
Da bi se izboljšala primerljivost najnovejših znanih rezultatov in ožjih ciljev, je GD REGIO številčne podatke prilagodil tako, da je uporabil isto skupino držav članic.
8.26.-8.27. Footnote 19: The indicator mentioned by the Court indeed refers to the ‘Number of research infrastructures of world class relevance launched jointly at EU level’ and will be amended accordingly. 
8.26–8.27 Opomba 19: Kazalnik, ki ga je navedlo Sodišče, se resnično nanaša na „število raziskovalnih infrastruktur svetovnega pomena, ki so bile skupaj ustanovljene na ravni EU“ in bo skladno s tem spremenjen.
Reliability of performance information 17 out of 31 indicators traced back to a reliable source of information 8.26. The Court examined a sample of 31 indicators selected over the three DGs(18). 
Zanesljivost informacij o smotrnosti poslovanja Pri 17 od 31 kazalnikov je sled vodila do zanesljivega vira infor­ macij 8.26 Sodišče je preučilo vzorec z 31 kazalniki, izbranimi v navedenih treh generalnih direktoratih (18).
For 17 of these, the information on achieved results could be traced back to a reliable source. 
Pri 17 od njih je bilo informacijam o doseženih rezultatih mogoče slediti do zanesljivega vira.
Generally it concerned data coming from external and recognised providers for statistics or internally managed databases, including accounting information. _____________ (17) The setting up of enterprises, the accessibility gain (kilometres of reconstructed rail and roads), the additional population served by new/renovated wastewater projects, the Research jobs created and the number of benefiting students form improved education infra­ structure. 
Na splošno so se nanašale na podatke iz zunanjih in priznanih virov za statistične ali notranje vodene podatkovne zbirke, vključno z računovodskimi informacijami. _____________ (17) Ustanavljanje podjetij, večja dostopnost (km obnovljenih železni­ ških prog in cest), dodatno prebivalstvo, ki ga oskrbujejo nove/ obnovljene naprave za odpadno vodo, delovna mesta, ustvarjena na področju raziskav, in število študentov, ki uporabljajo obno­ vljeno izobraževalno infrastrukturo.
(18) The indicators were selected so as to as ensure a high coverage of the main objectives of each DG. 
(18) Kazalniki so bili izbrani tako, da je bila zagotovljena visoka vklju­ čenost glavnih ciljev posameznih generalnih direktoratov.
EN 216 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 10.11.2011 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S Weaknesses in the control system impairing reliability in the areas of regional policy and rural development 8.27. Outofthe14otherindicators,eightresultsindicators for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and four impact indicators for rural development (19) were consolidated by the respective DGs on the basis of information which the Member States provided on the implementation of the programmes. 
SL 216 UradnilistEvropskeunije 10.11.2011 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A Slabosti v kontrolnem sistemu škodijo zanesljivosti na področju regionalne politike in razvoja podeželja 8.27 Od preostalih 14 kazalnikov so osem kazalnikov rezultatov za Evropski sklad za regionalni razvoj (ESRR) in štiri kazalnike učinka za razvoj podeželja (19) pristojni gene­ ralni direktorati konsolidirali na podlagi informacij o izvajanju programov, ki so jih zagotovile države članice.
The Commission's ability to ensure that information supplied was reliable and comparable was hampered by legal limitations (see paragraph 8.28) and practical constraints (see paragraph 8.29). 
Sposobnost Komisije, da bi zagotovila zanesljivost in primerljivost dobljenih informacij, so ovirale zakonske (glej odstavek 8.28) in praktične omejitve (glej odstavek 8.29).
8.28. In the area of the ERDF, there was no legal requirement to implement a common set of performance indicators, so that managing authorities were not obliged to use the set of ‘Core indicators for ERDF and Cohesion Fund’ defined in the ‘Indicative guidelines on evaluation methods: monitoring and evaluation indicators’ by the Commission in August 2006. 
8.28 Na področju ESRR ni bilo zakonske zahteve za izva­ janje skupnega niza kazalnikov uspešnosti, zato organom upra­ vljanja ni bilo treba uporabljati niza osnovnih kazalnikov za ESRR in Kohezijski sklad, ki jih je Komisija avgusta 2006 določila v Okvirnih smernicah za načine vrednotenja: kazalniki spremljanja in vrednotenja.
Consequently, there was a high risk that the data collected on the Core indicators and used in Annex 7 to the Annual Activity Report might not be exhaustive or comparable (20). 
Posledično je obstajalo visoko tveganje, da podatki, zbrani za osnovne kazalnike in upora­ bljeni v Prilogi 7 letnega poročila o dejavnostih, morda ne bodo izčrpni ali primerljivi (20).
8.29. For both ERDF and rural development data, the Commission did not verify the reliability of the data provided by the bodies in charge in the Member States, beyond plausibility checks(21). 
8.29 KomisijapripodatkihzaESRRinrazvojpodeželja razen preverjanja verjetnosti (21) ni opravila drugih preverjanj zanesljivosti podatkov, ki so jih zagotovili pristojni organi v državah članicah.
The information received through the information technology systems used for reporting to the Commission by the Member States was aggregated at programme or measure level. 
Informacije, prejete iz elektronskih informa­ cijskih sistemov, ki jih uporabljajo države članice za poročanje Komisiji, so bile združene na ravni programa ali ukrepa.
The Commission had no direct access to data at the level of the projects so that it could not perform more systematic in-depth checks. 
Komi­ sija ni imela neposrednega dostopa do podatkov na ravni projektov, tako da ni mogla izvajati bolj sistematičnih poglo­ bljenih pregledov.
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S See reply to paragraph 8.29. _____________ (19) The other two indicators were an indicator on the convergence towards Lisbon objectives in the regions based on Eurostat data that was significantly revised over the year, and an indicator on the number of research infrastructure built and operated jointly at EU level, that included data on infrastructure not yet built. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E Glej odgovor na odstavek 8.29. _____________ (19) Druga dva kazalnika sta bila kazalnik konvergentnosti pri dose­ ganju lizbonskih ciljev po regijah na podlagi podatkov Eurostata, ki so bili med letom močno spremenjeni, in kazalnik za število infra­ strukturnih objektov za raziskave, zgrajenih in upravljanih skupno na ravni EU. Ta kazalnik je vključeval podatke o infrastrukturi, ki še ni bila zgrajena.
(20) This issue did not concern the indicators for rural development for which a common set of indicators had been defined in Article 62 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1974/2006 (OJ L 368, 23.12.2006, p. 
(20) Vprašanje se ni nanašalo na kazalnike za razvoj podeželja, za katere je bil opredeljen skupni niz kazalnikov v členu 62 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št.
(21) Verifying unit scales, identifying typing errors, and comparing data reported at programme or measure level with other information provided in the reporting. 8.27. 
(21) Preverjanje stroškov na enoto, iskanje tipkarskih napak in primer­ janje podatkov, o katerih se je poročalo na ravni programa ali ukrepa, z drugimi podatki, zagotovljenimi med poročanjem.
8.29. DG REGIO is checking the figures received from Member States (MS) and using its strong partnership with them and Regions to encourage and convince them to report more reliable figures. 
8.27 8.28 8.29 GD REGIO preverja številčne podatke, ki jih je prejel od držav članic, ter svoje trdno partnerstvo z njimi in regijami uporablja za to, da jih spodbuja in prepričuje, naj predložijo zanesljivejše številčne podatke.
Nonetheless the legal requirements place the main responsibilities on Managing authorities in terms of project selection, objective setting and detailed monitoring. 
Vendar pravne zahteve v zvezi z izbiranjem projektov, določanjem ciljev in podrobnim spremljanjem nalagajo glavne odgovornosti organom upravljanja.
In terms of tracking the thematic use of EU financing the results of the 2009 annual programme reporting exercise has been discussed in different forums involving national authorities (COCOF, technical, annual meetings or moni­ toring committees) resulting in corrections in the data. 
V zvezi s spremljanjem tematske rabe finančnih sredstev EU se je na različnih forumih, ki so vključevali nacionalne organe (COCOF, tehnične, letne seje ali nadzorni odbori), razpravljalo o rezultatih poročanja o letnem programu iz leta 2009, na podlagi česar so bili podatki popravljeni.
For rural development, the Commission established a Common Moni­ toring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) for the 2007-2013 programming period. 
V zvezi z razvojem podeželja je Komisija za programsko obdobje 2007–2013 oblikovala skupni okvir spremljanja in vrednotenja.
It provides for the first time a single framework for monitoring and evaluation of all rural development interventions on the basis of common indicators. 
Ta prvič zagotavlja enoten okvir za spremljanje in vrednotenje vseh intervencij za razvoj podeželja na podlagi skupnih kazalnikov.
The constraints identified by the Court relate to matters that should be put in perspective. 
Omejitve, ki jih je navedlo Sodišče, se nanašajo na zadeve, ki bi jih bilo treba obravnavati v kontekstu.
DG REGIO has continuously developed and improved arrangements for reporting on performance. 
GD REGIO stalno razvija in izboljšuje načine poročanja o delovni uspešnosti.