natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Outputs: (i) the annual summer ozone report; (ii) lauch of near-reale time ozone data pilot website; (iii) the report on air quality and ancillary benefits of climate change policies was released; (iv) the European pollutant emission register website was updated; (v) contributed to the review of the IPPC directive.Results: (i) impact of the air quality report on the draftng of the proposed ‘clean air for Europe’ directive; (ii) reported data were used to establish the environmental progress being made under the EC-long-range transboundary air pollution convention; (iii) the website is increasingly popular with users, an analysis of usage statistics shows that it received 340 000 visits in 2006, 64% more than in the launch year 2004.Impact: Being the main source of independent quantitative and environmental indicators data on changes in the state of the environment in the EU; thus leading to more awareness of environmental issues among the general public and to better informed environmental decision-making.
Izložki: (i) letno poročilo o poletnem ozonu; (ii) vzpostavitev poskusne spletne strani s podatki o ozonu blizu dejanskega časa; (iii) objava poročila o kakovosti zraka in stranskih koristih politik o podnebnih spremembah; (iv) posodobitev spletne strani Evropskega registra emisij onesnaževal; (v) prispevek agencije k spremembam Direktive IPPC.Rezultati: (i) učinek poročila o kakovosti zraka na pripravo predlagane direktive o čistem zraku za Evropo; (ii) uporaba sporočenih podatkov pri opredelitvi okoljskega napredka, doseženega v okviru Konvencije ES o onesnaževanju zraka na velike razdalje prek meja; (iii) spletna stran je čedalje bolj priljubljena pri uporabnikih, analiza statističnih podatkov o uporabi kaže, da je stran v letu 2006 zabeležila 340 000 obiskov, kar je za 64 % več kot v letu 2004, ko je začela delovati.Učinek: Agencija predstavlja glavni vir neodvisnih podatkov iz kvantitativnih in okoljskih kazalnikov sprememb o stanju okolja v EU, prispeva k ozaveščanju širše javnosti o okoljskih zadevah in omogoča okoljsko odločanje na podlagi boljšega poznavanja dejstev.
32 The reporting obligation also relates
32 Obveznost poročanja se nanaša tudi
Alltheagencies,as required,submittedactivityreportsinsupportoftheiryear-endaccounts andpresentedthemtotheir managementboards.Someofthesereports31were even made availabletothe general public32.
Vse agencije so predložile poročila o dejavnostih v podporo svojim računovodskim izkazom ob koncu proračunskega leta in jih predstavile svojim upravnim svetom, kot je bilo predvideno.
to knowledge sharing.
na širjenje znanja.
For this purpose, each agency uses the possibilities afforded by the Internet.
V ta namen vsaka agencija uporablja možnosti, ki jih nudi internet.
However, the difficulties encountered by the agencies in making their websites multilingual, so as to facilitate consultation by citizens of all Member States, are hindering access to the data they contain.
Vendar težave, ki nastanejo zaradi zagotavljanja večjezičnosti na spletnih straneh agencij, da se omogoči iskanje informacij državljanom vseh držav članic, ovirajo dostop do vseh informacij, ki jih vsebujejo.
The reports dealt for the most part with the activities carried out during the year.Explanations weregiven mainlyaboutthenatureandscaleofthese activities and sometimes about the amount of resources that have been used.
V poročilih so bile večinoma upoštevane dejavnosti, ki so se izvajale med letom.
The extent to which objectives had been met and the impact of the agency’s work were questionsthat wereseldom covered(see Box 8).
Pojasnilasosenanašalapredvsemnanaravoinobsegtehdejavnosti,vča-sihpatudinaobseguporabljenihvirov.Vprašanjerezultatov,doseženih glede na cilje, kotje učinek dela agencije,je bilole redko obravnavano (glej okvir 8).
In particular it measures the extent to which the European Parliament makes direct use of the foundation’s findings, as well as the foundation’s participation in the preliminary stages of the decision-making process. e conclusions drawn from this impact assessment system are particularly well described in the foundation’s annual report.
Zaključki, pridobljeni iz tega sistema za ocenjevanje učinka, so zlasti dobro opisani v letnem poročilu Fundacije.
The management boards appeared to be satisfied with this partial application of theregulatory provisions.
Kot kaže, so se upravni sveti zadovoljili s to delno uporabo uredbenih določb.
They hadstill not askedforreportingto be done on the basis of the objectives set in the multiannual programmes in order to obtainanoverviewintermsoftheresultsobtained.Ingeneral, wherethe agencies’ management boards basedthemselvessolely onthereportssub-mittedtothem,they were not ableto preciselyidentify eitherthe outcome ortheimpact ofthe agencies’ work.
Še vedno niso zahtevali, da je treba poročati na podlagi ciljev, določenih v več-letnihprogramih,dasedobipreglednaddoseženimirezultati. Nasplošno upravnisvetiagencijniso moglinatančnoopredelitiizidovaliučinkadela agencij,sajsoselahkoopiralinaedinaporočila,kisojimbilapredložena.
However,they did obtain areasonably reliable measure ofthelevel of activity.
Vendarso zato pridobili dovolj zanesljivosliko naravni dejavnosti.
In most of the reports, the fact that there was no activitybased budget made it difficult,if notimpossible, to establish thelink between the actual activities and the implementation of the budget.
Ker ni bilo k dejavnostim usmerjenega proračuna, je bilo dejanske dejavnosti vvečiniporočiltežko,čenecelonemogoče,povezatizizvrševanjempro-računa.
The Commission’s guidelines for authorising officers on the subject of activity reports had not been transposed to the agencies.
Agencije niso izvedle prenosa smernic Komisije za odredbodajalce glede poročil o dejavnostih.
Even though this reconciliation of activities with the budget was a key aspect of the agencies’ governance, the management boards had not adopted any clear guidelines as to the information that they were expecting from management in order to ascertain that the work programmes’ objectives wereinfact being pursued.
Čeprav je ta povezanost dejavnosti s proračunom ključnividikupravljanjaagencij,upravnisvetinisosprejelinobenihjasnih smernic gledeinformacij, ki sojih pričakovali od vodstva, da bi se prepričali o uspešnem zasledovanju ciljev, določenih v programih dela.
EVALUATIONS
OCENJEVANJA
The framework financial regulation (Article 25, paragraph 4) requires the agencies to regularly carry out ex post evaluations of their programmes and activities.
V skladu z okvirnofinančno uredbo za agencije(člen 25(4)) morajoteredno izvajati naknadna ocenjevanja svojih programov in dejavnosti.
In practice these evaluations provide useful input to the periodic updating of strategies and for organising the agencies’ structure.
Ta ocenjevanja v praksikoristno prispevajokrednemu posodabljanjustrategijink organi-ziranostistruktureagencij.
Some basic regulations requirethecorrespondingagenciesto makeaninitialevaluationthreeor fiveyearsafterthey have beenset up,followed bysubsequent evaluations atregularintervals.
Nekatere osnovne uredbe odagencijzahtevajo, daprvoocenjevanjeizvedejotrialipetletponjihoviustanovitvi,natopa vrednihpresledkih. Agencijesotedoločbevednospoštovaleinpripravile ocene v predvidenihrokih.
Nevertheless, these initial evaluations for the most part only tackled questions relating to the start-up (fitting-out, organisation, recruitment).
Vendar so bila pri teh prvih ocenah večinoma obravnavana samo vprašanja v zvezi z zagonom (opremljanje, organiziranost, zaposlovanje).
The problem is that the deadlines which are imposed by the basic regulations do not take sufficient account of thefact thatitis hardfor an agency to reachits‘cruis-ingspeed’ untilit has beenin existencefortwoyears.
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.
Soitis not untilthe second evaluationthatthe question of performanceis dealt with.
Zato se vprašanje uspešnosti obravnavašele pri drugem ocenjevanju.
In most cases, the agencies themselves have carried out internal evaluations of their projects and havecalled on outside partiesto make evaluations of all their activities for a given period (see Box 9).
Agencije so v večini primerov same izvedle notranja ocenjevanja svojih projek-tov,za pripravoocenovsehsvojih dejavnostihza določenoobdobje paso zaprosilezazunanjo pomoč(glej okvir 9).
Most of the external evaluations hadbeencommissionedbytheagenciesthemselves.Inonecase,certain consultantshad madesuccessiveevaluationsofthesameagency34.These situations were not withoutrisktothe evaluators’independence.
Večinozunanjih ocenso naročile agencijesame.Venemprimerusodoločenisvetovalciizvedlizaporedna ocenjevanjavistiagenciji34.Takšnesituacijenisobilebreztveganjaglede
The conclusions of the eight evaluations that were examined35 were positive overall butin generalregrettedthe vagueness ofthe objectives being pursued and thelack of performanceindicators.
Zaključki o osmih preučenih ocenjevanjih 35 so bili na splošno pozitivni, vendar je bilo v njih običajnoizraženo obžalovanje, da zastavljeni cilji nisojasniin da ni kazalnikov uspešnosti.
For example,in order to assess performanceandtocompensateforthelack ofinternal data,theassessors had often conducted enquiries atthe agencies’stakeholders.
Ocenjevalci so na primer pogosto izvedli po izvedbe pri zainteresiranih straneh, da bi tako ocenili uspešnost poslovanjain nadomestili pomanjkanje notranjih podatkov.
ASSESSMENT BY BENCHMARKING THE EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY EMEA e 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.
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). e last assessment exercise took place in 2006.
Za ta področja so se nato pripravili načrti za izboljšanje ravni s tremi prednostnimi stopnjami (visoka, srednja, nizka). 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. is type of approach allows the thematic networks bringing together a Community agency and national agencies to be strengthened.
Ker je bilo ugotovljeno, da je bila agencija nad povprečjem, niso bile potrebne nobene izboljšave. Tovrstni pristop omogoča okrepitev tematskih mrež, ki agencije Skupnosti povezujejo z nacionalnimi agencijami.
36 The Commission, for example, has
36 Komisija je na primer priporočila,
recommended that each agency set up a multiannual staff policy plan, Sec Gen C(2005) 5304.
da vsaka agencija pripravi večletni načrt za kadrovsko politiko, Sec Gen C(2005) 5304.
Hardly any correlation was made between the multiannual programming and theoverallevaluations,thusrestrictingtheeffectoftheseexercises.The measurementofperformanceagainstaimsremainedlargelyintuitive(see paragraph 27).
Med večletnim načrtovanjem in ocenjevanji skoraj ni bilo povezave, kar je ome-jevaloučinektakšnihpostopkov,kerjebilaprimerjavaciljevzrezultatiše vedno večinoma intuitivna (glej odstavek 26).
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 plansfor implementingtheremedial measuresinresponsetotheassessors’conclu-sions had not beensystematicallyrequired bythe management bodies.
Vendar upravni sveti niso sistema-tičnozahtevalipripraveakcijskihnačrtovzaizvajanjepopravnihukrepov v odgovor na zaključke ocenjevalcev.
financial regulation for the agencies.
37 Člen 71(2) okvirne finančne uredbe za agencije.
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.
In September 2003, a ‘meta-evaluation of the agencies’ was published by the Commissiononthebasisoftheexternalevaluationsavailableatthetime.
Komisija je septembra 2003 objavila „metaoceno agencij“ na podlagi zunanjih ocen, ki so bile takrat na voljo.
The agencies’ management boards had not askedfor asystematic examina-tionoftheoverallrecommendations madeonthisoccasion,despitetheir relevance.
Upravni sveti agencij kljub pomembnosti priporočil, oblikovanih obteh priložnosti, niso zahtevali, da se slednja v celoti sistematično preučijo.
Several Commission departments are involved with the agencies: the directorates-general(DG) with whichtheyareassociatedforthesectoral part,the Budget
Z agencijami sodeluje več služb Komisije: z njimi povezani generalni direktorati za sektorski del, Generalni direktorat za proračun za finančni del in Generalni
DG for the financial part and the Personnel and Administration DG36 forall human resources questions.
direktorat za kadrovske zadeve in administracijo zavsavprašanjaglede kadrovskih virov.
The Commission’s Internal Audit Service exercises thesamepowers withrespecttothe Communitybodiesas withrespectto Commission departments37 and basesits audits on the sameinternal control standards(seeparagraph25).Lastly,inthe General Secretariat there is a unit responsible for institutional matters which deals with issues concerning relations betweenthe agencies andthe Commission.
Služba Komisije za notranjo revizijo ima v zvezi z organi Skupnosti enaka pooblastila kot v zvezi s službami Komisije 37, pri svojih preverjanjihpaseopiranaenakestandardenotranjegakontroliranja(glej odstavek 25). Kot zadnje je v generalnem sekretariatu oddelek, ki je zadolžen za institucionalne zadeve in obravnava problematiko odnosov med agencijami in Komisijo.
The agencies encountered difficultiesin usingthe services proposed bythe Commissioninrespectofactivity-based managementand monitoringof performance against objectives.
Agencije so imele težave pri uporabi storitev, ki jih je predlagala Komisija v zvezi zupravljanjempodejavnostihinspremljanjemrezultatovgledenacilje.
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 ofthem weretoosmallto determine and developthe managementsolutions mostsuitedtotheir needs.
Posledično agencije kot celota niso mogle ovrednotiti najboljših sistemov za upravljanje, ki bijihlahko uporabljale, saj so številne med njimi premajhne, da bilahko določileinizdelalerešitve 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 directoratesgeneral are primarilytherecipients ofthe agencies’ work and are able to judge its added value.
V prvi vrsti so prejemniki dela agencij z njimi povezani generalni direktorati, kilahko ocenijo njegovo dodano vrednost.
Furthermore, the Com- missiontakesinitiativesin orderto evaluate38the agencies’systems and,if need be, to propose improvements39.
Komisija poleg tega prevzema pobudo, da bi ovre- dnotila 38 sistem agencijin po potrebi priporočilaizboljšave 39
COM(2000) 200 final of 5.4.2000.
konč. z dne 5.4.2000.
One of the key objectives of the major administrative and financial reform carried out bythe European Union40 wasto makeits management morefocused on results by overhauling the strategic planning cycle and introducing activitybased budget management.
Eden ključnih ciljev velike upravne in finančne reforme Evropske unije 40 je bil usmeriti upravljanje k doseganjurezultatovin sicer s preoblikovanjem cikla strateškeganačrtovanjainuvedboupravljanjaproračunapodejavnostih.
In terms of the reform’s objectives, the agencies were still lagging behind as regards setting up management systems geared towards gettingresults.
Agencije so glede ciljev reforme še vedno zaostajale pri vzpostavitvi sistemov krezultatom usmerjenega upravljanja.
DID THE AGENCIES PLAN THEIR ACTIVITIES ADEQUATELY BY SETTING THEMSELVES SPECIFIC AND MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES?
ALI SO AGENCIJE USTREZNO NAČRTOVALE SVOJE DEJAVNOSTI Z DOLOČANJEM NATANČNIHIN MERLJIVIH CILJEV?
The shortcomings in the planning were not conducive to effectively assessing theresults achievedinterms ofthe objectives.
Pomanjkljivosti pri načrtovanju niso vodile k uspešnemu ocenjevanju rezultatov glede na cilje.
Where multiannual programmes did exist, their underlying strategies were not based on explicit ex ante evaluationsjustifyingthe prioritiesthat 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 and 13).
Ciljevtakonisovednospremljaliprimernikazalniki,skaterimibiselahko merila uspešnost pridobljenih rezultatov v nekem časovnem obdobju in njihov učinek naravnisektorskihstrategij Skupnosti(glej odstavka 12in 13).
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 14to 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 activitybased budgeting, which is one of the basic instruments neededfor managementtransparency, acted as a serious brake ontheintroductionofaperformance-orientedculture(seeparagraphs19 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 kultureresno ovirana(glej odstavka 19in 20).
e 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.
e 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 AGENCIESINTRODUCE 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 thatthe managementteams werekeento monitorperformance.
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 monitoringtools did notseemto have been a priorityforthe 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 andthevolumeofactivity,this wasnotthecaseforoutcomeandimpact indicators(see paragraphs 26to 28).
Kazalniki izidov in učinka se za razliko od kazalnikov dodeljevanja virov in obsega dejavnosti niso veliko uporabljali(glej odstavke 26 do 28).
e 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. ed.
Takšna orodja bi morala zagotavljati pregled nad vsemi dodeljenimi viri.
e 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 DEJAVNOSTIHIN OCENJEVALE SVOJE REZULTATE?
The duty to report was always complied with, but appraisal of the actual results was hindered bytheshortcomingsin planning.
Obveznost poročanja je bila vedno spoštovana, na ocenjevanje dejanskih rezultatov paso 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.