Good buyer. SUPPLIER_FEEDBACK_TRUE_2 Buyer divides contracts into lots to foster participation of SME's
Is the level of competition satisfactory? detailed info
|
Largest contracts Industry |
Bids |
|---|---|
|
I/27 Klatovy přeložka 1. stavba
Road construction works |
7
Ø6 in industry |
|
Výběr provozovatele městské autobusové dopravy v Klatovech II.
Public road transport services |
3
Ø3 in industry |
|
Snížení energetické náročnosti bytového domu čp. 391-393/III, Klatovy
Construction work |
6
Ø4 in industry |
|
Oprava povrchu komunikací a výměna vodovodu a kanalizace v Klatovech 2019, 2. část
Construction work |
5
Ø4 in industry |
|
Snížení energetické náročnosti budovy Kulturního domu v Klatovech
Construction work |
1
Ø4 in industry |
Isn't majority of contracts awarded to small circle of firms? detailed info
| Largest suppliers | Contracts count | Contracts volume Kč |
|---|---|---|
|
SILNICE GROUP a.s. |
1 | 863,350,721 |
|
Silnice Klatovy a.s. |
16 | 189,147,532 |
|
STAFIKO stav s.r.o. |
4 | 72,874,409 |
|
Klatovská dopravní společnost s.r.o. |
1 | 58,475,000 |
|
Lesní stavby, s.r.o. |
6 | 51,702,900 |
| Other suppliers | 89 | 1,401,502,532 |
| Supplier | Contracts count | Contracts volume (Kč) |
|---|---|---|
|
SILNICE GROUP a.s. |
1 | 863,350,721 |
|
Silnice Klatovy a.s. |
16 | 189,147,532 |
|
STAFIKO stav s.r.o. |
4 | 72,874,409 |
|
Klatovská dopravní společnost s.r.o. |
1 | 58,475,000 |
|
Lesní stavby, s.r.o. |
6 | 51,702,900 |
|
Šumavské vodovody a kanalizace a.s. |
8 | 31,955,114 |
|
VAK SERVIS s.r.o. |
3 | 30,548,854 |
|
FINAL KOM s. r. o. |
8 | 22,804,189 |
|
BIGGEST construct s.r.o. |
1 | 19,955,707 |
|
ROBSTAV stavby k.s. |
1 | 13,687,388 |
|
Pražská plynárenská, a.s. |
3 | 10,012,152 |
|
CENTROPOL ENERGY, a.s. |
1 | 9,958,080 |
|
POHL cz, a.s. |
1 | 9,283,660 |
|
ŠAFINVEST, s.r.o. |
2 | 8,147,026 |
|
INTERIERY KOUPELEN s.r.o. |
2 | 7,274,906 |
|
AutoCont CZ a.s. |
2 | 7,139,989 |
|
AUTOCONT a.s. |
2 | 7,139,989 |
|
K&K TECHNOLOGY a.s. |
2 | 6,755,871 |
|
INVEST TEL, s.r.o. |
3 | 5,688,846 |
|
PROJECT PLUS KLATOVY, spol. s r. o. |
2 | 5,278,341 |
|
KOBIT, spol. s r.o. |
1 | 4,478,500 |
|
Linhart spol. s r.o. |
1 | 3,199,992 |
|
GTBC CZ s.r.o. |
1 | 2,864,632 |
|
ALFASTAV, spol. s r.o. |
3 | 2,731,614 |
|
hřiště.cz, s.r.o. |
1 | 2,535,310 |
|
Adestik s.r.o. |
1 | 2,358,176 |
|
Projekce dopravní Filip s.r.o. |
1 | 1,907,000 |
|
FORM, spol. s r. o. |
2 | 1,326,051 |
|
SILNICE NEPOMUK s.r.o. |
1 | 1,187,488 |
|
Atregia s.r.o. |
1 | 1,064,000 |
|
Jan Nepasický |
1 | 1,042,659 |
|
ATELIER L s.r.o. |
1 | 930,000 |
|
BVD PECE spol. s r.o. |
2 | 692,850 |
|
Klatovská stavební společnost s.r.o. |
1 | 685,000 |
|
architektonický ateliér PROJEKTOR s.r.o. |
1 | 648,000 |
|
Pavel Starý |
1 | 595,000 |
|
INEL-Market, spol. s r.o. |
1 | 575,615 |
|
Marie Rašková |
1 | 556,800 |
|
InQool, a.s. |
1 | 537,000 |
|
AUTO NEJDL s.r.o. |
1 | 500,655 |
|
ASPEKTA Trading, s.r.o. |
1 | 439,260 |
|
BCE s.r.o. |
1 | 390,000 |
|
KPMG Česká republika, s.r.o. |
1 | 386,000 |
|
M.C.TRITON, spol. s r.o. |
1 | 270,000 |
|
MERCI, s.r.o. |
1 | 209,809 |
|
KOVO, výrobní družstvo |
1 | 159,700 |
|
ENPRAG, s.r.o. |
1 | 48,612 |
|
Miloslav Stružinský |
1 | 46,000 |
Does the buyer foster the competition by using the available tools? detailed info
| Tool | Contracts count |
|---|---|
| Extended deadlines | 57% (4 from 7) |
| Nonprice competition | 10% (5 from 52) |
| Division into lots | 12% (6 from 52) |
| E-auction | 2% (1 from 52) |
| Innovative procedure | 0% (0 from 52) |
What fraction of purchases was made under procurement law? detailed info
| Purchases | Volume (Kč) |
|---|---|
| Public procurement | 1,219,042,357 |
| Small scale tenders | 143,332,881 |
| Unregulated purchases | 801,911,239 |
| Total | 2,164,286,477 |
| Budget item | Objem prostredku Kč |
|---|---|
| Durable property purchases | 1,495,536,696 |
| Material consumption | 22,842,421 |
| Energy consumption | 21,269,877 |
| Other consumption | 0 |
| Sold goods | 1,251,359 |
| Activation of durable property | 0 |
| Activation of consumable property | 0 |
| Change of stock | 0 |
| Maintenance and repairs | 362,634,560 |
| Travel costs | 1,449,349 |
| Representation costs | 2,225,357 |
| In-house services | 0 |
| Other services | 222,531,191 |
| Small long-term property costs | 17,388,469 |
| Other costs | 17,157,198 |
Did buyer violate law significantly? detailed info
How often does buyer use non-competitive procedures? detailed info
|
Contract Reason for negotiated procedure without publication |
Original contract (Kč) | Contract modification / NPWP (Kč) |
|---|---|---|
|
Skládka TKO Štěpánovice - realizace III. části III. etapy + rekultivace I. části III. etapy Contract modification |
19,955,707 | 2,433,361 (+13%) |
|
Klatovy, VDJ Hůrka 2 - Sanace akumulačních nádrží Contract modification |
9,283,660 | 1,791,232 (+20%) |
|
Plavecký bazén Klatovy – oprava vstupní haly, šaten a hygienických zařízení – I. etapa Contract modification |
6,983,482 | 598,410 (+9%) |
|
Regenerace panelového sídliště Pod Hůrkou, Klatovy - 2. etapa Contract modification |
9,150,504 | 451,488 (+5%) |
|
Contract Reason for negotiated procedure without publication |
Original contract (Kč) | Contract modification / NPWP (Kč) |
|---|---|---|
|
Skládka TKO Štěpánovice - realizace III. části III. etapy + rekultivace I. části III. etapy Contract modification |
19,955,707 | 2,433,361 (+13%) |
|
Klatovy, VDJ Hůrka 2 - Sanace akumulačních nádrží Contract modification |
9,283,660 | 1,791,232 (+20%) |
|
Plavecký bazén Klatovy – oprava vstupní haly, šaten a hygienických zařízení – I. etapa Contract modification |
6,983,482 | 598,410 (+9%) |
|
Regenerace panelového sídliště Pod Hůrkou, Klatovy - 2. etapa Contract modification |
9,150,504 | 451,488 (+5%) |
Does buyer discourage bidders by frequent competition cancellations or modifications? detailed info
| Type of flaw | Result |
|---|---|
| Issued tenders without published result | 0% |
| Cancelled contracts | 0% |
| Average requirements modifications count | 2.40 |
| Average decision length | 87.40 days |
| Contract | Modifications count | Cancelled | Without results | Decision length |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Výběr provozovatele městské autobusové dopravy v Klatovech II. | 0 | 117 | ||
| Vybavení základních škol v Klatovech: Konektivita a připojení k internetu - ZŠ Plánická, ZŠ Čapkova | 0 | 62 | ||
| I/27 Klatovy přeložka 1. stavba | 11 | 115 | ||
| Rekonstrukce objektu č. p. 363/IV, Klatovy | 1 | 81 | ||
| Vybavení základních škol v Klatovech: IT vybavení - ZŠ Plánická, ZŠ Čapkova, ZŠ Masarykova | 0 | 62 |
Does buyer publish vital data in official journal? detailed info
| Type of flaw | Contracts count |
|---|---|
| Bidders count not published | 0% (0 from 54) |
| Procedure type not published | 0% (0 from 54) |
| Missing buyer ID | 0% (0 from 54) |
| Missing call for tenders | 0% (0 from 54) |
| Missing winning price | 0% (0 from 54) |
| Contract modification by more than 50 % | 0% (0 from 54) |
Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements? detailed info
| Check | Result | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? | 100% (contracts) | ||||||||||||
| Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? | 0.11 (average mistakes per contract) | ||||||||||||
| Are small scale tenders published on a buyer profile? (Compared to quantity of 53 tenders under the law) |
|
| Contract | Type of flaw |
|---|---|
| Klatovy - ul. Dr. Sedláka, čerpací stanice odpadních vod | Price inconsistent with Journal |
| Snížení energetické náročnosti budovy Kulturního domu v Klatovech | Price inconsistent with Journal |
| Revitalizace parku Vodojem - Husovy sady v Klatovech | Price inconsistent with Journal |
| Skládka TKO Štěpánovice - realizace III. části III. etapy + rekultivace I. části III. etapy | Price inconsistent with Journal |
| I/27 Klatovy přeložka 1. stavba | Bid evaluation protocol missing |
| Regenerace panelového sídliště Pod Hůrkou, Klatovy - 2. etapa | Price inconsistent with Journal |
Have the tenders according to companies been procured fairly and professionally? detailed info
Buyer did receive excellent feedback from its tender participants.
