Small cities • 2022 • past ranking

Město Čáslav

IČO 00236021

Buyer profile has high number of errors. Uncompetitive procedures are overused.

Zindex je pro nás rozcvička.

Najít rizika ve veřejných zakázkách →

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

42%
average 51%
Largest contracts
Industry
Bids
Výstavba vícepodlažních bytových domů B5 a B6 v areálu bývalých kasáren Prokopa Holého v Čáslavi
Construction work
4
Ø4 in industry
Cyklostezka Čáslav - Filipov 3
Construction work
1
Ø4 in industry
Stavební úpravy domu č.p. 288/9 v Čáslavi se změnou v užívání
Construction work
7
Ø4 in industry
Realizace úspor energie - bytový dům ul. Jiřího z Poděbrad č. p. 939 v Čáslavi
Construction work
2
Ø4 in industry
Správa a údržba systému veřejného osvětlení v Městě Čáslavi opakované řízení
Repair, maintenance and associated services related to roads and other equipment
3
Ø1 in industry

Winner concentration

Isn't majority of contracts awarded to small circle of firms?   detailed info 

86%
average 86%
Largest suppliers Contracts count Contracts volume Kč
Trigema Building a.s.
1 94,240,623
Konstrukce a dopravní stavby s.r.o.
4 40,465,000
PWB stavby s.r.o.
2 17,953,319
Pražská plynárenská, a.s.
2 17,816,595
CENTROPOL ENERGY, a.s.
2 12,212,700
Other suppliers 17 179,293,241

Pro-competitive tools

Does the buyer foster the competition by using the available tools?   detailed info 

48%
average 27%
Tool Contracts count
Extended deadlines 0% (0 from 6)
Nonprice competition 22% (4 from 18)
Division into lots 17% (3 from 18)
E-auction 0% (0 from 18)
Innovative procedure 6% (1 from 18)

Public procurement share on total purchases

What fraction of purchases was made under procurement law?   detailed info 

62%
average 68%
Purchases Volume (Kč)
Public procurement 235,068,660
Small scale tenders 2,180,328
Unregulated purchases 371,538,838
Total 608,787,825

Competitive contracting

How often does buyer use non-competitive procedures?   detailed info 

56%
average 87%
Contract
Reason for negotiated procedure without publication
Original contract (Kč) Contract modification / NPWP (Kč)
Cyklostezka Čáslav - Filipov 3
Outside directive scope
- 18,470,000
Výstavba vícepodlažních bytových domů B5 a B6 v areálu bývalých kasáren Prokopa Holého v Čáslavi
Contract modification
94,240,623 1,752,268 (+2%)
Stavební úpravy domu č.p. 288/9 v Čáslavi se změnou v užívání
Contract modification
13,555,884 1,504,351 (+12%)
III. etapa rekonstrukce Dusíkova divadla v Čáslavi část 1 stavební práce v historické části budovy divadla (JŘBU)
Previous tender without bids
4,397,435 1,419,731 (+33%)
Zpracování projektové dokumentace Městský park Vala
Contract modification
2,649,000 248,000 (+10%)

Consistent conduct

Does buyer discourage bidders by frequent competition cancellations or modifications?   detailed info 

64%
average 60%
Type of flaw Result
Issued tenders without published result 29%
Cancelled contracts 0%
Average requirements modifications count 1.86
Average decision length 54.50 days

Journal data quality

Does buyer publish vital data in official journal?   detailed info 

76%
average 98%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Bidders count not published 0% (0 from 24)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 24)
Missing buyer ID 4% (1 from 24)
Missing call for tenders 8% (2 from 24)
Missing winning price 0% (0 from 24)
Contract modification by more than 50 % 4% (1 from 24)

Buyer profile data quality

Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements?   detailed info 

10%
average 49%
Check Result
Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? 42% (contracts)
Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? 0.95 (average mistakes per contract)
Are small scale tenders published on a buyer profile? (Compared to quantity of 19 tenders under the law)
0-250K 0 tenders
250K-500K 0 tenders
500K-1000K 0 tenders
1000K+ 1 tender

Supplier feedback

Have the tenders according to companies been procured fairly and professionally?   detailed info 

80%
average 81%

Buyer did not get enough feedback (yet) to get a statistically relevant rating from his tender participants. Thus he gets standard rank of 80 %.