Large cities • 2022 • past ranking

Statutární město Ostrava

IČO 00845451

Good buyer. Data on buyer profile have relatively good quality. Buyer uses e-auctions to achieve lower prices.

1.
ranking
81%
zIndex

Zindex je pro nás rozcvička.

Najít rizika ve veřejných zakázkách →

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

63%
average 51%
Largest contracts
Industry
Bids
Multifunkční parkovací dům u MNO
Construction work for buildings relating to road transport
10
Ø5 in industry
Rekonstrukce a modernizace DK Poklad II.
Construction work for buildings relating to leisure, sports, culture, lodging and restaurants
8
Ø4 in industry
Městská nemocnice Ostrava - Modernizace pavilonu E2 II.
Building completion work
7
Ø4 in industry
Blok Nové Lauby
Construction work for social services buildings
1
Ø7 in industry
Rekonstrukce historické budovy bývalých jatek
Buildings of particular historical or architectural interest
6
Ø3 in industry

Winner concentration

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

95%
average 91%
Largest suppliers Contracts count Contracts volume Kč
GEOSAN GROUP a.s.
4 645,326,586
Zlínstav a.s.
3 290,256,537
PKS stavby a.s.
1 252,000,000
Sdružení BBB Nové Lauby s.r.o.
1 251,736,150
KR OSTRAVA a.s.
3 197,247,000
Other suppliers 2,228 6,579,991,952

Pro-competitive tools

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

64%
average 41%
Tool Contracts count
Extended deadlines 16% (14 from 88)
Nonprice competition 24% (47 from 197)
Division into lots 12% (23 from 197)
E-auction 10% (19 from 197)
Innovative procedure 4% (7 from 197)

Public procurement share on total purchases

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

63%
average 66%
Purchases Volume (Kč)
Public procurement 5,450,565,667
Small scale tenders 2,328,962,069
Unregulated purchases 11,999,905,968
Total 19,779,433,703

Competitive contracting

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

83%
average 79%
Contract
Reason for negotiated procedure without publication
Original contract (Kč) Contract modification / NPWP (Kč)
Kanalizace splašková Plesná - II. etapa, II. část
Contract modification
163,900,000 44,336,785 (+28%)
KONCERTNÍ HALA MĚSTA OSTRAVY - příprava projektové dokumentace, inženýring a autorský dozor
Contract modification
133,875,000 40,162,500 (+30%)
Rekonstrukce historické budovy bývalých jatek
Contract modification
169,967,256 20,819,547 (+13%)
Rekonstrukce a modernizace DK Poklad II.
Contract modification
354,986,020 14,464,765 (+5%)
Oprava kanalizace a vodovodu v areálu Městské nemocnice Ostrava
Contract modification
66,709,333 12,985,757 (+20%)

Consistent conduct

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

63%
average 56%
Type of flaw Result
Issued tenders without published result 4%
Cancelled contracts 11%
Average requirements modifications count 0.85
Average decision length 81.76 days

Journal data quality

Does buyer publish vital data in official journal?   detailed info 

99%
average 100%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Bidders count not published 0% (1 from 205)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 205)
Missing buyer ID 0% (1 from 205)
Missing call for tenders 0% (1 from 205)
Missing winning price 0% (0 from 205)
Contract modification by more than 50 % 0% (0 from 205)

Buyer profile data quality

Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements?   detailed info 

94%
average 69%
Check Result
Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? 97% (contracts)
Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? 0.39 (average mistakes per contract)
Are small scale tenders published on a buyer profile? (Compared to quantity of 190 tenders under the law)
0-250K 907 tenders
250K-500K 291 tenders
500K-1000K 295 tenders
1000K+ 440 tenders

Supplier feedback

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

90%
average 86%

Buyer did receive excellent feedback from its tender participants.