Large cities • 2022 • past ranking

Statutární město Plzeň

IČO 00075370

Good buyer. SUPPLIER_FEEDBACK_TRUE_1 Competitions are open to multiple bidders.

7.
ranking
77%
zIndex
Show average values  
50%
Bidder participation
81%
Winner concentration
40%
Pro-competitive tools
65%
Public procurement share on total purchases
100%
Legal misconduct
90%
Competitive contracting
67%
Consistent conduct
100%
Journal data quality
75%
Buyer profile data quality
100%
Supplier feedback

Zindex je pro nás rozcvička.

Najít rizika ve veřejných zakázkách →

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

50%
average 51%
Largest contracts
Industry 		Bids
Uzel Plzeň, 5.stavba - Lobzy - Koterov
Intercity railway works
2
Ø2 in industry
Městský okruh úsek Křimická - Karlovarská
Site preparation work
5
Ø7 in industry
Technologický park DRONET – Plzeň Světovar
Restoration work
5
Ø4 in industry
I/20 a II/231 v Plzni, Plaská - Na Roudné - Chrástecká, 2. etapa
Road construction works
7
Ø6 in industry
Zátiší – revitalizace území Línská - Kreuzmannova
Construction work
4
Ø4 in industry

Winner concentration

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

81%
average 91%
Largest suppliers Contracts count Contracts volume Kč
Metrostav a.s.
 3 2,179,173,731
Chládek & Tintěra, a.s.
 1 1,099,906,657
BERGER BOHEMIA a.s.
 6 1,086,769,004
POHL cz, a.s.
 23 554,763,008
GEOSAN GROUP a.s.
 1 264,413,770
Other suppliers 633 8,355,722,873

Pro-competitive tools

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

40%
average 41%
Tool Contracts count
Extended deadlines 21% (13 from 62)
Nonprice competition 14% (20 from 145)
Division into lots 2% (3 from 145)
E-auction 3% (4 from 145)
Innovative procedure 1% (1 from 145)

Public procurement share on total purchases

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

65%
average 66%
Purchases Volume (Kč)
Public procurement 7,517,256,986
Small scale tenders 1,078,761,771
Unregulated purchases 11,713,942,226
Total 20,309,960,983

Competitive contracting

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

90%
average 79%
Contract
Reason for negotiated procedure without publication 		Original contract (Kč) Contract modification / NPWP (Kč)
Technologický park DRONET – Plzeň Světovar
Contract modification 		528,827,539 59,354,728 (+12%)
I/20 a II/231 v Plzni, Plaská - Na Roudné - Chrástecká, 2. etapa
Contract modification 		493,663,326 37,756,790 (+8%)
Zátiší – revitalizace území Línská - Kreuzmannova
Contract modification 		346,738,749 17,298,697 (+5%)
Sportovní areál Prokopávka – rekonstrukce, revitalizace a přístavba sportovního areálu
Contract modification 		183,350,668 16,767,823 (+10%)
Městský okruh úsek Křimická - Karlovarská
Contract modification 		1,791,832,812 15,199,075 (+1%)

Consistent conduct

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

67%
average 56%
Type of flaw Result
Issued tenders without published result 3%
Cancelled contracts 6%
Average requirements modifications count 1.34
Average decision length 79.88 days

Journal data quality

Does buyer publish vital data in official journal?   detailed info 

100%
average 100%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Bidders count not published 0% (0 from 147)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 147)
Missing buyer ID 1% (1 from 147)
Missing call for tenders 0% (0 from 147)
Missing winning price 0% (0 from 147)
Contract modification by more than 50 % 0% (0 from 147)

Buyer profile data quality

Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements?   detailed info 

75%
average 69%
Check Result
Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? 99% (contracts)
Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? 0.47 (average mistakes per contract)
Are small scale tenders published on a buyer profile? (Compared to quantity of 128 tenders under the law)
0-250K 22 tenders
250K-500K 37 tenders
500K-1000K 161 tenders
1000K+ 212 tenders

Supplier feedback

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

100%
average 86%

Buyer did receive excellent feedback from its tender participants.