Large cities • 2022 • past ranking

Statutární město Liberec

IČO 00262978

Lot of money goes into historical contracts and unregulated purchases. Enough firms are competing for contracts.

18.
ranking
72%
zIndex

Zindex je pro nás rozcvička.

Najít rizika ve veřejných zakázkách →

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

61%
average 51%
Largest contracts
Industry
Bids
Rekonstrukce Liebiegova paláce pro potřeby polyfunkčního komunitního centra - Centrum aktivního života - stavba
Construction work
1
Ø4 in industry
Sociální bydlení města Liberce Na Žižkově - stavební práce
Construction work
2
Ø4 in industry
Navýšení kapacit MŠ Malínek, Liberec - stavba
Construction work
9
Ø4 in industry
Vodojem Horská a zásobní řady - stavební práce
Construction work
12
Ø4 in industry
Navýšení kapacit MŠ Pastelka - stavba
Construction work for kindergarten buildings
11
Ø5 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
CL-EVANS s.r.o.
1 168,185,876
První podještědská stavební spol. s r.o.
2 151,943,000
EP ENERGY TRADING, a.s.
2 60,327,573
STAVEBNÍ SPOLEČNOST GUTTENBERG s.r.o.
1 57,790,662
ŠEBESTA VHS, v.o.s.
1 52,862,418
Other suppliers 207 1,078,987,438

Pro-competitive tools

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

44%
average 41%
Tool Contracts count
Extended deadlines 19% (4 from 21)
Nonprice competition 27% (21 from 77)
Division into lots 3% (2 from 77)
E-auction 0% (0 from 77)
Innovative procedure 1% (1 from 77)

Public procurement share on total purchases

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

53%
average 66%
Purchases Volume (Kč)
Public procurement 1,156,249,319
Small scale tenders 248,410,038
Unregulated purchases 3,600,048,610
Total 5,004,707,968

Competitive contracting

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

78%
average 79%
Contract
Reason for negotiated procedure without publication
Original contract (Kč) Contract modification / NPWP (Kč)
Rekonstrukce Liebiegova paláce pro potřeby polyfunkčního komunitního centra - Centrum aktivního života - stavba
Contract modification
168,185,876 29,529,123 (+18%)
Vodojem Horská a zásobní řady - stavební práce
Contract modification
52,862,418 7,866,105 (+15%)
Sociální bydlení města Liberce Bytový dům E - stavební práce
Contract modification
29,950,000 3,943,559 (+14%)
Projekční práce na rekonstrukci a stavební úpravy Městského plaveckého bazénu v Liberci
Contract modification
6,770,111 2,654,020 (+40%)
Sociální bydlení města Liberce Bytový dům C - stavební práce
Contract modification
14,054,116 2,449,868 (+18%)

Consistent conduct

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

50%
average 56%
Type of flaw Result
Issued tenders without published result 5%
Cancelled contracts 10%
Average requirements modifications count 1.67
Average decision length 105.70 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 82)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 82)
Missing buyer ID 0% (0 from 82)
Missing call for tenders 0% (0 from 82)
Missing winning price 0% (0 from 82)
Contract modification by more than 50 % 0% (0 from 82)

Buyer profile data quality

Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements?   detailed info 

64%
average 69%
Check Result
Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? 100% (contracts)
Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? 0.71 (average mistakes per contract)
Are small scale tenders published on a buyer profile? (Compared to quantity of 78 tenders under the law)
0-250K 21 tenders
250K-500K 38 tenders
500K-1000K 41 tenders
1000K+ 43 tenders

Supplier feedback

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

80%
average 86%

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