State-owned enterprises • 2015

Povodí Labe, státní podnik

IČO 70890005

Good buyer. Data on buyer profile have relatively good quality. Often makes mistakes in procurement journal announcements.

7.
ranking
75%
zIndex

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

60%
average 52%
Largest contracts
Industry
Bids
Labe, Ústí nad Labem, levý břeh – protipovodňová ochrana na Q100 na Labi
Regulace řek a ochrana před povodněmi
8
Ø7 in industry
Protipovodňová ochrana obce Zálezlice
Regulace řek a ochrana před povodněmi
11
Ø7 in industry
Lovosicko (Píšťany, Lovosice) - protipovodňová ochrana na Q100 na Labi - stavební část, dodatečné stavební práce
Regulace řek a ochrana před povodněmi
neuveden
Ø7 in industry
Jeřice, Chrastava, obnova vodního toku v ř. km 0,00 – 3,45
Regulace řek a ochrana před povodněmi
9
Ø7 in industry
Jizera, Benátky nad Jizerou, protipovodňová ochrana
Regulace řek a ochrana před povodněmi
3
Ø7 in industry

Winner concentration

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

81%
average 62%
Largest suppliers Contracts count Contracts volume (Kč)
Strabag Rail a.s.
2 338,121,243
Eurovia Cs, a.s.
9 294,158,479
Metrostav a.s.
10 287,323,089
Ohl Žs, a.s.
5 194,902,332
Labská, strojní a stavební společnost s.r.o.
9 77,293,753
Other suppliers 79 655,627,204

Pro-competitive tools

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

77%
average 78%
Tool Contracts count
Extended deadlines 8% (3 from 38)
Nonprice competition 5% (2 from 38)
Lots 26% (10 from 38)
E-auction 0% (0 from 38)

Public procurement share on total purchases

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

69%
average 67%
Purchases Volume (Kč)
Public procurement 1,847,426,107
Unregulated purchases 1,984,821,995
Total 3,832,248,102

Competitive contracting

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

83%
average 73%

Consistent conduct

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

63%
average 59%
Type of flaw Result
Issued calls without published result 21%
Cancelled contracts 4%
Average requirements modifications count 0.43

Journal data quality

Does buyer publish vital data in official journal?   detailed info 

54%
average 76%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Bidders count not published 6% (7 from 114)
Final or estimated price not published 22% (25 from 114)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 114)
Missing supplier ID 1% (1 from 114)
Missing buyer ID 0% (0 from 114)
Wrong buyer name 0% (0 from 114)
Call and award notices contradict each other 4% (5 from 114)
Missing call for tenders 28% (32 from 114)

Buyer profile data quality

Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements?   detailed info 

58%
average 36%
Check Result
Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? 59% (contracts)
Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? 0.10 (average mistakes per contract)

Supplier rating

Do the risky firms win frequently?   detailed info 

91%
average 88%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Supplier founded less than 180 days before contract award 0% (0 from 114)
Supplier with over 75 % of turnover from public procurement 3% (3 from 114)
Subcontractor share above 50 % 3% (3 from 114)
Supplier demise shortly after contract 0% (0 from 114)
Supplier bankruptcy 0% (0 from 114)
Supplier donating to political party 7% (8 from 114)
Supplier did not publish financial results on time 11% (13 from 114)

Information provision

Has buyer answered our information request?   detailed info 

100%
average 29%

Full disclosure

Buyer responded within 15 days legal limit.