Small cities • 2016

Město Františkovy Lázně

IČO 00253936

Tender documentation is well prepared, thus there is no need to modify or cancel the procedure. There are not many contract extensions and ammendments.

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

72%
average 59%
Largest contracts
Industry
Bids
REKONSTRUKCE ŠKOLNÍ KUCHYNĚ ZŠ ČESKÁ 1, FRANTIŠKOVY LÁZNĚ GASTROTECHNOLOGIE
Kuchyňské zařízení
4
Ø5 in industry
Rekonstrukce školní jídelny ZŠ ve F.Lázních čp. 39
Stavební práce
11
Ø5 in industry
Varovný monitorovací systém před povodněmi města Františkovy Lázně - Varovný monitorovací systém
Informační systémy
3
Ø1 in industry
Zateplení 1. mateřské školy ve Františkových Lázních
Stavební úpravy školních budov
11
Ø5 in industry
Zvýšení kvality řízení města Františkovy Lázně
Poradenství v oblasti řízení lidských zdrojů
6
Ø3 in industry

Winner concentration

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

51%
average 51%
Largest suppliers Contracts count Contracts volume Kč
Intergast a.s.
1 6,400,000
Isso - Inženýrské stavby Sokolov, s. r. o.
1 4,827,423
Suptel a.s.
1 2,194,850
Tercom s.r.o.
1 2,042,895
M.c.triton, spol. s r.o.
1 659,000

Pro-competitive tools

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

79%
average 64%
Tool Contracts count
Extended deadlines 0% (1 from 0)
Nonprice competition 0% (0 from 1)
Division into lots 0% (0 from 1)
E-auction 100% (1 from 1)
Innovative procedure 0% ( from 1)

Competitive contracting

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

100%
average 84%
No contracts in negotiated procedure without publication.

Consistent conduct

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

100%
average 69%
Type of flaw Result
Issued tenders without published result 0%
Cancelled contracts 0%
Average requirements modifications count 0

Journal data quality

Does buyer publish vital data in official journal?   detailed info 

70%
average 80%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Bidders count not published 0% (0 from 5)
Final or estimated price not published 0% (0 from 5)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 5)
Missing supplier ID 0% (0 from 5)
Missing buyer ID 0% (0 from 5)
Wrong buyer name 0% (0 from 5)
Missing call for tenders 20% (1 from 5)
Missing winning price 0% ( from 5)
Contract modification by more than 50 % 0% ( from 5)

Supplier rating

Do the risky firms win frequently?   detailed info 

87%
average 85%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Supplier founded less than 180 days before contract award 0% (0 from 5)
Supplier with over 75 % of turnover from public procurement 0% (0 from 5)
Subcontractor share above 50 % 0% (0 from 5)
Supplier demise shortly after contract 0% (0 from 5)
Supplier bankruptcy 0% (0 from 5)
Supplier donating to political party 0% (0 from 5)
Supplier did not publish financial results on time 40% (2 from 5)