Small cities • 2018 • past ranking

Město Mnichovice

IČO 00240478

Purchases are made in legal regime, there is no tendency to portion contracts. Large volume of money is spent without open competition.

58.
ranking
71%
zIndex

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

72%
average 49%

Winner concentration

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

32%
average 55%
Largest suppliers Contracts count Contracts volume Kč
PROFISTAV Litomyšl, a.s.
2 29,657,007
DEREZA, společnost s ručením omezeným
3 7,066,736
AVE Kolín s.r.o.
1 5,760,670
Metrostav a.s.
2 3,445,375
MEVA-TEC s.r.o.
1 1,568,898

Pro-competitive tools

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

71%
average 59%
Tool Contracts count
Extended deadlines 67% (2 from 3)
Nonprice competition 0% (0 from 3)
Division into lots 100% (3 from 3)
E-auction 0% (0 from 3)
Innovative procedure 0% ( from 3)

Public procurement share on total purchases

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

100%
average 66%
Purchases Volume (Kč)
Public procurement 152,060,158
Small scale tenders 0
Unregulated purchases 0
Total 60,459,004

Competitive contracting

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

62%
average 91%
Contract
Reason for negotiated procedure without publication
Original contract (Kč) Contract modification / NPWP (Kč)
Intenzifikace ČOV Mnichovice – dodatečné stavební práce 2
Additional works
- 2,329,091
Nástavba na budovu ZŠ Mnichovice - dodatečné stavební práce
Outside directive scope
- 1,727,153
Intenzifikace ČOV Mnichovice – dodatečné stavební práce 3
Additional works
- 1,116,284
Nástavba na budovu ZŠ Mnichovice - dodatečné stavební práce
Emergency , Additional works , Outside directive scope
- 218,195

Consistent conduct

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

83%
average 77%
Type of flaw Result
Issued tenders without published result 0%
Cancelled contracts 0%
Average requirements modifications count 1.67

Journal data quality

Does buyer publish vital data in official journal?   detailed info 

98%
average 91%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Bidders count not published 22% (2 from 9)
Final or estimated price not published 0% (0 from 9)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 9)
Missing supplier ID 0% (0 from 9)
Missing buyer ID 0% (0 from 9)
Wrong buyer name 11% (1 from 9)
Missing call for tenders 0% (0 from 9)
Missing winning price 0% ( from 9)
Contract modification by more than 50 % 0% ( from 9)

Buyer profile data quality

Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements?   detailed info 

25%
average 38%
Check Result
Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? 67% (contracts)
Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? 1.67 (average mistakes per contract)
Are small scale tenders published on a buyer profile? (Compared to quantity of 9 tenders under the law)
0-250K 0 tenders
250K-500K 0 tenders
500K-1000K 0 tenders
1000K+ 0 tenders