Government • 2015

Uměleckoprůmyslové museum v Praze

IČO 00023442

Buyer does not avoid following procurement law. Small number of firms recieve most of contracts.

36.
ranking
66%
zIndex

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

52%
average 61%

Winner concentration

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

30%
average 68%
Largest suppliers Contracts count Contracts volume Kč
Psg-international a.s.
2 269,700,651
Psj, a.s.
3 239,232,415
Trade Fides, a.s.
1 23,725,672
Ceiba, s.r.o.
2 1,511,369
Hrubymoving s.r.o.
1 1,306,780
Other suppliers 7 1,412,364

Pro-competitive tools

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

79%
average 78%
Tool Contracts count
Extended deadlines 0% (1 from 0)
Nonprice competition 25% (1 from 4)
Division into lots 0% (0 from 4)
E-auction 0% (0 from 4)
Innovative procedure 0% ( from 4)

Public procurement share on total purchases

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

100%
average 56%
Purchases Volume (Kč)
Public procurement 539,251,307
Small scale tenders 0
Unregulated purchases 0
Total 539,251,307

Competitive contracting

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

94%
average 61%
Contract
Reason for negotiated procedure without publication
Original contract (Kč) Contract modification / NPWP (Kč)
Rekonstrukce historické budovy Uměleckoprůmyslového musea v Praze - dodatek č. 1
Jediný dodavatel (technické důvody)
- 3,930,652
Dodávka obalového materiálu pro stěhování UPM v Praze
Předchozí zakázka bez nabídek
- 755,685
Dodávka obalového materiálu pro stěhování UPM v Praze
Předchozí zakázka bez nabídek
- 755,685
Dodávka obalového materiálu pro stěhování UPM v Praze
Předchozí zakázka bez nabídek
- 755,685
Výkon funkce managera projektu a komplexní inženýrsko-investorskou činnost při přípravě a realizaci rekonstrukce historické budovy UPM v Praze - uzavření dodatku č. 5
Dodatečné práce
- 158,000

Consistent conduct

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

50%
average 58%
Type of flaw Result
Issued tenders without published result 0%
Cancelled contracts 67%
Average requirements modifications count 0.83

Journal data quality

Does buyer publish vital data in official journal?   detailed info 

84%
average 55%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Bidders count not published 0% (0 from 16)
Final or estimated price not published 25% (4 from 16)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 16)
Missing supplier ID 12% (2 from 16)
Missing buyer ID 0% (0 from 16)
Wrong buyer name 0% (0 from 16)
Missing call for tenders 0% (0 from 16)
Missing winning price 0% ( from 16)
Contract modification by more than 50 % 0% ( from 16)

Buyer profile data quality

Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements?   detailed info 

0%
average 32%
Check Result
Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? 0% (contracts)
Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? 0.86 (average mistakes per contract)
Are small scale tenders published on a buyer profile? (Compared to quantity of tenders under the law)
0-250K 0 tenders
250K-500K 0 tenders
500K-1000K 0 tenders
1000K+ 0 tenders

Supplier rating

Do the risky firms win frequently?   detailed info 

80%
average 88%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Supplier founded less than 180 days before contract award 0% (0 from 16)
Supplier with over 75 % of turnover from public procurement 0% (0 from 16)
Subcontractor share above 50 % 6% (1 from 16)
Supplier demise shortly after contract 0% (0 from 16)
Supplier bankruptcy 0% (0 from 16)
Supplier donating to political party 0% (0 from 16)
Supplier did not publish financial results on time 12% (2 from 16)

Information provision

Has buyer answered our information request?   detailed info 

50%
average 56%

Conditional disclosure

Buyer responded within 15 days legal limit.