Small cities • 2016

Město Frenštát pod Radhoštěm

IČO 00297852

The supplier portfolio is relatively broad.

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

52%
average 59%
Largest contracts
Industry
Bids
„Stavební úpravy Domu kultury ve Frenštátě pod Radhoštěm“
Stavební práce
5
Ø5 in industry
Vybudování sběrného dvora ve Frenštátě pod Radhoštěm
Stavební práce
5
Ø5 in industry
Modernizace a zateplení ZŠ Tyršova 913 ve Frenštátě pod Radhoštěm
Rekonstrukce budov
6
Ø5 in industry
„Stavební úpravy domu č. p. 1159 (CVČ Astra) ve Frenštátě pod Radhoštěm“
Stavební úpravy budov sloužících pro volný čas, sporty, kulturu, ubytování a restaurace
3
Ø4 in industry
Celková oprava ZŠ Záhuní ve Frenštátě pod Radhoštěm
Stavební práce
8
Ø5 in industry

Winner concentration

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

77%
average 51%
Largest suppliers Contracts count Contracts volume Kč
Průmstav, a.s.
1 53,993,630
Turčina s.r.o.
3 20,948,447
Sewer s.r.o.
1 11,486,209
Bdstav Morava s.r.o.
1 10,314,114
Staseko Plus s.r.o.
2 10,151,115
Other suppliers 22 74,670,681

Pro-competitive tools

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

61%
average 64%

Competitive contracting

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

85%
average 84%
Contract
Reason for negotiated procedure without publication
Price (Kč)
Celková oprava ZŠ Záhuní ve Frenštátě pod Radhoštěm
Dodatečné práce
2,808,990
Podchycení parapetu na mezipodestách domu č.p.346
Dodatečné práce
138,551
Vícepráce při realizaci projektu „Stavební úpravy domu č. p. 1159 (CVČ Astra) ve Frenštátě pod Radhoštěm“
Krajní naléhavost
64,990

Consistent conduct

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

61%
average 69%
Type of flaw Result
Issued calls without published result 8%
Cancelled contracts 33%
Average requirements modifications count 0.55

Journal data quality

Does buyer publish vital data in official journal?   detailed info 

88%
average 80%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Bidders count not published 0% (0 from 30)
Final or estimated price not published 20% (6 from 30)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 30)
Missing supplier ID 7% (2 from 30)
Missing buyer ID 0% (0 from 30)
Wrong buyer name 0% (0 from 30)
Call and award notices contradict each other 0% (0 from 30)
Missing call for tenders 0% (0 from 30)

Supplier rating

Do the risky firms win frequently?   detailed info 

78%
average 85%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Supplier founded less than 180 days before contract award 0% (0 from 30)
Supplier with over 75 % of turnover from public procurement 0% (0 from 30)
Subcontractor share above 50 % 3% (1 from 30)
Supplier demise shortly after contract 0% (0 from 30)
Supplier bankruptcy 3% (1 from 30)
Supplier donating to political party 0% (0 from 30)
Supplier did not publish financial results on time 27% (8 from 30)