Large cities • 2016

Statutární město Jihlava

IČO 00286010

Buyer profile has high number of errors. Large volume of money is spent without open competition.

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

70%
average 63%
Largest contracts
Industry
Bids
Snížení znečištění ve vodních tocích ze stokové sítě města Jihlavy
Stavební práce na výstavbě kanalizace
12
Ø5 in industry
Revitalizace části parku Malý Heulos – II. etapa
Stavební úpravy sportovních zařízení
16
Ø4 in industry
MĚSTO JIHLAVA, ul. BRNĚNSKÁ, ul. KŘIŽÍKOVA, REKONSTRUKCE KANALIZACE A VODOVODU
Stavební práce
3
Ø5 in industry
Regenerace veřejných prostranství – ul. Srázná, Jihlava
Stavební práce pro vodovodní a kanalizační potrubí
9
Ø5 in industry
Sportovně relaxační centrum Český mlýn, Jihlava
Stavební úpravy v souvislosti s objekty pro sportovní hřiště
8
Ø5 in industry

Winner concentration

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

86%
average 76%
Largest suppliers Contracts count Contracts volume (Kč)
Ohl Žs, a.s.
8 162,915,811
Psj, a.s.
8 69,568,500
Stavointerier s.r.o.
11 68,776,064
Agrostav, akciová společnost
5 68,575,499
Colas Cz, a.s.
1 59,622,243
Other suppliers 100 459,314,930

Pro-competitive tools

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

68%
average 70%
Tool Contracts count
Extended deadlines 35% (11 from 31)
Nonprice competition 13% (4 from 31)
Lots 10% (3 from 31)
E-auction 6% (2 from 31)

Public procurement share on total purchases

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

58%
average 57%
Purchases Volume (Kč)
Public procurement 890,280,956
Unregulated purchases 1,744,495,905
Total 2,634,776,861

Competitive contracting

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

59%
average 77%

Consistent conduct

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

65%
average 65%
Type of flaw Result
Issued calls without published result 12%
Cancelled contracts 10%
Average requirements modifications count 0.97

Journal data quality

Does buyer publish vital data in official journal?   detailed info 

91%
average 83%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Bidders count not published 0% (0 from 133)
Final or estimated price not published 50% (67 from 133)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 133)
Missing supplier ID 2% (3 from 133)
Missing buyer ID 0% (0 from 133)
Wrong buyer name 0% (0 from 133)
Call and award notices contradict each other 0% (0 from 133)
Missing call for tenders 4% (5 from 133)

Buyer profile data quality

Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements?   detailed info 

24%
average 46%
Check Result
Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? 52% (contracts)
Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? 2.11 (average mistakes per contract)

Supplier rating

Do the risky firms win frequently?   detailed info 

88%
average 84%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Supplier founded less than 180 days before contract award 0% (0 from 133)
Supplier with over 75 % of turnover from public procurement 0% (0 from 133)
Subcontractor share above 50 % 5% (7 from 133)
Supplier demise shortly after contract 0% (0 from 133)
Supplier bankruptcy 2% (2 from 133)
Supplier donating to political party 5% (6 from 133)
Supplier did not publish financial results on time 12% (16 from 133)