Large cities • 2018 • past ranking

Statutární město Děčín

IČO 00261238

Good buyer. Data on buyer profile have relatively good quality. Considerable volume of contracts goes only to few firms.

1.
ranking
83%
zIndex

Bidder participation

Is the level of competition satisfactory?   detailed info 

70%
average 52%
Largest contracts
Industry
Bids
Nakládání s odpady
Sběr odpadu
3
Ø2 in industry
Údržba komunikací
Opravy a údržba silnic a dalších zařízení a související služby
5
Ø2 in industry
Údržba zeleně
Služby při údržbě pozemků
5
Ø5 in industry
Obnova historické části Podmokel - etapa C
Chodníky a jiné zpevněné povrchy
5
Ø5 in industry
Sběrný dvůr
Sběr odpadu
2
Ø2 in industry

Winner concentration

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

40%
average 70%
Largest suppliers Contracts count Contracts volume (Kč)
Marius Pedersen a.s.
6 397,189,627
STRABAG a.s.
4 59,393,305
Metrostav a.s.
2 35,247,412
Edenred CZ s.r.o.
1 27,804,336
SaM silnice a mosty Děčín a.s.
4 22,267,174
Other suppliers 33 128,546,523

Public procurement share on total purchases

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

72%
average 56%
Purchases Volume (Kč)
Public procurement 832,683,546
Unregulated purchases 777,464,474
Total 1,610,148,020

Competitive contracting

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

91%
average 87%
Contract
Reason for negotiated procedure without publication
Price (Kč)
Rekonstrukce domova pro seniory Děčín II, Kamenická 755/195 JŘBU IV
Additional works
3,098,997
Údržba zeleně - uplatnění opce
Additional works
2,916,362
Revitalizace veřejného prostranství panelového sídliště Březiny-JŘBU
Additional works
2,354,295
Manažerský informační systém
Previous tender without bids
1,311,830
JŘBU-Zámek Děčín- revitalizace zázemí zámeckého areálu
Additional works
1,162,117

Journal data quality

Does buyer publish vital data in official journal?   detailed info 

99%
average 90%
Type of flaw Contracts count
Bidders count not published 2% (1 from 42)
Final or estimated price not published 5% (2 from 42)
Procedure type not published 0% (0 from 42)
Missing supplier ID 0% (0 from 42)
Missing buyer ID 2% (1 from 42)
Wrong buyer name 0% (0 from 42)
Call and award notices contradict each other 0% (0 from 42)
Missing call for tenders 0% (0 from 42)

Buyer profile data quality

Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements?   detailed info 

94%
average 55%
Check Result
Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? 100% (contracts)
Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? 0.24 (average mistakes per contract)