Mistakes in public procurement by small businesses and socially oriented non-profit organizations: case studies for 2020–2022.
Government contractors were punished for checking participants for the status of a small business entity or a Socially Oriented Non-Profit Organization. The controllers also saw a violation in the fact that the purchase of postal services was carried out among such entities. Read more about these and other situations in our review.
We checked whether the participant is a small business entity or a Socially Oriented Non-Profit Organization.
The procurement commission rejected the participant's application due to the lack of a declaration of belonging to small businesses and socially oriented non-profit organizations.
The Astrakhan Department of the Federal Antimonopoly Service considered this a violation. The controllers noted that the operator of the electronic site checks the fact that a participant is classified as a small business, the commission of the customer is not authorized to do this.
The Kemerovo Department of the Federal Antimonopoly Service came to the same conclusion.
Conducted the purchase of postal services among small businesses and socially oriented non-profit organizations.
The 15th Arbitration Court of Appeal recognized as a violation the purchase of postal services exclusively among small businesses and socially oriented non-profit organizations, because:
- this unreasonably limits the participation in the procurement of other entities, including those specially created for these purposes;
- Small business entities or Socially Oriented Non-Commercial Organizations do not have the infrastructure to serve them on time throughout the country.
The Arbitration Court of the North Caucasian District also considers the same.
We forgot about the features: payment terms, the size of the initial maximum price of the contract, the volume of involvement in the execution of the contract.
The Krasnoyarsk Department of the Federal Antimonopoly Service had to be reminded of the reduced terms of payment under the contract.
The Saratov, Irkutsk and Kabardino-Balkaria Departments of the Federal Antimonopoly Service were punished for exceeding the maximum size of the initial maximum contract price.
The Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia indicated that the draft contract should have a specific percentage of participation of subcontractors and co-executors from among small businesses and Socially Oriented Non-Commercial Organizations. The Sverdlovsk and Nizhny Novgorod Departments of the Federal Antimonopoly Service did the same.