-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Ecuador R022, R023, R024, R028, R058 collusion indicators #89
Comments
Ok, so I'll change R058 to "no" in the spreadsheet. |
For R028 (Different tenderers submitted bids with the same price.) do we need to only consider the last bid? It seems fine to consider all bids by the same tenderer. |
For R024 (Price close to winning bid), I've now fixed a bug, so that we treat the lowest bid by the winner as the winning bid. We don't need to exclude any bids from non-winners, since each is individually compared to the winning bid to determine the second-lowest (and we already don't compare the winner's other bids to itself). |
Although R036 is not calculated for Ecuador, I've made the new configuration ( |
@Camilamila I don't see the problem with considering all bids, not just the last? |
For R024, if we already don't compare the winner's other bids to itself, as you mention then it wouldn't be a problem. Similar to R028 |
And similar for R022 and R023 (i.e. as long as we don't compare a tenderer's own bids to each other) ? |
Yes! |
procurementMethodDetails='Subasta Inversa Electrónica'
). We verified with Sercop and they agreed the indicators can be calculated for this method.price_comparison_procurement_methods
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: