Estimating the contract value in an EU project – practical rules

Estimating the contract value in an EU project is a mandatory step preceding the initiation of a procurement procedure for eligible expenditure. In practice, it means determining with due diligence the contractor's expected remuneration excluding VAT and on the basis of current market data, aggregating identical contracts and correctly setting the time horizon.

Errors in estimation are one of the most common causes of financial corrections, which is why beneficiaries should treat this stage as part of managing the project's financial risk, and not merely as a documentation formality.

What estimating the contract value is and why it matters

The estimated value of a contract is the contractor's expected net remuneration (excluding value added tax), determined with due diligence, covering all the services within the subject of the contract, including options, renewals, supplementary services and prizes provided for in a design contest.

In projects financed from EU funds, a correct estimate of the value serves three essential functions:

• it determines the procurement procedure (a contract below the competitiveness principle threshold with documented market prices, the competitiveness principle, the Public Procurement Law Act),
• it determines the obligations regarding the publication of notices (including in the Baza Konkurencyjności (Competitiveness Database)),
• it forms the basis for the institution providing support to assess the eligibility of the expenditure.

The consequences of irregularities are tangible. In accordance with the tariff of financial corrections (Regulation of the Minister of Development Funds and Regional Policy on the conditions for reducing the value of financial corrections), an unauthorised understatement of the contract value in order to avoid applying the proper procedures may result in a correction of up to 100% of the expenditure. This is a direct risk of losing funding for the given budget item.

Applicable legal bases and guidelines

Estimating the contract value in an EU project is governed in parallel by national legislation and horizontal guidelines. The scope of their application depends on the beneficiary's status (whether it is a contracting authority within the meaning of the PZP) and on the value and nature of the contract.

The most important acts and documents:

• the Act of 11 September 2019 – Public Procurement Law (Articles 28–36 concerning the estimation of value),
• the Guidelines on the eligibility of expenditure for 2021-2027 (the subchapter on the award of contracts, including the competitiveness principle),
• project selection rules and the grant agreement for the given programme.

Beneficiaries outside the public finance sector, as a rule, do not apply the PZP Act, but are obliged to comply with the competitiveness principle arising from the Guidelines. The current wording of these documents can be verified in the knowledge base published on the European Funds website.

The due diligence principle in practice

The legislator uses the concept of “due diligence” without a rigid methodological definition. In audit practice, an estimate based on at least one of the following methods is considered correct:

• an analysis of prices from requests sent to potential contractors (at least three requests are recommended),
• an analysis of prices from publicly available price lists, commercial offers and product catalogues,
• an analysis of contracts concluded by the beneficiary or other entities for identical contracts in the last 12 months,
• an analysis of the results of previously conducted procedures for similar contracts,
• an analysis of data from public databases, including notices in the Baza Konkurencyjności (Competitiveness Database) and public procurement bulletins.

Documenting the process is crucial. The note on the estimation of the contract value should indicate the method, the data sources (together with dates), the assumptions adopted and the final result. A lack of such documentation – even where the value has been determined correctly – is most often questioned during ex post audits.

Aggregating identical contracts – the most difficult element of estimation

The most common cause of financial corrections in the area of estimation is the unauthorised splitting of a contract into parts in order to avoid applying the proper procedure. To avoid this, the beneficiary must add up the values of all identical contracts planned to be awarded within the reference period.

Criteria for the identity of contracts

Contracts are considered identical if they jointly meet three criteria:

• subject-matter identity – they concern supplies, services or works of the same type and with the same purpose,
• contractor identity – they can be performed by the same contractor (there is a group of contractors capable of performing the whole),
• temporal identity – they can be awarded within a foreseeable, similar time horizon.

Practical example: the purchase of five computers in January, two laptops in March and a server in June, financed from the same project, should be treated as a single contract for computer equipment. The aggregation covers the net values of all items, and the result determines the procurement procedure for the whole.

Reference period

For contracts financed under an EU project, the reference period is, as a rule, the entire project implementation period specified in the grant agreement. This means that, at the purchase planning stage, the beneficiary should foresee all identical contracts over the entire project horizon, and not only in the current budget year.

The most common mistakes in estimating the contract value

Experience from audits carried out by intermediate bodies and the Supreme Audit Office (NIK) points to a recurring catalogue of irregularities:

• artificial splitting of a contract – separately estimating items that form a functional whole,
• omitting VAT in the eligibility analysis where the beneficiary is not entitled to deduct it (VAT is then eligible and should be included in the budget, although the estimate of the contract value itself is made in net amounts),
• basing the estimate on a single source – e.g. solely on the offer of one supplier,
• failure to update the estimate – using data from more than a year earlier during a period of high inflation,
• failure to take into account supplementary contracts, options or renewals provided for in the contract,
• no documentation of the estimation process.

Each of these irregularities may be considered a breach resulting in a financial correction. The scale of the correction depends on the nature of the breach and its impact on compliance with the competitiveness principles.

When is it necessary to update the contract value estimate?

The estimated value of the contract should be up to date at the time the procedure is initiated. In accordance with Article 35(1) of the PZP Act – also used in practice as a reference point for the competitiveness principle – the contract value is determined no earlier than:

• 3 months before the procedure is initiated – for supplies and services,
• 6 months before the procedure is initiated – for construction works.

Documenting the estimation process

From an audit perspective, the documentation is as important as the result of the estimate itself. The recommended scope of documents includes:

• an internal memo or report on the estimation of the contract value,
• requests for quotation sent to contractors together with the replies received,
• printouts of price lists and public offers, dated screenshots,
• auxiliary calculations (spreadsheets, summaries),
• a justification of the choice of estimation method,
• an indication of the person responsible and the date of preparation.

These documents should be kept for the archiving period specified in the grant agreement – as a rule, for the project durability period and the additional years arising from State aid rules.

Estimation and the budget in the grant application

Estimating the contract value is related to, but not identical with, the calculation of costs at the grant application stage. At the application stage, the beneficiary presents a justification of the amount of costs, most often on the basis of preliminary quotations, price lists or experience from previous projects. After the grant agreement has been signed and before the procurement procedure is initiated, the estimate must be carried out again in accordance with the rules described above.

A discrepancy between the value in the application and the value from the estimate is not automatically an irregularity. It results from a natural change in market conditions. What matters is that the contracted value falls within the eligible expenditure limit and that the procurement procedure is appropriate to the estimated value. Practical support in preparing the budget is provided by specialised grant advisory services.

Estimation in mixed and partial contracts

In the case of contracts whose subject covers different categories of services (e.g. delivery of equipment together with an implementation service and training), the contract value is determined jointly, and the procedure is determined according to the category with the dominant value. A contract may be divided into parts if this is based on objective grounds – e.g. the specialisation of the market of contractors – provided that the sum of the values of all parts forms the basis for determining the procedure for the entire contract.

Division into parts may increase the participation of small and medium-sized enterprises in the procedure, which is consistent with the EU horizontal policy. However, it does not release the beneficiary from the obligation to add up the values of the parts for the purpose of determining the procedure.

Practical recommendations for beneficiaries

From the perspective of managing an EU project, it is worth implementing the following organisational solutions:

• preparing a procurement schedule at the beginning of the project, identifying identical contracts,
• appointing a person responsible for estimation and for documenting the process,
• using a standardised template for the estimation note,
• monitoring market prices on an ongoing basis in key purchasing categories,
• consulting the project officer at the institution on any interpretation doubts before initiating the procedure,
• archiving the complete documentation in a way that allows it to be made available quickly during an audit.

Implementing these principles significantly reduces the risk of financial corrections and ensures smooth settlement of the project.

If you are planning to apply for funding or are implementing a project that requires procurement procedures in line with the competitiveness principle, it is worth verifying in advance the eligibility of the investment, the call deadlines and the applicable thresholds.Contact an expert

Current calls can be checked on Mapa Dotacji.