This indicator is contradictory to the prescriptions of the EU Public Procurement Directive or the Hungarian Public Procurement Law, but according to the authors is in line with a corrupt rent extraction logic, since contract awards are annulled and relaunched more often when there were multiple bidders .The indicator's value is set 0, if the contract was awarded in a non-annulled procedure and 1, if the contract was awarded in a procedure annulled, but relaunched. Both annulations by the procuring entities or courts are taken into consideration.
Not publishing the call for tenders in the official journal increases the probability of single received and valid bids and the winner’s contract share in every regression. Therefore the indicator's value is set 0, if the call for tender was published in official journal and 1, if no call for tender was published in official journal
Modifying call for tenders allows for excluding unwanted bidders by changing eligibility criteria once the interested bidders are known. Therefore the indicator's value is set 0, if call for tenders are NOT modified and 1, if call for tenders are modified.
According to the developers of CRI, contract modification(s) suggests that the procuring entity corruptly favour a well-connected company, potentially repeatedly. Therefore the indicator's values is set 0 if the contract was not modified during delivery and 1, if the contract was modified during delivery.
Every non-open procedure type carries a higher corruption risk than open procedures in terms of single received and valid bids and winner’s contract share. Therefore developers set the indicator's value 0 , if there is ano open procedure, 1, if there is an invitation procedure, 2, if there is a negotiation procedure, and 3, if there are other procedures (e.g. competitive dialogue). Indicator's value is 4, if procedure type is missing/erroneous.