Contractor certification: a revolution in public procurement or just another formality?

Is the era of having to submit the same documents repeatedly in every procedure coming to an end? This is the promise held by the forthcoming Act on the Certification of Contractors, the main provisions of which are due to come into force on 12 July 2026. The new mechanism is designed to simplify and speed up contractor verification, but will it in fact prove to be the revolution the market is waiting for, or just another mechanism for the initiated? Let’s take a look at what the new regulations mean for contractors and contracting authorities.

In this article, you will learn:

• What is contractor certification, and how is it intended to simplify the verification of contractors in public procurement?
• Who will be eligible for certification, and what scope of contracts will the new scheme cover?
• What types of certificates does the Act provide for, and what can be confirmed using them?
• What will the procedure be if the contracting authority challenges the certificate?
• What information will be included in the Public Procurement Contractors’ Certification Database, and what will it be used for?
• in what situations will the certificate not replace existing documents and evidence?
• What benefits can certification bring to contractors and clients?

Abstract

The background check on Contractors is a mandatory and, at the same time, the most bureaucratic stage of the tender evaluation process. The recently introduced certification of contractors is intended to simplify and speed up this process by minimising the documentation requirements for both contractors (submission) and contracting authorities (verification). If, once the Act has fully come into force and covers the entire market, practice aligns with the proposed scope of certification, this will undoubtedly result in a shorter due diligence process and increased competitiveness in the procurement procedures conducted.

Keywords

certification of contractors, entity-specific measures, public procurement, certification database

A public procurement contractor’s certificate will be nothing more than a document confirming that the contractor has undergone certification, pursuant to the Act of 5 August 2025 on the certification of public procurement contractors (Journal of Laws of 2025, item 1235). According to the guidelines, the purpose of the certificate is to provide objective confirmation of the contractor’s ability to perform a public contract and to replace subjective evidence. The contractor will therefore be entitled to rely on the certification and use the certificate for the purposes of a wide range of procurement procedures throughout the European Union, without having to gather and submit documents (subjective evidence) on each occasion.

Certification will be carried out by independent bodies specialising in this field, which will verify the contractor’s status in terms of compliance with specific requirements on the basis of the documents submitted. The certification mechanism relating to contractor qualifications will be optional, meaning that the use of a certificate will always be at the contractor’s discretion (the mechanism will operate in parallel with existing arrangements).

The certificate will be issued at the Contractor’s request for a period of between one and three years and will cover only those categories of the Contractor’s legal status that the Contractor specifies (e.g. only mandatory grounds for exclusion, or only confirmation of financial or economic capacity).

The scope of the certification will be independent of the value of the public contract. It covers standard and sector-specific contracts and, where applicable, public contracts to which the provisions of the Public Procurement Law do not apply mandatorily, e.g. contracts with a value of less than 170,000 zlotys. As regards the scope of certification in terms of eligible entities, any contractor for a public contract may apply for certification, with the exception of entities from outside the European Union (or the World Trade Organisation Agreement on Government Procurement) or states that are not parties to other international agreements guaranteeing, on the basis of reciprocity and equality, access to the public procurement market to which the European Union is a party.

The Act provides for two types of certification, namely:

1. Certification of non-exclusion – this involves confirming that there are no grounds for exclusion from the procurement procedure. Furthermore, this certification procedure provides for the possibility of carrying out a self-assessment, the outcome of which will be binding on all contracting authorities (e.g. no tax arrears, no criminal record).
2. Certification of capacity – this involves confirming the Contractor’s capacity to perform the contract properly (within the scope covered by the certification), and serves to demonstrate compliance with the conditions for participation in the procurement procedure, (e.g. specific experience, technical and organisational resources, qualified staff). It is worth noting that the draft bill refers to confirmation of the capacity to perform the contract properly, rather than to meeting the conditions for participation in the procurement procedure. This is because these conditions are formulated by the Contracting Authority only at the stage of the procurement procedure. In contrast, in the case of capacity certification, the Contractor will have their capacity confirmed by a professional certification body, which may meet those conditions in the future.

The Certification Act introduces a (rebuttable) legal presumption that a Contractor holding a valid certificate is not subject to exclusion and is capable of properly performing the contract within the scope covered by the certificate. This presumption may be rebutted if it is shown that the contractor misled the certifying body or no longer meets the conditions on which the certification is based.

1. 1. A condition for successfully challenging, avoiding exclusion or demonstrating the ability to perform the contract properly, arising from the certification granted, is that the contractor must use the certificate in connection with the procurement procedure. It will therefore not be possible for a third party, including the contracting authority or another contractor, to challenge the certification if the contractor does not submit the certificate in a specific procurement procedure.
2. 2. If the Contracting Authority disputes the certificate, it shall first request the contractor to provide an explanation within a specified period (not less than 5 days), and only if the Contracting Authority considers these to be insufficient shall it inform the certification body and forward to it the explanations provided by the Contractor.
3. 3. Following this, the certification body shall immediately carry out verification checks (within no more than 3 working days), after which it shall inform the Client of the validity of the certification, the suspension of its validity or the expiry of the certification.

Given the relatively short timeframe for verification, this type of check should not result in the proceedings being prolonged. In the event of the certification being suspended, the Contracting Authority shall request the Contractor to submit, within a specified period (at least 5 days), substantive (traditional) evidence, and shall decide on the Contractor’s situation on the basis of such evidence.

The Act provides for the creation of a Database on the Certification of Public Procurement Contractors. First and foremost, it will collect information on certifications granted and certificates issued (valid, suspended pending renewal, and invalid), on contractors who have applied for public procurement contractor certification, and on certifying bodies.

As part of public access to the data held in the database, a valid contractor’s certificate will be made available. Anyone will be able to download this document themselves, free of charge, in electronic form.

The data collected in the database will be used primarily by contracting authorities to assess the suitability of contractors applying for public contracts; in particular, they will be able to check the validity of any certification granted directly within the database. Furthermore, the database will serve as a source of information for contractors regarding certification bodies.

Certification bodies will be required to publish information concerning certification and contractors applying for a certificate, as well as information on updates to the validity of certification. At the same time, in the event that a certification expires or is suspended, the certifying body will be obliged to restrict the ability to download the certificate document independently, for the duration of the suspension, and permanently if the certification has expired.

Importantly, Article 29(3) of the Certification Act explicitly establishes the certifying body’s responsibility for the content of the data it has entered into the certification database, and for the content of the certificate itself made available in the database (its accuracy and completeness).

Admittedly, in practice, certification should replace all the data available in most public registers – and thus most of the information required to demonstrate that there are no grounds for exclusion – but it cannot be regarded as a definitive solution.

First and foremost, it cannot replace declarations based solely on the Contractor’s own knowledge, such as a declaration regarding membership of a capital group or a sanctions declaration (concerning EU sanctions against the Russian Federation). If one takes into account the discretionary grounds for exclusion, the inclusion in the certificate of the grounds set out in Article 109(1)(5n) of the Public Procurement Law (breach of professional duties) and Articles 7–10 of the Public Procurement Law (non-performance or improper performance of a contract, misleading conduct, or influencing the procurement procedure) – given the current situation of extremely fragmented access to the necessary information – covering these grounds under the certification scheme must also be regarded as rather problematic.

Secondly, it will not cover information specific to a given tender. Consequently, the certification cannot cover the grounds set out in Article 108(1)(6) of the Public Procurement Law (the Contractor’s involvement in the preparation of the tender procedure) and in Article 109(1)(6) of the Public Procurement Law (an irreconcilable conflict of interest).

Finally, the Contracting Authority reserves the right to have the ‘final say’ on the matter of outstanding payments. Even if the contractor holds a certificate, the Contracting Authority may, just before the contract is signed, require the contractor to provide up-to-date certificates from ZUS/KRUS and the Tax Office for the purposes of final verification.

Naturally, in all areas not covered by certificates, it will be necessary to apply the traditional forms of evidence specified in the regulations.

In line with its objectives, the introduction of certification should lead to a significant reduction in the administrative burden on contractors, as well as to a reduction in the cost of participating in tender procedures, as there will be no need to pay fees repeatedly for individual documents. If a contractor opts for certification, instead of repeatedly gathering and submitting numerous documents for individual procurement procedures (e.g. certificates from the Tax Office or the Social Insurance Institution [ZUS], information from the National Debt Register [KRK]), they will do so only once for the purposes of certification. Thereafter, throughout the certificate’s period of validity, they will be able to use it to secure new public contracts. From the contractors’ perspective, there will undoubtedly be an increase in the objectivity and transparency of the verification process – it will be carried out by a body with no vested interest in the outcome of a specific tender procedure. For contracting authorities, an unquestionable benefit will be the shortening of the contractor assessment process and the reduction of the risk of potential allegations regarding the underestimation or overestimation of the conditions for participation in the procedure. Consequently, the public procurement market will gain in the area that matters most – competitiveness. It should open up more widely to the SME sector and occasional contractors, but there is no doubt that the solutions adopted will benefit everyone.