Completing JEDZ and foreign supporting evidence for a Polish tender

A Polish tender's JEDZ is a declaration about the economic operator and the qualifications relevant to the competition. It should be prepared from the company's actual position and its proposed delivery arrangement. For a foreign bidder working with partners, the central task is to connect each declaration with the right legal entity, supporting evidence and authorised signatory.

Start by reading the procurement's SWZ, the specification of contract conditions. Identify the required declarations, the procedure's timing and the evidence requested for the conditions the business intends to satisfy. A form reused from another competition can help with preparation, but it cannot decide which entities or qualifications belong in this response.

Distinguish the declaration from the evidence behind it

The UZP's commentary on article 125 describes JEDZ as preliminary evidence that temporarily replaces the supporting documents requested by the buyer. It explains that each joint bidder makes its own declaration, and that an entity supplying relied-on resources provides a declaration covering its relevant position. The response therefore needs an entity-by-entity view.

Consider a hypothetical Czech records-management company bidding with a Polish implementation business. The Czech company supplies the software service and relevant project experience; the Polish company proposes local onboarding and support. Their preparation should show which participant meets each stated condition and what work that participant will perform.

A combined company presentation will not answer every declaration question. Corporate identity, exclusion information and the experience attributed to an entity need to remain identifiable. The coordinator should not copy the lead bidder's answers into the partner's form simply to keep the package visually consistent.

Use the same discipline for a separate company whose capacity supports the bid. Identify the exact resource being relied on and obtain its approval for the corresponding statement. The commercial delivery arrangement should make that resource available in the way the offer describes. A reference to a prestigious partner is much less useful than a precise, supportable contribution.

Establish the submission sequence from the procedure

UZP's article 125 commentary also describes the exception in an open procedure using the specified reverse evaluation process: the buyer can provide in the SWZ for requesting JEDZ only from the highest-rated bidder. That is a reason to read the actual conditions, rather than assume either that every declaration is always due with the offer or that it can always wait.

Build the evidence timetable around the procedure the buyer has chosen. The team should know what must accompany the initial response and what must be available for a later request. A later formal submission date does not eliminate the need to understand whether the company can truthfully make the underlying declaration now.

For the records-management partners, this means checking the relevant experience and corporate information during bid preparation. If a requested certificate requires input from a foreign authority or a director living in another country, identify that dependency early. The work can be scheduled proportionately without leaving the company unable to respond when the buyer asks.

The timetable should also preserve review responsibility. The person completing a form needs confirmation from the company concerned, and the person signing needs authority for that action. The proposal coordinator can manage the sequence without personally certifying facts that only a partner's management can establish.

Map foreign evidence to the person and requirement

The 2023 amendment to Poland's evidence regulation expressly addresses the country of residence of the person concerned, alongside the supplier's seat or residence, in the relevant foreign criminal-record evidence provisions. It also specifies a formal declaration route where the prescribed documents are not issued or do not cover the relevant grounds. A casual company letter is not automatically that formal substitute.

The practical lesson is to identify the subject of each document. A company-register extract, a tax document and information concerning an individual answer different questions. A document issued in the company's home country may not cover every person or circumstance described in the procurement requirements.

The Czech company should therefore prepare a document map naming the requirement, the entity or person concerned, the issuing source and the intended evidence. Where the mapping is uncertain, the question to resolve is precise: whether this document addresses this requirement for this subject. Translating a familiar certificate into Polish does not expand what that certificate proves.

For example, record whether a project reference describes the whole contract or only the part performed by the named partner. The buyer needs a supportable account of that contribution. The partners should resolve differences in project dates, customer names or service descriptions before those differences appear across their declarations.

Check the document's scope before paying for translation or certification. A clear source document and an accurate translation should remain connected so the buyer can identify names, dates and the relevant statement. If the evidence is incomplete, obtaining a better translation of the same incomplete document will not solve the underlying problem.

Account for current certification without treating it as universal

The current consolidated Public Procurement Act, in the Sejm's version dated 28 July 2026, includes article 124 provisions allowing the relevant public-procurement contractor certificate to replace supporting evidence within its certified scope, subject to stated exceptions. A supplier using such a certificate should map its actual coverage to the tender, rather than assume it replaces every document or the complete response.

That creates another possible evidence route, not a reason to abandon the entity map. The company still needs to understand which qualifications and exclusion matters the certificate addresses and which requirements remain outside it. The procurement team should record the source of the evidence it proposes to use for each relevant condition.

For a business entering Poland for the first time, the immediate bid decision should use evidence it can actually provide. A possible future certification project may be worthwhile for repeated tendering, but it should not be presented as an existing certificate. Separate longer-term administrative investment from the supportable position in the current competition.

Use the form service as a drafting tool

The official UZP JEDZ service page links its free electronic tool and explains that users can create, reuse and inspect forms. The tool assists preparation; the procurement's required transmission and signature process still governs how the completed declaration becomes part of the response.

The coordinator should compare the completed forms with the participant map before submission. Check that names and identifiers agree, that each resource claim appears under the appropriate entity and that the answers reflect the current competition. A reused form should receive the same factual review as a new one.

Keep that preparation connected to the Polish notice and electronic-procurement workflow. The notice identifies the opportunity, while the linked procurement documents supply the instructions that control the response. Save the relevant version with the evidence decisions so a later reviewer can reconstruct why particular declarations were included.

Financial preparation is a separate dependency. If the tender requires Polish bid security, or wadium, the banking work should run alongside the evidence timetable. Completing JEDZ does not arrange that security, just as arranging a guarantee does not establish the bidder's qualifications.

The useful outcome is a coherent set of declarations backed by identifiable evidence and approved by the right entities. That gives a foreign supplier a stronger basis for answering buyer requests and avoids treating form completion as the end of qualification preparation.