WSCC AE Framework Reopening for Urgent and Specialist Personal Support Placements for Children’s Services

This tender for urgent and specialist personal support services exhibits significant gaps in critical information, particularly regarding mandatory requirements and evaluation criteria, which raises concerns about legal compliance, clarity, completeness, and fairness. While the service description is clear and basic information is present, these omissions are substantial.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV codes appropriately. However, the AI-extracted information explicitly states that mandatory exclusion grounds, eligibility requirements, financial requirements, and evaluation criteria are 'not specified'. This represents a significant compliance risk as these are fundamental elements required by procurement regulations. The missing reveal date is a minor transparency issue.

The description of the services required is clear and unambiguous. The technical capability requirements are also understandable. However, the explicit absence of specified mandatory exclusion grounds, eligibility requirements, financial requirements, and, critically, evaluation criteria, significantly diminishes the overall clarity for potential bidders.

While basic information such as title, organization, value, duration, and CPV code are present, the tender is significantly incomplete due to the explicit lack of mandatory exclusion grounds, eligibility requirements, financial requirements, and evaluation criteria. The 'Liable Person' field is also empty.

The estimated value is disclosed, and the technical requirements appear generic, not tailored. The preparation time (41 days) is reasonable. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria is a critical fairness issue, as it prevents bidders from understanding how their proposals will be assessed, undermining transparency and equal treatment. There's also a contradiction regarding e-procurement.

The tender specifies a contract duration and estimated value. However, there is a contradiction between 'E-Procurement' being a characteristic and the automated check flagging 'No e-submission'. A specific document URL is not provided, and a clear contract start date is missing, which reduces practicality for bidders.

There is a notable inconsistency between the 'E-Procurement' characteristic and the automated check indicating 'No e-submission'. Furthermore, the explicit 'not specified' for mandatory exclusion, eligibility, financial requirements, and evaluation criteria highlights significant gaps in consistent data provision.

The tender documentation does not explicitly incorporate green procurement, social criteria (beyond the inherent social nature of the service itself), or innovation focus. It is also not EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.