Legal Compliance60/100
The tender defines an open procedure and provides a reasonable submission period. However, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria and explicit mandatory exclusion/eligibility grounds in the provided information represents a significant legal transparency concern. The CPV code, while acceptable, could be more precise.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•Potential absence of explicit mandatory exclusion/eligibility grounds
Clarity60/100
The description of the requirement and the technical specifications for the air quality sensors are clear and understandable. However, the complete absence of evaluation criteria makes it unclear for bidders how their proposals will be assessed, which is a major deficiency in clarity.
•Missing evaluation criteria
Completeness55/100
Basic information such as title, organization, reference, estimated value, duration, and location are well-defined. The tender also references a Preliminary Market Engagement. Nevertheless, the critical omission of evaluation criteria and explicit mandatory exclusion/eligibility grounds constitutes a significant gap in the completeness of the tender documentation.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•Potential absence of explicit mandatory exclusion/eligibility grounds
Fairness65/100
The Preliminary Market Engagement (PME) process indicates an effort to engage the market and ensure requirements are not tailored. The value is disclosed, and the preparation time is reasonable. However, the lack of specified evaluation criteria severely compromises the objectivity and transparency of the assessment process, and the absence of e-submission limits equal access for all potential bidders.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•No electronic submission
Practicality55/100
Key practical details like contract start date and duration are clearly stated. However, the lack of support for electronic submission is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement, potentially increasing administrative burden for bidders.
•No electronic submission
Data Consistency90/100
The tender information is largely consistent, with logical dates and no reported disputes or suspensions. Most key fields are populated, ensuring a reliable dataset.
•Minor gaps in 'Liable Person' and specific procedure codes
Sustainability50/100
The tender explicitly notes an 'Innovation Focus' and the project itself, monitoring air quality, inherently contributes to environmental sustainability. However, the tender documentation does not include explicit green procurement criteria for the sensors or services, nor does it specify any social aspects.
•No explicit green procurement criteria
•No social criteria