Legal Compliance65/100
The Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) is a legally recognized procurement procedure, and the CPV code is appropriate. However, the provided text explicitly notes the absence of specific mandatory exclusion grounds and financial requirements, which are typically legal prerequisites for a comprehensive tender notice. The lack of specified evaluation criteria also raises legal compliance concerns regarding transparency.
•Missing specific mandatory exclusion grounds in the provided text.
•Missing specific financial requirements in the provided text.
Clarity60/100
The description of the DPS, its purpose, categories, and operational model is very clear and unambiguous. However, the overall clarity for potential bidders is significantly hampered by the explicit absence of evaluation criteria and specific financial/exclusion grounds in the provided tender information.
•No evaluation criteria specified.
•Specific financial requirements are not detailed.
Completeness55/100
While basic information like title, organization, value, and duration are present, the tender information is notably incomplete regarding critical aspects. The explicit lack of mandatory exclusion grounds, financial requirements, and, most importantly, evaluation criteria means bidders cannot fully understand the tender's scope or how to prepare a competitive offer.
•No evaluation criteria specified.
•Specific financial requirements are not detailed.
Fairness35/100
The DPS structure, allowing continuous joining and supporting e-procurement, generally promotes fairness and equal access. However, the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria is a critical flaw, as it prevents bidders from understanding how their submissions will be judged, undermining transparency and objective competition.
•No evaluation criteria specified, severely impacting transparency and objective competition.
Practicality65/100
The tender supports electronic submission and clearly specifies the DPS duration and start date, which are practical aspects. However, the lack of a direct URL for tender documents and the absence of specific financial requirements (e.g., minimum turnover, insurance levels) make it less practical for immediate and comprehensive bidder assessment.
•No direct URL for tender documents provided.
•Specific financial requirements (e.g., turnover, insurance) are not detailed.
Data Consistency85/100
The tender exhibits good data consistency, with logical dates for the DPS duration and no reported disputes. Most key fields are populated, although the 'Liable Person' field is empty. The tender's description of e-procurement is consistent with its characteristics, despite a contradictory automated check result.
•Liable Person field is empty.
Sustainability60/100
The tender scores moderately on sustainability due to its explicit inclusion of 'Social Criteria' and its focus on transport for children and vulnerable adults. However, there is no explicit mention of green procurement initiatives or an innovation focus, limiting its overall sustainability profile.
•No explicit green procurement criteria.
•No explicit innovation focus.