Legal Compliance60/100
The tender references PCR 2015 and defines the procedure type clearly. Deadlines are reasonable. However, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria is a major legal compliance issue, as it undermines transparency and fairness required by procurement regulations. The missing reveal date is a minor concern.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•Missing reveal date
Clarity55/100
The description of the services and AI-extracted requirements are clear. However, the overall clarity is severely hampered by the absence of 'Document No. 2 (The Specification)' which is stated to contain further details, and the complete lack of specified evaluation criteria.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•Crucial 'Document No. 2 (The Specification)' content not provided
Completeness50/100
Basic information, value, duration, and deadlines are provided. However, the tender is significantly incomplete due to the absence of crucial documents, particularly 'Document No. 2 (The Specification)', and the complete lack of defined evaluation criteria.
•Crucial 'Document No. 2 (The Specification)' content not provided
•Missing evaluation criteria
Fairness40/100
While the value is disclosed and deadlines are reasonable, the lack of access to 'Document No. 2 (The Specification)' and, most critically, the absence of specified evaluation criteria severely compromise the fairness and transparency of the procurement process. This creates an uneven playing field for potential bidders.
•No evaluation criteria specified
•Crucial 'Document No. 2 (The Specification)' content not provided
Practicality60/100
The tender indicates E-Procurement, which is a positive for practicality. However, the absence of a direct document URL is a significant practical barrier for bidders. The contract start date is also not explicitly clear.
•Document URL not provided
•Contract start date not explicitly clear
Data Consistency70/100
Most key fields are populated, and there are no disputes. The 're-opening September 2021' in the title with a 2026 deadline is plausible for a DPS. However, there is a contradiction between the 'E-Procurement' characteristic and the automated check's 'No e-submission' flag. The 'Liable Person' field is also missing.
•Contradiction between 'E-Procurement' characteristic and 'No e-submission' automated check
•'Liable Person' missing
Sustainability40/100
The tender does not explicitly include green procurement criteria, social aspects beyond the inherent nature of the service, or an innovation focus. It is also not EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.
•No explicit green procurement criteria
•No explicit social criteria (beyond inherent service nature)