CSI/CYP/Additional Provision Framework - Therapists, Mentors & Tutors

This tender for EHCP provision demonstrates good initial clarity regarding its purpose and scope but suffers from significant deficiencies in legal compliance, completeness, and fairness due to the absence of critical information such as mandatory exclusion grounds, specific financial requirements, and, most notably, evaluation criteria.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV code correctly, and there are no reported disputes. However, the absence of mandatory exclusion grounds, specific financial requirements, and explicit evaluation criteria represents significant non-compliance with standard procurement regulations, which require transparency and clear rules for participation and assessment.

The overall description of the framework and its purpose is clear and understandable. However, the lack of detailed mandatory exclusion grounds, financial requirements, and especially the complete absence of evaluation criteria severely diminishes the clarity for potential bidders regarding how their submissions will be assessed and what specific conditions they must meet.

While basic information like title, organization, value, and duration is provided, the tender is critically incomplete due to the absence of mandatory exclusion grounds, specific financial requirements, and evaluation criteria. The 'Missing reveal date' and unclear status of full tender documents also contribute to incompleteness.

The requirements appear generic, suggesting no tailoring to a specific company. However, the complete absence of evaluation criteria is a major impediment to fairness, as it prevents bidders from understanding the basis of assessment and introduces potential for arbitrary decisions. Unclear document access also raises fairness concerns.

The tender lists 'E-Procurement' as a characteristic, which is positive, but this is contradicted by an automated flag of 'No e-submission'. The absence of a direct document URL and a specified contract start date also presents practical hurdles for interested parties.

The tender exhibits notable inconsistencies, specifically regarding the estimated value (EUR vs. GBP) and contract duration (48 months vs. five years). The 'Liable Person' field is also empty, and the reveal date is missing.

The tender does not explicitly incorporate green procurement, social criteria, or innovation focus, as indicated by automated checks. While the service itself has a social purpose, the procurement process lacks specific sustainability-related requirements for bidders.