Adults Mental Health Lot 3 - Framework Agreement for Supported Living in Norfolk

This tender documentation is clear in its service description and requirements, but it suffers from a critical lack of specified evaluation criteria, impacting transparency and fairness. The long submission period is a positive aspect, but the overall completeness of the provided summary is moderate.

The procedure type and CPV code are clearly defined, and there are no reported disputes. The submission deadline of 2028-12-31, from today's date of 2026-01-18, provides an exceptionally long period for preparation. However, the missing reveal date and, more critically, the absence of specified evaluation criteria are significant legal transparency concerns.

The description of the service, target group, and scope (Lot 3) is very clear and unambiguous. The AI-extracted eligibility, technical, and submission requirements are well-articulated and understandable. The major deficiency, however, is the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria, which significantly reduces overall clarity for bidders.

Basic information such as title, reference, organization, financial details, timeline, and classification are provided. Requirements are outlined, though some refer to full documents for specifics. However, the tender summary indicates only 1 of 4 documents is processed, and crucial details like evaluation criteria, specific financial thresholds, and a direct document URL are missing from the provided content.

The estimated value is disclosed, e-procurement is enabled, and the requirements appear generic and not tailored to a specific company. The submission deadline is exceptionally long, providing ample preparation time. The primary concern for fairness is the complete lack of specified evaluation criteria, which hinders transparency and objective assessment of bids.

Electronic submission is supported, and the contract duration is clearly specified. However, a direct document URL is not provided in the summary, and the contract start date is not explicitly stated, which can create practical hurdles for bidders trying to access full information and plan accordingly.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical and consistent. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. Minor inconsistencies include the empty 'Liable Person' field and the missing reveal date. The contradiction between 'E-Procurement' characteristic and 'No e-submission' in automated checks is noted but resolved by prioritizing the characteristic.

The tender does not explicitly include green procurement, innovation focus, or additional social criteria beyond the inherent social benefit of providing mental health support services. It is also noted as not being EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.