London and Quadrant Housing Trust - Supply/Distribution of Concrete Blocks Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS

This tender for a Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) for concrete block distribution exhibits good clarity on its objective and scope, but is significantly hampered by a lack of transparency regarding contract value and evaluation criteria, alongside a highly questionable contract duration.

The tender explicitly references compliance with Public Contracts Regulations 2015 and uses a correct CPV code. However, the classification as 'Restricted procedure' for a DPS introduces a minor procedural ambiguity. More significantly, the classified value and absence of evaluation criteria represent transparency deficiencies under procurement regulations. The missing reveal date is also a minor concern.

The description of the procurement's objective and the eligibility/technical requirements are clear and understandable. However, the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria and explicit financial/submission requirements creates significant ambiguity for potential bidders.

Basic information such as title, organization, deadlines, and location is provided. However, critical elements like the estimated contract value, detailed evaluation criteria, and specific financial/submission requirements are either missing or incomplete. Only one of four tender documents has a content summary, suggesting potential incompleteness in the provided information.

While the requirements appear generic and e-procurement is enabled, the classified contract value and the complete absence of evaluation criteria severely undermine fairness and transparency. Bidders cannot adequately assess the opportunity or understand how their proposals will be judged, creating an uneven playing field.

The tender supports e-procurement, which is a positive for practicality. However, the classified value, the lack of a direct document URL, and especially the highly impractical and confusing 1-month contract duration for a Dynamic Purchasing System significantly reduce the tender's practicality for both the contracting authority and potential bidders.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are generally logical. However, the stated 'Contract Duration: 1 months' for a Dynamic Purchasing System is a major inconsistency, as DPS frameworks typically run for several years. The classification as 'Restricted procedure' for a DPS is also a minor inconsistency.

The tender provides no information or requirements related to green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also not EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.