Dynamic Purchasing System - Moves Management

This tender establishes a Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) for moves management services, offering flexibility and continuous joining, but critically lacks evaluation criteria and transparency regarding value.

The procedure type (DPS, Open) and CPV code are clearly defined, and no disputes are reported. The long submission period for initial applications to the DPS is highly reasonable. However, the lack of detailed mandatory exclusion grounds in the AI summary and the classified value are minor concerns regarding full transparency and compliance with best practices.

The overall description of the DPS and its lots is clear and unambiguous. However, the tender significantly lacks clarity regarding evaluation criteria, which is a critical omission. Specific financial requirements are also not detailed in the provided information, impacting a full understanding for potential suppliers.

Basic information like title, reference, organization, description, and duration are present. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, and crucial elements such as detailed financial requirements and, most importantly, evaluation criteria are explicitly noted as missing or not detailed. This significantly impacts the completeness of the tender documentation.

The Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) structure, allowing continuous joining and multiple suppliers across distinct lots, inherently promotes fair competition and equal access. Requirements appear generic and not tailored. However, the classified value reduces transparency, and the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria is a major concern, as it undermines objectivity and transparency in supplier selection.

The tender specifies "E-Procurement" as a characteristic, which generally enhances practicality. The duration is clearly stated. However, there's an inconsistency with the automated check flagging "No e-submission." Specific financing information beyond "not disclosed" is absent, and a precise contract start date is not provided, which could affect planning for suppliers.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. The primary inconsistency lies in the contradiction between "E-Procurement" being listed as a characteristic and the automated check stating "No e-submission." The "Liable Person" field is also empty.

The tender does not indicate any focus on green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also not EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards. This suggests a missed opportunity to integrate broader sustainability objectives.