Legal Compliance75/100
The tender defines an open procedure and assigns an appropriate CPV code. The submission deadline is well in the future from today's date, suggesting a reasonable period once officially published. However, the actual 'reveal date' is missing, making it impossible to confirm the minimum 7-day period from official publication. The classified value and missing evaluation criteria are significant compliance gaps for a full tender.
•Missing tender reveal date
•Estimated value is classified and not disclosed
Clarity80/100
The description of the required services and the AI-extracted technical capabilities are very clear and unambiguous, providing a good understanding of the project scope. However, the complete absence of evaluation criteria significantly hinders bidders' understanding of how their proposals will be assessed.
•No evaluation criteria specified
Completeness70/100
Basic information such as title, reference, organization, deadlines, duration, and CPV code are provided. A document is attached and summarized. However, critical information like the estimated contract value, detailed financial requirements, and especially the evaluation criteria are missing, which are fundamental for a comprehensive tender.
•Estimated contract value not disclosed
•No evaluation criteria specified
Fairness60/100
The requirements for the service appear generic and not tailored to a specific company, and the notice mentions suitability for SMEs. However, the classified contract value reduces transparency, and the complete absence of evaluation criteria makes it difficult for bidders to prepare competitive and relevant proposals. The flagged lack of e-submission also presents a barrier to equal access and modern procurement practices.
•Estimated contract value is classified
•No evaluation criteria specified
Practicality65/100
The contract start date and duration are clearly specified, which is practical for planning. However, the lack of an indicated electronic submission method is a significant practical drawback. No specific document URL is provided, and detailed financing information is absent.
•No electronic submission indicated
•No specific document URL provided
Data Consistency90/100
The tender information is largely consistent, with logical dates for submission and contract start. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. Minor fields like 'Liable Person' are empty, and some codes are 'N/A', but these do not indicate major inconsistencies.
•Some minor fields are empty (e.g., Liable Person)
Sustainability50/100
The tender does not explicitly include any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. While this is a consultancy service, modern public procurement increasingly integrates these criteria to achieve broader public policy objectives.
•No explicit green procurement criteria
•No explicit social criteria