Legal Compliance85/100
The tender clearly defines the procedure as an Open procedure for a DPS under the Light Touch Regime and Public Contract Regulations 2015, with a correctly assigned CPV code. While a reveal date is missing, the continuous nature of a DPS for new applicants mitigates this concern. No disputes or suspensions are noted.
Clarity70/100
The description of the DPS, its purpose, lots, and types of childcare is clear and unambiguous. AI-extracted requirements are also well-defined. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria is a significant drawback, impacting the overall clarity for potential bidders.
•No evaluation criteria specified
Completeness60/100
Basic information, estimated value, and DPS validity period are provided. However, the full Invitation to Tender (ITT) documentation, which is stated to contain full details, is not directly accessible or summarized beyond a single PDF. This omission, along with the lack of explicit evaluation criteria, represents a notable gap in completeness.
•Full ITT documentation not provided/accessible
•No evaluation criteria specified
Fairness75/100
The DPS structure, division into lots, disclosed value, and e-procurement support promote fairness. Requirements appear generic and not tailored. However, the lack of direct access to the full ITT and the absence of explicit evaluation criteria reduce transparency, which is crucial for ensuring objective and fair assessment.
•Full ITT documentation not directly accessible
•No evaluation criteria specified
Practicality70/100
Electronic submission is supported, and the DPS start and end dates are clearly specified. Financing information is also available. The main practical limitation is the absence of a direct URL for the full tender documents, requiring bidders to navigate an e-procurement portal.
•No direct document URL provided
Data Consistency90/100
Key fields are largely populated, and dates related to the DPS validity are logical and consistent. There are no reported suspensions or disputes. The 'Liable Person' field is empty, which is a minor omission.
•Liable Person field is empty
Sustainability30/100
The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects (beyond the core service of childcare), or innovation focus. It is also not indicated as EU funded, suggesting a lack of emphasis on broader sustainability objectives.
•Not green procurement
•No social criteria explicitly mentioned