Responsive Repairs, Voids and Multi Trade Project Works Dynamic Purchasing System (iFlair Consortium/West Central Scotland)

This tender establishes a Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) with a clear scope, but suffers from significant inconsistencies in procedure type and a critical lack of detail regarding qualification requirements and evaluation criteria.

The tender's legal compliance is moderately good, with appropriate CPV and NUTS codes. However, the contradiction between 'Restricted procedure' and 'Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS)' in the tender fields versus the description is a notable concern. The 'N/A' for procedure code and lack of detailed mandatory exclusion grounds in the summary also slightly detract from full compliance.

While the overall description of the DPS, its purpose, duration, value, and categories is clear, the tender lacks clarity on crucial aspects for suppliers. The absence of specified evaluation criteria for DPS qualification and the minimal detail on mandatory exclusion grounds are significant drawbacks. The inconsistency in procedure type also introduces ambiguity.

Basic information such as title, reference, organization, value, and duration is complete. However, the tender is incomplete regarding critical details for the DPS qualification stage, specifically the full requirements for suppliers, detailed evaluation criteria, and comprehensive mandatory exclusion grounds. The ambiguity of 'Required: No' for the PDF document is also a minor point.

The fairness of the tender is significantly impacted by the explicit lack of specified evaluation criteria, which hinders transparency and equal opportunity for all potential suppliers. The contradiction between 'E-Procurement' and 'No e-submission' also raises concerns about equal access to the application process. While categories are generic, the absence of clear qualification rules makes it difficult to ensure an objective assessment.

Practicality is hampered by the contradiction regarding electronic submission capabilities ('E-Procurement' characteristic versus 'No e-submission' issue). If e-submission is not supported, it presents a significant practical barrier. A direct document URL is not provided, which could make accessing full tender documents less straightforward. The duration and value are clearly specified.

The tender exhibits significant data inconsistencies. The most prominent is the contradiction between the stated 'Restricted procedure' and the description of a 'Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS)'. Furthermore, the 'E-Procurement' characteristic conflicts with the 'No e-submission' automated check result. The 'Liable Person' field is empty, and procedure codes are 'N/A'.

The tender does not explicitly incorporate any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. While these might be defined at the subsequent Invitation to Tender (ITT) stage by individual PfH Members, their absence at the DPS framework level indicates a lack of overarching sustainability emphasis.