Legal Compliance65/100
While the procedure type (DPS) and CPV code are appropriate, the absence of specific mandatory exclusion grounds and evaluation criteria, along with a missing reveal date, indicates potential gaps in legal compliance and transparency. The long submission period for a DPS is generally compliant.
•Missing reveal date
•No specific mandatory exclusion grounds provided
Clarity55/100
The service description and basic eligibility/technical requirements are clear. However, the critical absence of evaluation criteria, specific financial requirements, and mandatory exclusion grounds significantly diminishes the overall clarity of the tender process.
•No evaluation criteria specified
•No specific financial requirements provided
Completeness45/100
Basic information is present, but the tender is critically incomplete. Key tender documents beyond a single non-required PDF are not provided, and essential details such as full financial requirements, mandatory exclusion grounds, and all evaluation criteria are missing. The contract start date is also illogical.
•Critical tender documents are not provided or accessible (only one non-required PDF listed)
•Missing specific financial requirements
Fairness50/100
The lack of specified evaluation criteria and potentially incomplete document access are major impediments to fairness and transparency. While requirements do not appear tailored, the absence of crucial information makes it difficult for all potential bidders to compete on an equal footing.
•No evaluation criteria specified, hindering objective assessment
•Incomplete document access (only one non-required PDF listed)
Practicality45/100
The absence of a direct document URL is a significant practical barrier. The contradiction between 'E-Procurement' being a characteristic and 'No e-submission' being flagged by automated checks creates confusion. The illogical contract start date further complicates practical understanding.
•No explicit document URL provided
•Contradiction regarding e-submission support
Data Consistency50/100
The tender exhibits significant data inconsistencies, most notably the 'Contract Start' date being in the past and before the submission deadline. The contradiction between 'E-Procurement' and 'No e-submission' also highlights data integrity issues. Some fields like 'Liable Person' are empty.
•Contract start date (2023-03-30) is before today's date and the submission deadline
•Contradiction between 'E-Procurement' characteristic and 'No e-submission' flag
Sustainability20/100
The tender does not include any explicit green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. This is common for highly specialized services but results in a low score for this category.
•No green procurement criteria
•No social aspects mentioned