Legal Compliance75/100
The procedure type and CPV code are clearly defined, and there are no disputes. However, the absence of a reveal date, detailed mandatory exclusion grounds, and crucially, evaluation criteria, represents significant legal compliance shortcomings.
•Missing reveal date
•Missing detailed mandatory exclusion grounds
Clarity80/100
The description and AI-extracted requirements are clear and understandable regarding the scope and capabilities. Nevertheless, the explicit absence of evaluation criteria significantly diminishes the overall clarity of the tender process for potential bidders.
•Missing evaluation criteria
Completeness70/100
Basic information, deadlines, value, and duration are all present. Requirements are listed, but the critical absence of evaluation criteria and detailed mandatory exclusion grounds renders the tender incomplete for a comprehensive submission.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•Missing detailed mandatory exclusion grounds
Fairness85/100
The estimated value is disclosed, and the requirements appear generic, not tailored to a specific company. E-procurement is indicated, supporting equal access. However, the lack of specified evaluation criteria significantly impacts transparency and fairness.
•Missing evaluation criteria
Practicality65/100
E-Procurement is listed as a characteristic, suggesting electronic submission is supported, though an automated check contradicts this. A direct document URL is not provided, and the contract start date is not specified, which are minor practical inconveniences.
•No direct document URL provided
•Contract start date not known
Data Consistency90/100
Key data fields are largely consistent, including logical dates and active status. Minor inconsistencies include an empty 'Liable Person' field and 'Code: N/A' for procedure types, along with the contradiction regarding e-submission.
•Liable Person field is empty
•Contradiction between 'E-Procurement' characteristic and 'No e-submission' automated check
Sustainability50/100
The tender demonstrates a clear environmental focus by aiming to improve waste management and environmental footprint. However, it lacks explicit mention of social aspects or innovation criteria, and it is not EU funded.
•No explicit social criteria
•No innovation focus