Provision of Care & Support Service in Extra Care Housing Scheme

This tender for domiciliary care services exhibits a clear service description and strong social criteria, but is significantly hampered by the absence of explicit evaluation criteria and a lack of e-submission, impacting fairness and clarity for potential bidders.

The tender clearly defines the open procedure and assigns an appropriate CPV code. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. However, the absence of a specified reveal date and the lack of explicit mandatory exclusion grounds in the provided summary are notable omissions that could impact full transparency and compliance with standard disclosure requirements. The missing evaluation criteria also pose a legal compliance risk regarding transparency.

The service description is detailed and unambiguous, clearly outlining the scope, aims, and underlying principles of the domiciliary care provision. However, the tender significantly lacks explicit evaluation criteria, making it difficult for bidders to understand how their proposals will be assessed. The AI-extracted requirements are also sparse, indicating a potential lack of detailed formal requirements in the provided summary.

The tender provides essential information such as title, reference, organization, estimated value, duration, and location. A document is attached. Nevertheless, a critical gap exists in the absence of explicit evaluation criteria and a comprehensive set of formal requirements beyond the general service description, which are crucial for bidders to submit a complete and compliant offer. The 'Liable Person' field is also empty.

The tender discloses the estimated value and appears to offer document access. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria is a significant fairness concern, as it prevents bidders from understanding the basis of assessment and creates an opaque selection process. The lack of e-submission also presents a barrier to equal access for all potential providers. There is no clear indication that requirements are tailored to a specific company.

Key practical details such as the contract start date, duration, and estimated value are clearly provided. However, the absence of electronic submission capabilities is a notable practical drawback in modern procurement, potentially increasing administrative burden for bidders and the contracting authority.

The tender exhibits good data consistency with logical dates and no reported disputes or suspensions. Most key fields are populated. Minor inconsistencies include the empty 'Liable Person' field and 'N/A' codes for procedure type, which are not critical but indicate slight incompleteness.

The tender demonstrates a strong commitment to social sustainability, explicitly mentioning "Social Criteria" and detailing a service model focused on wellbeing, independence, and community integration, aligning with Welsh Government policies. However, it does not indicate any focus on green procurement or innovation, nor is it EU funded.