London and Quadrant Housing Trust - Fire Engineering and Inspections Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS)

This tender for a Fire Engineering and Inspections DPS presents significant data inconsistencies and lacks critical information regarding evaluation criteria and financial requirements, impacting clarity and fairness. While the general description is clear and e-procurement is indicated, the overall quality is moderate due to these fundamental gaps.

The tender states compliance with PCR 2015 and uses a DPS, which is legally sound. However, the explicit contradiction between 'Restricted procedure' in the type/procedure fields and 'Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS)' in the description is a significant legal misclassification. The missing reveal date and absence of evaluation criteria also raise compliance concerns.

The general description of the services and the objective to establish a DPS is clear. However, the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria for admission to the DPS is a major clarity issue, making it difficult for potential bidders to understand the assessment process. Financial and detailed technical requirements are also not explicitly clear.

Basic information such as title, organization, and CPV code is present. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, financial requirements are missing, and crucially, evaluation criteria are not defined. The specified contract duration (1 month) and start date (same as submission deadline) are highly unrealistic for a DPS, indicating incomplete or placeholder data.

The tender indicates E-Procurement and requirements are generic, which are positive for fairness. However, the undisclosed estimated value and the complete absence of evaluation criteria severely undermine transparency and objectivity, making it difficult for all potential bidders to compete on an equal footing. Full document access is also not explicitly guaranteed without a direct URL.

E-Procurement is indicated, which is practical. However, the lack of a direct URL for accessing tender documents creates a practical barrier. The undisclosed value and the highly unrealistic contract start date and duration for a DPS also reduce the practicality and reliability of the tender information.

This category shows significant weaknesses. There is a fundamental contradiction between the stated 'Restricted procedure' and the objective to establish a 'Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS)'. The contract start date and duration are illogical for a DPS. Furthermore, there's a contradiction regarding e-procurement status (stated as characteristic but flagged as 'No e-submission' by automated checks).

The tender information does not include any explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not EU funded, which typically encourages higher sustainability standards.