TOXICOLOGY SERVICE for HM CORONER for SUFFOLK

This tender provides clear service requirements and basic information but suffers from significant gaps in evaluation criteria, explicit financial requirements, and the lack of e-submission, impacting fairness and completeness.

The tender defines an open procedure and uses an appropriate CPV code. The 16-day period from today's date to the submission deadline is generally reasonable. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria is a significant legal compliance issue, as is the missing reveal date and liable person.

The description of the required toxicology service is clear and unambiguous. The AI-extracted eligibility and technical requirements are also well-defined. However, the complete absence of evaluation criteria significantly diminishes the overall clarity for potential bidders regarding how their proposals will be assessed.

Basic information such as title, organization, reference, value, duration, and CPV code are provided. However, the tender is incomplete due to the explicit lack of specified evaluation criteria and financial requirements for bidders. The liable person is also missing.

The tender value is disclosed, and requirements do not appear tailored. However, the absence of evaluation criteria creates a significant fairness concern, as bidders cannot objectively prepare their proposals or understand the basis of selection. The lack of e-submission also presents a barrier to equal access and participation.

The contract start date and duration are clearly specified. However, the explicit lack of electronic submission support ("No e-submission") is a major practical drawback, potentially increasing administrative burden for bidders and the contracting authority.

Key dates are logical and consistent, and there are no reported disputes or suspensions. Most essential fields are populated, though the "Liable Person" is missing and "N/A" codes for Type/Procedure are minor inconsistencies.

The tender does not include any explicit requirements or considerations related to green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also not EU-funded, which often drives higher sustainability standards.