Legal Compliance75/100
The tender clearly defines the open procedure and assigns an appropriate CPV code. Deadlines appear reasonable for an open procedure of this scale. However, the absence of specific mandatory exclusion grounds and, more critically, detailed evaluation criteria in the provided information raises concerns about full compliance with transparency requirements.
•No specific mandatory exclusion grounds detailed in the provided information.
•No evaluation criteria specified.
Clarity60/100
The service description and eligibility/technical requirements are clear and unambiguous. However, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria and detailed financial requirements significantly diminishes the overall clarity for potential bidders, making it difficult to formulate a compliant and competitive proposal.
•No evaluation criteria specified.
•No specific financial requirements detailed.
Completeness65/100
Basic information such as title, organization, value, duration, and CPV code is present. However, the tender is incomplete due to the lack of specific financial requirements, evaluation criteria, and the fact that only one document has a summary, marked as 'Required: No', suggesting incomplete documentation access or processing.
•Missing specific financial requirements.
•Missing evaluation criteria.
Fairness50/100
The tender's estimated value is disclosed, and the requirements, as stated, do not appear tailored. However, the complete absence of evaluation criteria is a major fairness concern, as bidders cannot understand how their proposals will be judged. Furthermore, the lack of e-submission creates an unnecessary barrier to equal access and participation.
•No evaluation criteria specified, severely impacting transparency and objectivity.
•No e-submission supported, hindering equal access and modern procurement practices.
Practicality65/100
The contract start date and duration are clearly specified, which is practical for planning. However, the absence of electronic submission is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement, potentially increasing administrative burden for bidders and the contracting authority.
•No electronic submission supported.
Data Consistency85/100
Key dates are logical and consistent, and there are no reported disputes or suspensions. Most key fields are populated, though the 'Liable Person' field is empty. A slight discrepancy exists between the estimated value in EUR and the GBP value mentioned in the document summary, likely due to currency conversion.
•Empty 'Liable Person' field.
•Slight discrepancy between EUR and GBP estimated values.
Sustainability50/100
The tender explicitly includes 'Social Criteria' as a characteristic, which is a positive aspect for sustainability. However, there is no explicit mention of green procurement initiatives or a focus on innovation, limiting its broader sustainability impact.
•No explicit focus on green procurement.
•No explicit focus on innovation.