Legal Compliance75/100
The tender clearly defines an Open procedure and adheres to UK national context, including the Railways Act 2005 for potential operator transfer. No disputes or suspensions are noted. The CPV code is relevant, though potentially narrow for the full scope. The main legal compliance concern is the missing reveal date and the explicit note that mandatory exclusion/eligibility grounds are not detailed in the provided description (though referenced to full documents).
•Missing reveal date
•Mandatory exclusion and eligibility grounds not explicitly detailed in the provided description (though referenced to full documents)
Clarity70/100
The description of the services, including SISS maintenance, CCTV, CIS, PA, and PHPs, is highly detailed and unambiguous. The AI-extracted technical requirements are comprehensive and well-articulated. However, the explicit absence of evaluation criteria is a significant flaw, making it difficult for bidders to understand how their proposals will be judged.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•Specific details of SLAs and KPIs are mentioned but not provided in the summary
Completeness70/100
The tender is complete regarding basic information, financial details, contract duration, and location. The technical requirements are extensively defined. However, the critical omission of evaluation criteria significantly reduces its completeness. The 'Liable Person' field is also empty.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•Liable Person field is empty
Fairness60/100
The tender's estimated value is disclosed, and the requirements appear specific to the railway industry rather than tailored to a single company. However, the absence of evaluation criteria severely compromises the transparency and objectivity of the procurement process, directly impacting fairness. The lack of e-submission also presents a barrier to equal access for all potential bidders.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•No e-submission supported
Practicality60/100
The contract start date and duration are clearly specified, which is practical for planning. However, the lack of electronic submission is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement, potentially increasing administrative burden for bidders and the contracting authority. A document URL is not explicitly provided in the summary.
•No e-submission supported
•Document URL not explicitly provided in the summary
Data Consistency90/100
The tender exhibits strong data consistency, with key fields largely populated, no reported disputes or suspensions, and logical dates. The estimated value in EUR and GBP is consistent. Minor inconsistencies include an empty 'Liable Person' field and 'N/A' for procedure codes.
•Liable Person field is empty
•Procedure type code is 'N/A'
Sustainability30/100
This tender shows minimal focus on sustainability. While TUPE applies, addressing a social aspect of employee rights, it is a legal compliance rather than a proactive sustainability criterion. There are no explicit mentions of green procurement, broader social criteria, or innovation focus.
•Not green procurement
•No explicit social criteria (beyond TUPE compliance)