Legal Compliance75/100
The tender defines the procedure type, assigns an appropriate CPV code, and has a reasonable submission period of 17 days. There are no reported disputes. However, the provided information does not explicitly state mandatory exclusion grounds, which are typically a standard legal requirement.
•Mandatory exclusion grounds are not explicitly stated in the provided tender information.
Clarity80/100
The brief description of the requirement is clear, providing specific definitions for 'capacity' and 'capability'. The AI-extracted technical, financial, and submission requirements are also well-defined. However, the critical evaluation criteria are only referenced as being in an ITQ document and are not explicitly detailed in the provided text, which reduces overall clarity for bidders.
•Evaluation criteria are not explicitly specified in the provided tender information.
Completeness70/100
All basic information such as title, reference, organization, deadlines, estimated value, duration, and location (NUTS code) are provided. However, the tender's completeness is hampered by the absence of explicit evaluation criteria and the full content of all referenced tender documents within the provided input.
•Evaluation criteria are not explicitly defined in the provided tender information.
•Full content of all referenced tender documents (e.g., ITQ) is not provided for review.
Fairness85/100
The tender promotes fairness through disclosed value, reasonable deadlines for preparation (17 days), and mandatory e-procurement via a specified portal with clear instructions. The technical requirements appear generic and not tailored. The primary concern for fairness is the lack of explicit evaluation criteria in the main tender notice, requiring bidders to access external documents to understand the award basis.
•Evaluation criteria are not explicitly stated, potentially hindering immediate transparency for bidders.
Practicality90/100
This tender scores highly on practicality. Electronic submission is clearly mandated via the Jaggaer eSourcing Portal, with a direct URL and instructions provided. The contract start date, duration, and financing information are all clearly specified, making it straightforward for potential bidders to plan.
Data Consistency90/100
The data provided is largely consistent and logical. Key fields are populated, there are no reported disputes, and dates are sequential. The estimated value in EUR aligns well with the stated budget in GBP. The repetition of the description and application instructions in the 'Additional Info' section is redundant but not contradictory.
•The 'Liable Person' field is empty.
Sustainability50/100
The tender explicitly highlights an 'Innovation Focus' as a characteristic. While the subject matter (labour survey) inherently touches upon social aspects, there are no explicit green procurement criteria or broader social clauses beyond the survey's scope. It is not EU funded.
•No explicit green procurement criteria are included.