Apsardzes pakalpojumi

The overall quality of this tender is moderate, with strengths in clear description and e-procurement support, but significant deficiencies in restricted document access and undisclosed estimated value.

The tender defines a clear open procedure with a reasonable submission deadline and correct CPV codes. However, the 'Restricted document access' is a significant concern regarding transparency and compliance with public procurement principles. The non-disclosure of the estimated value also raises questions about full transparency.

The tender description is clear, and AI-extracted requirements are well-defined, covering mandatory exclusion, eligibility, technical, financial, and submission aspects. Document summaries explicitly mention detailed technical specifications and evaluation criteria, indicating a good level of detail.

Basic information, deadlines, duration, and location are provided. Documents are listed, and their summaries indicate comprehensive requirements and criteria. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, which is a significant omission impacting the completeness of financial information.

This category is severely impacted by two critical issues: 'Restricted document access' and 'Estimated Value: Not disclosed'. These factors significantly undermine transparency, equal access for all potential bidders, and the ability to prepare competitive offers. While e-procurement is indicated, the lack of full document access negates its benefit.

The tender supports e-procurement, which is a positive for practicality. The contract duration is specified. However, the 'Restricted document access' makes it impractical for bidders to fully review the tender. The contract start date and detailed financing information are also not explicitly provided in the basic overview.

Several inconsistencies are present, including 'Type/Procedure Code: N/A', 'Estimated Value: Not disclosed' vs 'Value Classified: No', 'E-Procurement' characteristic vs 'No e-submission' flag, and 'No evaluation criteria specified' flag vs document summaries. Most critically, 'Documents available' vs 'Restricted document access' is a direct contradiction. These inconsistencies reduce the reliability of the provided data.

The tender does not indicate any focus on green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also not identified as EU-funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.