Development and maintenance service for the project management support system (SynDoc)

This tender is generally well-structured with clear requirements and extensive documentation, but the single-participant framework agreement significantly raises concerns about fairness and competition. It also lacks explicit sustainability considerations.

Deadlines are reasonable, CPV codes are appropriate, and mandatory disclosure requirements appear met. The procedure type 'A' with 'N/A' code is vague, and the implication of a single-participant framework agreement without re-opening competition could raise legal questions if not properly justified under national law.

The tender description is clear, requirements are well-documented and understandable, and evaluation criteria are explicitly detailed with relative weightings. Performance conditions are clearly referenced to a specific document.

All basic information, financial details, and timeline elements are provided. A comprehensive set of 14 documents, including technical specifications, contract drafts, and evaluation methodologies, ensures a high level of completeness.

While e-procurement is enabled and value is disclosed, the specification of 'Max Participants: 1' for a framework agreement 'WITHOUT_REOPENING_COMPETITION' significantly limits competition and raises substantial concerns about fairness. This structure inherently restricts market access and could favor incumbent suppliers or those with pre-existing relationships. The requirement to demonstrate understanding of Elering's specific SynDoc system, even with a service description provided, adds to this potential bias.

Electronic submission and e-procurement are supported, contract start and duration are clearly specified, and financing information is available. This facilitates bidder participation and contract execution.

Key fields are largely populated, and dates are logical and consistent. There are no detected disputes or suspensions. Evaluation criteria are consistently presented across relevant documents.

The tender lacks explicit criteria or mentions of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not EU-funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards. This represents a missed opportunity to integrate broader public value objectives.