Bishopshalt School – Reinigungsauftrag

This tender clearly articulates the need for cleaning services with a strong emphasis on quality and social aspects. However, its practical execution is severely hampered by the complete absence of accessible tender documents and several critical data inconsistencies.

The procedure type is described, and the CPV code is correct. No disputes are noted. However, the lack of explicit mandatory exclusion grounds and the absence of actual tender documents are significant legal compliance risks. The procedure name 'Competitive flexible procedure' is somewhat vague for a tender of this value.

The service description and technical requirements are very clear and detailed. Evaluation criteria for Stage 2 (35% price, 65% quality) are specified. However, detailed evaluation criteria for Stage 1 (PSQ) are missing, and the 'Divided into Parts' characteristic is not explained.

While basic information is present, the complete absence of actual tender documents is a critical deficiency. There are multiple inconsistencies in dates (submission deadline, contract start) and ambiguity regarding the estimated value's duration. The 'Liable Person' field is empty.

The complete lack of accessible tender documents is a severe fairness issue, as bidders cannot properly assess the opportunity or prepare a response. The missing detailed criteria for Stage 1 also impacts transparency and objectivity. Requirements do not appear tailored to a specific company.

Electronic submission via Delta eSourcing is supported. However, the complete absence of actual tender documents makes it practically impossible for any bidder to prepare and submit a compliant response. No direct URL for tender documents is provided, and the contract start date is inconsistent.

Multiple date inconsistencies exist, including conflicting submission deadlines and contract start dates. There is also ambiguity regarding the estimated value's duration (36 months in basic info vs. £1.2M which implies 5 years in description). The 'Divided into Parts' characteristic is not consistent with the description implying a single contract.

While no explicit green procurement criteria are mentioned, the tender demonstrates a strong focus on social aspects, including TUPE transfer, staff development, safeguarding, and child safety awareness. Innovation is also explicitly encouraged.