CUE & Sommerfuglehusets Dekarbonisering

This tender for decarbonisation works at the Horniman Museum is generally well-structured, with clear technical requirements and a disclosed estimated value. However, it lacks explicit evaluation criteria and details on the submission process, impacting its overall practicality and legal compliance.

The tender includes a clear CPV code and a specified procedure. Deadlines are provided, though the submission deadline might be considered tight given the project's scope and the need for contractor design elements. The absence of explicit evaluation criteria is a notable omission. No disputes are reported.

The description of the works is detailed and specific, outlining the required technical interventions for both the Butterfly House and CUE buildings. The requirements for contractor design elements are also mentioned, providing a good understanding of the project's scope.

Most basic information is present, including the estimated value, contract duration, and start date. However, the tender documents themselves are not accessible or summarized, which is a significant gap. The lack of explicit evaluation criteria also affects completeness.

The tender discloses the estimated value and outlines objective technical requirements. The procedure is competitive. The requirements for experience with Grade II listed settings are specific but contextually appropriate for the project location. No obvious tailoring to specific companies is apparent.

The tender specifies a contract duration and start date. However, it lacks information regarding e-submission, which is a common and expected feature in modern procurement. The absence of financing information is also a drawback.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, estimated value, and deadlines are populated. The dates provided are logical, and there are no reported suspensions or disputes. The contract start date coinciding with the submission deadline is unusual but not necessarily inconsistent if interpreted as the earliest possible start.

While the project's objective is decarbonisation, aligning with sustainability goals, the tender does not explicitly mention green procurement criteria, social aspects, innovation, or EU funding. This limits its score in this category.