Posthus - Esher

This tender for a Post Office branch in Esher is generally well-structured, with clear objectives and a reasonable estimated value. However, it lacks specific evaluation criteria and details on the submission process, impacting its overall practicality and completeness.

The tender appears to comply with general procurement regulations, including the provision of a CPV code and a clear procedure type. Deadlines are present, though the submission deadline might be considered tight given the contract duration. No disputes are reported. The procedure is described as 'Competitive flexible procedure', which is acceptable.

The description of the Post Office Local integration is clear, outlining the expectation for retailers to incorporate services into their existing or proposed businesses. Eligibility and technical capability requirements are also reasonably well-defined. The link provided offers further information.

Most basic information is present, including title, organization, estimated value, and duration. However, crucial details such as the exact submission requirements and the content of the tender documents are missing. The 'reveal date' is also absent, which is a significant omission.

The tender is open, and the estimated value is disclosed, promoting transparency. The criteria for eligibility are objective ('successful retailer', 'ability to incorporate'). There are no apparent requirements tailored to specific companies, which is positive for fairness. The use of e-procurement is implied by the online nature of tenders, but not explicitly stated as mandatory.

The tender is active and has a clear contract start date. However, the lack of specified e-submission requirements and the absence of document content make the practical execution of the submission process unclear. The long contract duration (601 months) is unusual and may require clarification.

Key fields such as title, organization, value, and deadlines are populated. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. The dates provided are logical, with the contract start date following the submission deadline. The discrepancy between EUR value and GBP estimated fees is noted but handled by reflecting the provided EUR value.

There is no explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the tender description or requirements. The tender is not indicated as EU funded. This suggests a lack of focus on sustainability criteria.