Skip to main content
Tenders

Preparation of the main project for Märjamaa waste station

Open
Deadline
10 days left
April 06, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Services
Reference
306980
Value
€45,000
Location
Estonia
Published
March 26, 2026
CPV Code
Evaluation Criteria
Total bid price100%
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 26, 2026

Deadline for Questions

March 30, 2026

Submission Deadline

April 06, 2026

Tender Opening

April 06, 2026

Win ProbabilityPRO
🔒
Upgrade to Professional
See your estimated win probability based on historical data.
Upgrade to Professional →
Buyer IntelligencePRO
🔒
Unlock Buyer Intelligence
See spending patterns, preferred procedures, and more.
Upgrade to Professional →
Sector InsightsPRO
🔒
Unlock Sector Insights
See average winning prices, competition levels, and market trends.
Upgrade to Professional →
Budget
€45,000
Duration
6 months
Location
Estonia
Type
Services
75
Quality Score/100
Good
Market Benchmark
Avg. Winning Price
€71,415
Avg. Bids
4.8
Competition
Medium
SME Winners
99%
2,006 tenders analyzed

Original Tender Description

The purpose of the procurement is to find a designer for the construction of a waste station on the land parcel (KÜ 50301:001:0170) in Orgita village, Märjamaa municipality.
EU FundedElectronic Submission

Risk Analysis

Please log in to use risk analysis.

Login

Win Strategy

Please log in to access winning strategy recommendations.

Login

Competitors

Upgrade to see which companies are likely to bid on this tender, based on historical procurement data.

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

9 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (4)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (2)
Technical (1)
Financial (1)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS4
--Bidders must provide explanations regarding trade secrets.
--Bidders must confirm acceptance of the terms.
--Bidders must agree to the submission format and cost structure.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--Bidders must prove they do not have exclusion grounds.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS2
--Bidders must have previous experience in preparing main projects.
--Bidders must have appropriately qualified key personnel.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS1
--The project includes studies, approvals, permit applications, and author's supervision during construction.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS1
--The total cost of the bid is the sole evaluation criterion, with the lowest price receiving maximum points.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

5 documents available with AI summaries

VastavustingimusedPDF
306980_vastavustingimused.pdf -- 6.5 KB

The bidder must provide explanations regarding trade secrets, confirm acceptance of terms, agree to the submission format and cost structure, and provide proof of equivalence if necessary.

Hindamiskriteeriumid ja hinnatavad näitajadPDF
306980_hindamiskriteeriumid.pdf -- 2.8 KB

The total bid price is the sole evaluation criterion, where the lowest price receives maximum points.

Kõrvaldamise alused ja kvalifitseerimistingimusedPDF
306980_korvaldamise_alused_ja_kvalifitseerimi... -- 6.8 KB

Bidders must confirm the absence of exclusion grounds, demonstrate prior experience in preparing main project designs, and possess qualified key personnel.

Tehniline kirjeldusDOC
Lisa 1 Tehniline kirjeldus (Jäätmejaama põhip... -- 41.2 KB

The contracting authority seeks a designer to prepare the main project for the Märjamaa waste station, including studies, approvals, permit applications, and author supervision during construction.

hankelepingu olulised tingimusedDOC
Lisa 2 Töövõtulepingu projekt (Jäätmejaama põ... -- 35.3 KB

The essential terms of the procurement contract outline the object of the contract for the preparation of the main project and author's supervision for the Märjamaa waste station, the obligations of the parties, and the integral parts of the contract.

Documents Preview

Sign up to view document summaries and analysis

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender for the design of a waste station in Märjamaa is generally well-structured, with clear requirements and a straightforward evaluation process. However, it lacks explicit sustainability considerations and could improve on the accessibility of all tender documents.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender appears to comply with general legal requirements, including a clear procedure and CPV code. Deadlines are reasonable for the scope. No disputes are noted. The procedure type (LM) suggests a negotiated procedure, which is permissible.

Clarity80/100

The description of the objective is clear, and the requirements for exclusion grounds, eligibility, and technical capabilities are well-documented. The evaluation criteria are explicitly stated.

Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including estimated value, duration, and deadlines. However, the status '11' is unclear without context, and the availability of all 5 documents is implied but not explicitly confirmed as fully accessible or attached in a way that guarantees immediate download for all potential bidders.

Status code '11' requires clarification.
Fairness85/100

The tender is fair, with the value disclosed and objective criteria (lowest price). E-submission and e-procurement are utilized. The requirements for previous experience and qualified personnel are standard and not overly tailored to specific companies.

Practicality65/100

E-submission and e-procurement are positive. The contract duration is specified. However, information regarding financing is not explicitly detailed, and the contract start date is not provided, which can impact planning for bidders.

Financing information is not explicitly detailed.
Contract start date is not provided.
Data Consistency90/100

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and deadlines are populated. Dates are logical, and there are no reported suspensions or disputes.

Sustainability50/100

The tender is marked as EU Funded, which is a positive aspect. However, there are no explicit mentions of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the tender description or requirements.

Lack of explicit green procurement criteria.
Absence of social responsibility considerations.

Strengths

Clear objective and scope of work.
Objective evaluation criterion (lowest price).
Use of e-procurement and electronic submission.
Reasonable deadlines and disclosed value.

Concerns

Lack of explicit sustainability criteria (green, social, innovation).
Missing contract start date and detailed financing information.
Ambiguity of status code '11'.

Recommendations

1. Incorporate specific sustainability criteria (e.g., waste management practices, use of sustainable materials) into the technical requirements or evaluation.
2. Provide the expected contract start date and more detailed information on financing sources.
3. Clarify the meaning of the status code '11' for better transparency.

AI Scoring Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Complete quality score analysis
Detailed sub-score breakdown
Strengths & concerns insights
Strategic recommendations

No credit card required • Setup in 2 minutes

New Service

Want us to handle this tender?

Our procurement experts prepare everything. Proven to work — you review, approve, and submit.

~1hYour time only
80%+80%+
$0Upfront
See full comparison
Without TaaSWith TaaS
40-80 hrs
Preparation time
~1 hr
Your time only
15-25%
Average win rate
80%+
Win rate
Risk of errors
Manual review
Expert QA
Compliance check
You do all
Handle everything
We do all
End-to-end service
Let's Win This Tender
Pay only when you win · 400+ companies trust us
Or do it yourself

Add to Pipeline