Skip to main content
Looking to bid on government tenders? See our TaaS tender preparation service
Tenders

Greenhouse design and construction

Open
Deadline
17 days left
April 22, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Construction
Reference
307610
Value
€250,000
Location
Estonia
Published
March 27, 2026
CPV Code
Evaluation Criteria
Total bid cost100%
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 27, 2026

Deadline for Questions

April 15, 2026

Submission Deadline

April 22, 2026

Tender Opening

April 22, 2026

Contract Start Date

May 10, 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
€250,000
Duration
Not specified
Location
Estonia
Type
Construction
75
Quality Score/100
Good
Market Benchmark
Avg. Winning Price
€524,963
Avg. Bids
4.7
Competition
Medium
SME Winners
94%
5,932 tenders analyzed

Original Tender Description

Design and build one greenhouse with minimum dimensions of 25 x 53 meters at RMK Kullenga nursery (Lääne-Viru County, Tapa Municipality, Porkuni village, Porkuni forest district 65, cadastral unit 78701:004:0640), including the necessary external networks for its operation, according to the technical specification and sketch drawing.
Electronic Submission

Run Risk Analysis

Identify potential risks, inconsistencies, and red flags across all tender documents. Get a detailed risk report with severity levels and mitigation recommendations.

Login

Win Strategy

AI-powered analysis of this tender's requirements, opportunities, and challenges. Get strategic insights to maximize your win probability.

70%
Estimated Win ProbabilityModerate Fit

This tender for the design and construction of a greenhouse at RMK Kullenga nursery presents a clear opportunity for a technically competent bidder focused on cost-efficiency. The primary evaluation driver is price, necessitating a lean, optimized bid. Key to success will be demonstrating a streamlined design and construction process that minimizes costs while adhering strictly to technical specifications and deadlines.

Key Winning Messages

Cost-Effective Design and Construction Excellence

Guaranteed On-Time Delivery and Compliance

Streamlined Project Execution without Subcontractors

Key Opportunities
The explicit emphasis on the lowest price receiving maximum score is a significant opportunity for cost-focused bidders.
The prohibition of subcontractors simplifies the bid and reduces potential coordination risks, allowing a single entity to control costs and timelines.
The clear construction and occupancy permit deadlines provide a defined scope for project planning and resource allocation.
Key Challenges
The absence of specified evaluation criteria beyond price means that price will be the sole determinant of success, potentially leading to aggressive bidding.

Develop a highly accurate cost model that accounts for all design, material, labor, and permitting costs, while ensuring profitability. Explore efficiencies in material sourcing and construction methods to achieve the lowest possible price without compromising quality or compliance.

The requirement for bidders to obtain permits and connect external networks can be time-consuming and subject to external delays.

Proactively engage with local authorities and utility providers during the bid preparation phase to understand permit timelines and connection processes. Build buffer time into the project schedule for these activities and clearly outline the proposed approach in the bid.

The tender is for a single, integrated project, requiring a bidder with comprehensive design and construction capabilities.

Ensure the bid team has all necessary in-house expertise for both design and construction, or clearly demonstrate how integrated project management will be achieved. Highlight past experience in delivering similar end-to-end projects.

Ideal Bidder Profile
An experienced construction company with a proven track record in designing and building specialized agricultural or horticultural structures. The ideal bidder will have strong project management capabilities, efficient supply chain management, and a deep understanding of cost optimization in construction, particularly within the Estonian context. They should also have a robust process for obtaining permits and managing external network connections.
Key Requirements
Design and construction of a greenhouse (min. 25 x 53 meters) with external network connections.
Demolition work included in the scope.
Obtaining necessary permits.
Adherence to construction deadline (16.10.2026) and occupancy permit deadline (30.11.2026).
Submission of a Hankepass (ESPD) electronically.
Confirmation of site visit.
No subcontractors allowed.
Key Discriminators
Demonstrated ability to deliver projects within tight cost constraints while maintaining high quality.
A clear, efficient, and well-documented plan for permit acquisition and external network connections.
A highly optimized design that meets functional requirements with minimal material and construction complexity.
Social Value Opportunities
While not explicitly required, consider a commitment to using locally sourced materials where feasible to support the local economy, and to implement waste reduction strategies during construction.
Bid Focus Areas
PriceMaximum Score

Conduct a thorough cost analysis, identify all direct and indirect costs, and optimize the design for cost-efficiency. Benchmark against similar projects to ensure competitiveness while maintaining a healthy profit margin. Consider bulk purchasing of materials and efficient construction methodologies.

Recommendations5
Thorough Site Visit and Technical Specification Review
CriticalMed effort

Conduct a mandatory site visit and meticulously review the technical specification and sketch drawings. Understand the existing site conditions, potential challenges for demolition, and the exact requirements for external network connections. This will inform a more accurate and competitive cost estimate.

Ensures accurate pricing, identification of potential risks, and a bid that fully meets technical requirements.
Price Optimization Strategy
CriticalHigh effort

Given that price is the primary evaluation criterion, develop a lean and cost-effective design and construction plan. Focus on material efficiency, streamlined construction processes, and minimizing labor hours. Explore innovative but proven construction techniques that reduce overall cost.

Maximizes score for the price criterion, significantly increasing win probability.
Proactive Permit and Network Connection Planning
HighMed effort

Investigate the permit acquisition process and external network connection requirements early. Engage with relevant authorities and utility providers to understand timelines, procedures, and potential costs. Incorporate realistic timelines for these activities into the project schedule.

Reduces risk of delays and cost overruns related to external dependencies.
Demonstrate Integrated Project Management Expertise
MediumLow effort

Highlight the company's capability to manage the entire project lifecycle from design to construction, including all permitting and network connections, without subcontractors. Emphasize internal expertise and robust project management systems.

Builds confidence in the contracting authority regarding the bidder's ability to deliver efficiently and on time.
Accurate Hankepass (ESPD) Completion
CriticalLow effort

Ensure the Hankepass (ESPD) is completed accurately and electronically, providing all necessary self-declarations. Pay close attention to any specific instructions or clarifications provided in 'Hankepass täiendatavate selgitustega'.

Avoids disqualification due to administrative errors.
Competitive Positioning
Position the bid as the most cost-effective solution that guarantees timely delivery and full compliance with all technical requirements, leveraging the absence of subcontractors as a strength for streamlined execution.

Competitors

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

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

25 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (11)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (4)
Technical (6)
Financial (3)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS11
--The tender is for a single, integrated construction project.
--The contracting authority has the right to change the expected contract award date.
--The contracting authority has the right to award the contract earlier than expected.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--Bidders must not have criminal convictions for fraud, money laundering, or terrorist financing.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS4
--Bidders must confirm site visit.
--If submitting a joint bid, a power of attorney for joint bidders must be submitted.
--Bidders must define business secrets.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS6
--The project involves the design and construction of a covered seed greenhouse.
--Scope includes demolition work.
--Scope includes obtaining permits.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS3
--The total cost of the bid will be evaluated.
--The lowest price will receive the maximum score.
--The estimated value of the tender is 250,000.0 EUR.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

8 documents available with AI summaries

Alltöövõtjate kontrollimise tingimused lepingu täitmise etapisPDF
307610_alltoovotjate_kontrollimise_tingimused... -- 41.1 KB

The contracting authority will check subcontractors' backgrounds regarding criminal convictions for fraud, money laundering, or terrorist financing, requiring relevant explanations and proof of reliability.

VastavustingimusedPDF
307610_vastavustingimused.pdf -- 8.1 KB

Bidders must confirm site visit, submit power of attorney for joint bids, define trade secrets, and confirm non-engagement of subcontractors to ensure their bid complies with tender conditions.

Hindamiskriteeriumid ja hinnatavad näitajadPDF
307610_hindamiskriteeriumid.pdf -- 4.1 KB

The tender evaluates the total bid cost, where the lowest price receives the maximum score, covering design and construction works.

Hankepass täiendatavate selgitustegaPDF
307610_hankepass_taiendavate_selgitustega.pdf -- 72.4 KB

The Procurement Pass (ESPD) is a self-declaration by the economic operator, serving as preliminary evidence instead of certificates issued by authorities or third parties, and is filled out electronically.

HankedokumentDOC
HD_307610_3700.docx -- 60.1 KB

The State Forest Management Centre is seeking bids for the design and construction of a greenhouse for seedling production, with a completion deadline of 16.10.2026 and occupancy permit by 30.11.2026.

Ühispakkujate volikiri ja kinnitusDOC
HD Lisa 1, vorm 1 - Ühispakkujate volikiri (3... -- 35.5 KB

This document is a joint bidder authorization and confirmation, required for tender submission.

Tehniline kirjeldusDOC
Lisa 1 - Tehniline kirjeldus.docx -- 248.2 KB

The tender seeks proposals for the design and construction of a covering seedling greenhouse, including demolition, permit acquisition, and external network connections.

Hankelepingu vormDOC
Lisa 2- Hankelepingu vorm_307610_3700.docx -- 51.8 KB

The tender contract form defines the terms, parties, contract object, and general provisions for design and construction works, including insurance requirements and deadlines.

Documents Preview

Sign up to view document summaries and analysis

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender for greenhouse design and construction is generally well-structured, with clear technical requirements and a reasonable process. However, it lacks explicit sustainability considerations and some practical aspects of e-submission could be improved.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender appears to comply with general procurement regulations, including the use of a proper CPV code and a clear procedure. Deadlines are reasonable, and no disputes are noted. The procedure is classified as 'A' (Open Procedure), which is standard.

Clarity80/100

The description of the project is clear, detailing the scope of work for designing and constructing a greenhouse with specific dimensions and external network connections. Technical specifications and site location are well-defined. Requirements are documented.

Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including estimated value, duration, and deadlines. However, the contract start date is presented in a format that might require interpretation. While many documents are attached, the AI could not analyze all file types.

Fairness85/100

The tender offers full document access and discloses the estimated value. Criteria are objective (relative weighting, lowest price gets max score). E-procurement is utilized. There are no obvious requirements tailored to specific companies, promoting fairness.

Practicality65/100

E-submission is mandated, and a document URL is provided for the opening place. The contract start date is specified. Financing information is not explicitly detailed, and the duration is defined by 'PERIOD' which is standard but could be more precise in the summary.

Data Consistency90/100

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, and deadlines are populated. There are no noted suspensions or disputes. Dates appear logically sequenced, with a reasonable gap between submission and opening.

Sustainability50/100

The tender does not explicitly mention green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is not indicated as EU funded. This area is underdeveloped.

Lack of explicit green procurement criteria
Absence of social responsibility considerations

Strengths

Clear technical description and scope of work
Well-defined project location and CPV code
Use of e-procurement and electronic submission
Objective evaluation criteria (price-based weighting)

Concerns

Limited explicit sustainability considerations
Some practicalities of e-submission could be clearer (e.g., file format compatibility)
Financing information not explicitly detailed

Recommendations

1. Incorporate specific sustainability criteria (e.g., energy efficiency, material sourcing) in future tenders.
2. Ensure all attached documents are in AI-analyzable formats or provide summaries for all.
3. Provide more explicit details on financing arrangements if applicable.

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