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

Courtyard Paving with Concrete Blocks

Open
Deadline
8 days left
April 13, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Construction
Reference
307643
Value
€25,000
Location
Estonia
Published
March 17, 2026
Organization
CPV Code
Evaluation Criteria
Total cost of the object100%
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 17, 2026

Deadline for Questions

April 06, 2026

Submission Deadline

April 13, 2026

Tender Opening

April 13, 2026

Contract Start Date

April 19, 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
€25,000
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

The subject of the public procurement is the paving of the courtyard with concrete blocks as the main contractor, based on the preliminary design prepared by Kavatis OÜ, work no. 251010. The work includes the necessary design and construction works for the construction, in accordance with the contracting authority's conditions.
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.

65%
Estimated Win ProbabilityModerate Fit

This tender is a straightforward concrete paving project with a strong emphasis on price. Winning requires a highly competitive cost proposal, meticulous adherence to technical specifications, and a clear demonstration of capability through a well-structured work schedule. Focus on cost optimization and efficient project delivery to secure the maximum score.

Key Winning Messages

The most cost-effective and reliable solution for Parksepa Keskkool's courtyard renovation.

Efficient project execution ensuring a high-quality, durable paved courtyard.

A transparent and compliant bid demonstrating full understanding of project requirements.

Key Opportunities
Leveraging economies of scale for material procurement to drive down costs.
Streamlining the work schedule to demonstrate efficient project management and potential for early completion (though not explicitly rewarded).
Building a strong relationship with the contracting authority through a clear and responsive bid process.
Key Challenges
Intense price competition due to 100% cost evaluation.

Conduct thorough cost analysis, secure competitive quotes from suppliers, optimize labor allocation, and minimize overheads. Explore any potential for efficient material usage or waste reduction.

Potential for unforeseen site conditions or material price fluctuations.

Include a small contingency in the pricing for unforeseen issues. Clearly define the scope of work to minimize ambiguity. Ensure supplier contracts have stable pricing clauses where possible.

Ensuring full compliance with all mandatory requirements and submission formats.

Dedicate specific resources to review and cross-check all tender documents against the bid submission. Utilize checklists and have a peer review process for the final bid.

Ideal Bidder Profile
A small to medium-sized construction company with proven experience in paving and landscaping projects, possessing efficient operational processes and strong supplier relationships to ensure competitive material and labor costs. They should have a demonstrated ability to deliver projects on time and within budget, with a clear understanding of Estonian construction standards.
Key Requirements
Acceptance of all conditions in base documents
Submission according to specified structure
Work schedule form detailing division of work by months/weeks
Confirmation regarding subcontractors and RHS § 122 paragraph 7
Comprehensive bid including all work, materials, equipment, and preparatory work
Key Discriminators
A highly competitive and detailed cost breakdown that clearly demonstrates value for money.
A meticulously prepared work schedule that highlights efficiency and a clear understanding of the project's phases.
A clear and concise bid document that is easy for the contracting authority to review and understand, demonstrating professionalism.
Social Value Opportunities
While not explicitly requested, consider a commitment to using locally sourced materials where feasible, contributing to the local economy. This can be a subtle differentiator if other bidders do not address it.
Bid Focus Areas
Total cost of the object100.0%

Achieve the lowest possible price by optimizing all cost components: materials, labor, equipment, and overheads. Conduct rigorous cost-benefit analysis for all proposed solutions and ensure no hidden costs are overlooked. Present a clear and transparent cost breakdown.

Recommendations7
Aggressively Price for the Lowest Bid
CriticalHigh effort

Given the 100% weightage on cost, the primary focus must be on submitting the absolute lowest competitive price. This requires detailed cost analysis, securing the best supplier rates, and optimizing labor and equipment utilization.

Directly maximizes score for the primary evaluation criterion.
Meticulously Complete the Work Schedule
CriticalMed effort

The work schedule form is a key technical requirement. Ensure it is detailed, logical, and clearly shows the division of work by months/weeks, adjusting rows and columns as needed. This demonstrates planning capability and project understanding.

Ensures compliance with technical capability requirements and demonstrates competence.
Thoroughly Review and Accept All Tender Conditions
CriticalMed effort

Bidders must confirm acceptance of all conditions. A detailed review of all base documents, including the draft contract (DOCUMENT 4), is essential to identify any potential risks or obligations and ensure full compliance.

Prevents disqualification and ensures legal and contractual alignment.
Clarify Subcontractor Clause
HighLow effort

Ensure full understanding and compliance with the mandatory exclusion ground regarding subcontractors and RHS § 122 paragraph 7. If any doubt exists, seek clarification from the contracting authority.

Avoids mandatory exclusion from the tender process.
Develop a Comprehensive Scope of Work Understanding
HighMed effort

The bid must include all work, preparatory work, materials, and equipment. Thoroughly analyze the technical specification (DOCUMENT 1) to ensure no element is missed, which could lead to cost overruns or non-compliance.

Ensures a compliant and accurate bid, preventing future disputes and cost issues.
Professional and Clear Bid Presentation
MediumLow effort

Although not an explicit evaluation criterion, a well-organized, error-free, and easy-to-understand bid document can positively influence the perception of the contracting authority, especially for a school. Ensure all sections are clearly labeled and follow the specified structure.

Enhances the perceived professionalism and reliability of the bidder.
Consider Local Sourcing (Subtle Differentiator)
LowLow effort

If feasible and cost-effective, mention the use of locally sourced concrete stones or related materials. This can be a minor positive point without incurring significant cost or effort.

Potentially adds a small positive perception without impacting cost competitiveness.
Competitive Positioning
Position as the most cost-effective provider by demonstrating lean operations and efficient procurement. Highlight the ability to deliver the required quality at the lowest price point. Emphasize reliability and adherence to schedule to build confidence despite the price-centric evaluation.

Competitors

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

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

6 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (1)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (2)
Technical (1)
Financial (1)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS1
--The tender document contains instructions for preparing a bid for the public procurement of covering the inner courtyard with concrete paving stones by Parksepa Keskkool.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--Bidders must confirm that they will not engage subcontractors who would be subject to replacement under RHS § 122 paragraph 7.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS2
--Bidders must confirm that they accept all conditions set forth in the tender's base documents.
--Bidders must submit their bid according to the specified structure.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS1
--Submit a work schedule form describing the division of work parts by months/weeks, adjusting rows and columns as needed.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS1
--Bids will be evaluated primarily based on the total cost of the object, with the lowest price receiving the maximum score.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

6 documents available with AI summaries

VastavustingimusedPDF
307643_vastavustingimused.pdf -- 3.6 KB

Bidders must confirm that they will not engage subcontractors subject to replacement under Section 122, Paragraph 7 of the Public Procurement Act, and that they accept all conditions set forth in the tender documents and will submit their bid according to the specified structure.

Hindamiskriteeriumid ja hinnatavad näitajadPDF
307643_hindamiskriteeriumid.pdf -- 3.0 KB

The contracting authority will evaluate bids primarily based on the total cost of the object, where the lowest price receives the maximum score.

Hankepass täiendatavate selgitustegaPDF
307643_hankepass_taiendavate_selgitustega.pdf -- 33.7 KB

The Procurement Pass is an initial self-declaration by the economic operator, containing the conditions set by the contracting authority and the format of expected responses, but is not intended for completion.

Hankedokument (HD)DOC
Hankedokument(HD)_pakkumuse esitamise kutse.d... -- 31.5 KB

This tender document provides instructions for preparing a bid for the procurement of paving a courtyard with concrete stones by Parksepa Secondary School.

Lisa 2 Hankelepingu projektDOC
HD Lisa 2_Hankelepingu projekt_Parkseap Keskk... -- 32.5 KB

This document is a draft main contractor agreement outlining the terms and objectives for the construction of the Parksepa Secondary School courtyard.

Lepingu lisa - Tööde Ajakava vormXLS
Lepingu lisa - Tööde Ajakava vorm.xlsx -- 11.4 KB

Submit the work schedule form, detailing the breakdown of work parts by months/weeks, adjusting rows and columns as needed.

Documents Preview

Sign up to view document summaries and analysis

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender for paving an inner courtyard is generally well-structured with clear requirements and a straightforward evaluation process. However, it lacks explicit sustainability considerations and relies on a single evaluation criterion.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender appears to comply with general legal requirements, including a clear procedure and CPV code. Deadlines are reasonable, and no disputes are noted. The procedure type (VO) suggests a negotiated procedure, which is permissible. The financing condition is clear.

Clarity80/100

The description of the work is clear, and the requirements are documented in various tender documents. The evaluation criteria are specified, although primarily focused on price. Conditions for participation are outlined.

Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including value, duration, and deadlines. However, the exact contract start date is provided, but the 'Tööde lõpptähtaeg' (work completion deadline) is stated to be 'vastavalt hankelepingu projektile' (according to the contract project), which could be more explicitly stated within the tender notice itself. Several key documents are attached or referenced.

Work completion deadline not explicitly stated in tender notice.
Fairness85/100

The tender allows for full document access and discloses the estimated value. Deadlines are reasonable, and the primary evaluation criterion (lowest price) is objective. E-procurement is utilized. There are no apparent requirements tailored to specific companies.

Practicality65/100

E-submission and e-procurement are mandated. A contract start date is provided. Financing is specified as a single payment after work completion. The duration is defined as 'PERIOD' with a tender validity of 3 months, but the specific work completion date is not explicitly detailed in the notice.

Specific work completion date not explicitly stated in tender notice.
Data Consistency90/100

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and dates are populated. There are no reported suspensions or disputes. Dates appear logical, with the reveal date preceding the submission and opening dates.

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 sustainability criteria (green, social, innovation).

Strengths

Clear description and objective evaluation criteria (price-based).
Mandatory e-submission and e-procurement.
All basic financial and timeline information provided.
No apparent tailored requirements for specific companies.

Concerns

Lack of explicit sustainability considerations.
Work completion deadline not explicitly stated in the tender notice.
Reliance solely on price for evaluation.

Recommendations

1. Incorporate sustainability criteria (e.g., environmental impact, social responsibility) into the evaluation.
2. Clearly state the work completion deadline within the tender notice for better clarity.
3. Consider adding secondary evaluation criteria beyond just the lowest price to encourage quality.

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