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

Design works for the reconstruction of the Tallinn Detention Centre (Linnaarutee 5/1, Tallinn)

Open
Deadline
16 days left
April 20, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Services
Reference
308329
Value
€120,000
Location
Estonia
Published
March 27, 2026
CPV Code
Evaluation Criteria
TOTAL (Total cost of works)100%
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 27, 2026

Deadline for Questions

April 13, 2026

Submission Deadline

April 20, 2026

Tender Opening

April 20, 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
€120,000
Duration
29 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 order design works for the reconstruction and expansion of the detention centre of the Northern Prefecture.
Green ProcurementEU FundedElectronic 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 for the reconstruction design of the Tallinn Detention Centre prioritizes cost-effectiveness. A winning bid will demonstrate strong technical capability in correctional facility design, meticulous cost control, and a clear understanding of the project's security and operational sensitivities. Leveraging experience with similar public sector projects and highlighting efficient project management will be crucial.

Key Winning Messages

Cost-Effective Design Excellence for Secure Infrastructure

Proven Expertise in Correctional Facility Design and Project Management

Unwavering Commitment to Security, Confidentiality, and Compliance

Key Opportunities
The tender explicitly states that total cost is the primary evaluation criterion, with the lowest price receiving maximum points. This presents a significant opportunity for bidders with highly competitive pricing strategies.
The duration of 29 months for design works allows for thorough planning and execution, and bidders can leverage this to propose efficient workflows and demonstrate long-term project management capability.
The 'GREEN PROCUREMENT: Yes' tag, despite no specific social aspects or innovative aspects, suggests that incorporating sustainable design principles within the cost-effective framework could be a subtle differentiator.
Key Challenges
The absence of specified evaluation criteria beyond cost means that bidders must infer the weighting and importance of other factors. This creates uncertainty in optimizing the bid.

Focus heavily on meeting all mandatory requirements and technical specifications flawlessly. While cost is primary, a technically deficient bid, even if cheap, will be disqualified. Highlight the qualifications and experience of the project team as evidence of capability to deliver the design effectively.

The requirement for background checks and strict confidentiality implies a sensitive project environment. Bidders must demonstrate robust internal processes for handling such requirements.

Proactively address confidentiality in the bid narrative. Outline existing security protocols and employee vetting procedures. Ensure all proposed team members are aware of and prepared for these checks.

The estimated value of 120,000 EUR for a 29-month design project for a detention center reconstruction might indicate a tight budget, requiring highly efficient cost management.

Develop a highly detailed and optimized cost breakdown in Form 3. Explore opportunities for value engineering within the design process that do not compromise functionality or security. Clearly define the scope of construction-time consultation services to manage potential cost overruns.

Ideal Bidder Profile
An architectural and engineering firm with proven experience in designing or renovating public safety facilities, particularly detention centers or similar secure environments. The firm should possess a strong team of qualified project managers and architects with relevant certifications and a track record of successful, on-time, and within-budget project delivery. Experience with government procurement processes and strict confidentiality protocols is essential.
Key Requirements
Submission of a qualified project manager and architect with detailed CVs including professional certificate numbers and relevant project experience.
Detailed cost breakdown in Form 3, specifying design works cost and a limit for construction-time consultation services.
Adherence to confidentiality requirements, including background checks for employees accessing the site.
Compliance with the technical specification (Lisa 1) and contract project (Lisa 2).
Electronic submission of all required documents, including Form 2, Form 3, and Vorm 4.
Key Discriminators
Demonstrated experience in designing or renovating correctional facilities, highlighting security features, operational flow, and staff/inmate well-being considerations.
A highly competitive and meticulously detailed cost proposal that clearly justifies the proposed price and demonstrates value for money.
A project management approach that emphasizes efficiency, risk mitigation, and proactive communication, particularly concerning security and confidentiality.
Evidence of a strong, stable team of qualified professionals with a proven track record on similar public sector projects.
Social Value Opportunities
While not explicitly required, a bidder could subtly incorporate a commitment to using local suppliers for any necessary materials or services during the design phase, or propose design solutions that promote energy efficiency and reduced environmental impact, aligning with the 'Green Procurement' aspect.
Bid Focus Areas
Total Cost of WorksPrimary (Maximum Points)

Submit the most competitive price possible while ensuring all technical and mandatory requirements are met. Conduct thorough cost analysis and value engineering to identify savings without compromising quality or security. Ensure Form 3 is meticulously completed with clear justifications for all cost elements.

Technical Capability (Project Manager & Architect)Implied High

Provide comprehensive CVs for the project manager and architect, clearly highlighting relevant experience in correctional facilities or similar secure public infrastructure projects. Ensure all professional certificate numbers are accurate and work experience descriptions are tailored to the tender's scope. Showcase successful project delivery metrics (e.g., on-time, within budget).

Compliance and ConfidentialityMandatory

Explicitly state adherence to all confidentiality requirements. Outline existing internal procedures for employee background checks and data security. Ensure all proposed personnel are prepared for and willing to undergo the necessary checks.

Recommendations6
Meticulously Complete Form 3 for Cost Submission
CriticalHigh effort

Ensure the cost breakdown in Form 3 is detailed, accurate, and competitive. Clearly delineate the cost of design works and set a realistic, well-justified limit for construction-time consultation services. Any ambiguity or perceived lack of detail could lead to disqualification or a lower score.

Directly impacts the primary evaluation criterion and ensures compliance with submission requirements.
Leverage Project Manager and Architect CVs for Technical Strength
CriticalMed effort

Go beyond simply listing experience. For the Project Manager and Architect CVs (Vorm 4), detail specific achievements and responsibilities on projects of similar scale, complexity, and security requirements. Highlight any experience with public sector clients and adherence to strict regulations.

Demonstrates technical capability and builds confidence in the delivery team, crucial for a sensitive project.
Emphasize Experience with Secure Facilities
HighMed effort

If the bidder has experience with detention centers, prisons, police stations, or other high-security public buildings, this should be a central theme in the bid narrative and highlighted in the CVs. Focus on aspects like operational efficiency, security integration, and compliance with specific regulations for such facilities.

Positions the bidder as a specialist, increasing perceived value and reducing perceived risk for the contracting authority.
Proactive Confidentiality and Security Protocol Statement
HighLow effort

Address the confidentiality requirements head-on. Include a statement in the bid outlining the company's commitment to confidentiality and its existing procedures for handling sensitive information and employee vetting, aligning with the implied RHS § 77 lg 3.

Mitigates a key eligibility concern and demonstrates preparedness for the project's sensitive nature.
Thorough Review of Lisa 1 and Lisa 2
MediumMed effort

Conduct an in-depth review of the Technical Specification (Lisa 1) and Contract Project (Lisa 2) to fully understand the scope, deliverables, and contractual obligations. Identify any potential ambiguities or areas requiring clarification and consider submitting a clarification request if necessary.

Ensures a complete understanding of the project requirements, leading to a more accurate and compliant bid.
Integrate Green Procurement Principles
LowLow effort

While not a primary evaluation criterion, subtly weave in how the design will consider energy efficiency, sustainable materials, or waste reduction during the design phase, aligning with the 'Green Procurement: Yes' tag. This can be a minor positive differentiator.

Adds a layer of responsible design practice, potentially appealing to the contracting authority's broader objectives.
Competitive Positioning
Position the bid as the most cost-effective solution without compromising on the critical security and operational requirements of a detention center. Highlight a lean but highly experienced project team to justify the competitive pricing.
If competitors are large, generalist firms, emphasize the specialized expertise in correctional facility design. If competitors are smaller, highlight the robustness of the team and processes to ensure timely delivery and compliance.
Focus on the clarity and completeness of the cost proposal (Form 3) as a sign of meticulous planning and a commitment to budget control, contrasting with potentially less detailed proposals from less experienced bidders.

Competitors

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

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

19 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (9)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (3)
Technical (4)
Financial (2)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS9
--Bids must be submitted electronically.
--Bidders must follow the instructions in the "Pakkumuse esitamise ettepanek" document.
--Bidders must submit Form 2 (declaration of participation).
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--No specific grounds mentioned, but adherence to RHS § 77 lg 3 regarding confidentiality is implied.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS3
--Bidders must be eligible to participate in public procurement.
--Bidders must comply with confidentiality requirements for restricted access information.
--Bidders' employees will undergo background checks before site access.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS4
--Bidders must submit a proposal for design works.
--Bidders must include a qualified project manager.
--Bidders must include a qualified architect.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS2
--The total cost of the works will be the primary evaluation criterion, with the lowest price receiving maximum points.
--Form 3 must be submitted, detailing the cost of design works and specifying a limit for construction-time consultation services.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

11 documents available with AI summaries

VastavustingimusedPDF
308329_vastavustingimused.pdf -- 16.4 KB

Bidders must submit a design services tender, adhering to the contracting authority's conditions, by providing forms 2 and 3, and including a qualified project manager and architect.

Vorm 2DOC
Vorm 2.docx -- 17.9 KB

This form is an application to participate in the tender procedure, confirming full acceptance of the terms and compliance of the bid with the requirements.

Vorm 3XLS
Vorm 3.xlsx -- 18.7 KB

The bidder must submit Form 3, which includes a cost table for design services, specifying the maximum limit for construction-time consultation services.

Vorm 4DOC
Vorm 4.docx -- 21.5 KB

The contracting authority requires the submission of CVs for the project manager and architect, detailing their professional certifications, work experience, and past projects, to assess their suitability for the design works of the detention center reconstruction.

Vorm 4DOC
Vorm 4.docx -- 21.5 KB

The contracting authority requires the submission of CVs for project managers and architects, including professional certificate numbers, work experience, and descriptions of previous projects.

Vorm 8DOC
Vorm 8.docx -- 13.7 KB

Form 8 is a joint bid authorization letter, empowering one bidder to act on behalf of others in the tender procedure.

Hindamiskriteeriumid ja hinnatavad näitajadPDF
308329_hindamiskriteeriumid.pdf -- 2.8 KB

The contracting authority evaluates bids primarily based on the total cost of works, where the lowest price receives the maximum score.

Hankepass täiendatavate selgitustegaPDF
308329_hankepass_taiendavate_selgitustega.pdf -- 71.6 KB

The tender pass is an explanatory document outlining the contracting authority's requirements and response format for economic operators, to be filled electronically rather than directly within this PDF.

Alusdokument pakkumuse esitamise ettepanekDOC
Alusdokument pakkumuse esitamise ettepanek.do... -- 46.6 KB

This document outlines how to submit a bid for the design works of the Tallinn Detention Centre public procurement, including electronic submission requirements and the procedure for obtaining the technically descriptive document with access restrictions.

Lisa 1 Tehniline_kirjeldusDOC
Lisa 1 Tehniline_kirjeldus.docx -- 400.5 KB

The contracting authority is seeking design works for the reconstruction of the Tallinn Detention Centre, with the technical description defining the initial data, tasks, and requirements for materials, systems, and equipment.

Lisa 2 Lepingu_projektDOC
Lisa 2 Lepingu_projekt.docx -- 205.7 KB

This document outlines the special conditions of the design works contract, specifying details about the client, contractor, and project, including deadlines and responsibilities.

Documents Preview

Sign up to view document summaries and analysis

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender for design works of the Tallinn Detention Centre reconstruction is generally well-structured, with clear technical requirements and a straightforward evaluation process. However, the mandatory site visit and background checks, while necessary for security, add a layer of complexity to the practicalities of participation.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender appears to comply with standard procurement regulations, including the use of a proper CPV code and a clear procedure. Deadlines are reasonable for the scope. No disputes are noted. The reference to RHS § 77 lg 3 suggests adherence to specific legal requirements regarding confidential information.

Clarity80/100

The description of the works is clear, and the requirements for technical capability (project manager, architect CVs) are well-documented. The evaluation criteria are specified as relative weighting, with cost being the primary factor. Conditions for participation are outlined in various documents.

Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including estimated value, duration, and deadlines. Key documents like technical specifications, contract draft, and required forms are indicated. However, the 'Pakkumuse esitamise ettepanek' document, which contains crucial details for restricted access information and background checks, is not directly accessible for analysis, impacting overall completeness assessment.

Crucial details regarding restricted access information and background checks are contained in a document not fully accessible for analysis.
Fairness85/100

The tender is open to e-submission and uses e-procurement. The estimated value is disclosed. While the evaluation is primarily cost-based, which is objective, the mandatory site visit and background checks for employees could be perceived as a barrier for some potential bidders, though justified by the nature of the facility. Access to restricted information is handled with specific procedures.

Mandatory site visit and background checks for employees add a procedural hurdle.
Practicality65/100

E-submission and e-procurement are supported. The contract duration is specified. However, the mandatory site visit and the requirement for background checks before site access introduce practical challenges and potential delays for bidders. The URL for opening place is provided.

Mandatory site visit and background checks add practical complexity and potential delays.
Data Consistency90/100

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, estimated value, and deadlines are populated. Dates are logical, and there are no indications of suspension or disputes. The CPV code and NUTS code are correctly specified.

Sustainability50/100

The tender mentions 'Green Procurement' as a characteristic, indicating a focus on environmental aspects. However, specific details or requirements related to green procurement, social aspects, or innovation are not elaborated upon in the provided information, limiting the assessment of its depth.

Specific details on green procurement, social aspects, or innovation are not elaborated.

Strengths

Clear technical requirements and evaluation criteria.
Use of e-procurement and e-submission.
Well-defined CPV and NUTS codes.
EU Funded status indicated.

Concerns

Mandatory site visit and background checks add complexity.
Limited detail on sustainability aspects beyond the mention of 'Green Procurement'.
Key procedural details for restricted access information are in a document not fully analyzed.

Recommendations

1. Provide more detailed information on the specific green procurement requirements.
2. Clarify the process and timeline for background checks to mitigate potential delays for bidders.

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