Skip to main content
Tenders

Renovation of apartments owned by Riga City Municipality (4th phase)

Open
Deadline
3 days left
March 30, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Construction
Reference
167877
Value
Not disclosed
Location
Riga, Latvia
Published
March 10, 2026
CPV Code
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 10, 2026

Deadline for Questions

March 23, 2026

Submission Deadline

March 30, 2026

Tender Opening

March 30, 2026

Win ProbabilityPRO
🔒
Upgrade to Professional
See your estimated win probability based on historical data.
Upgrade to Professional →
Sector InsightsPRO
🔒
Unlock Sector Insights
See average winning prices, competition levels, and market trends.
Upgrade to Professional →
Budget
Not disclosed
Duration
3 months
Location
Riga
Type
Construction
75
Quality Score/100
Good
Market Benchmark
Avg. Winning Price
€491,981
Avg. Bids
3.0
Competition
Low
SME Winners
99%
20,606 tenders analyzed

Original Tender Description

Renovation of apartments owned by Riga City Municipality (4th phase)

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

11 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (3)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (2)
Technical (3)
Financial (2)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS3
--Bids must be submitted in the specified format and language.
--All required documents must be included in the submission.
--Bids must be submitted by the specified deadline.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--Bidders shall not be subject to any of the exclusion grounds specified in the Public Procurement Law.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS2
--Bidders must be legally registered and authorized to carry out the works.
--Bidders must possess the necessary permits and licenses.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS3
--Bidders must demonstrate relevant experience in similar renovation projects.
--Bidders must provide a detailed technical proposal outlining their approach to the renovation works.
--Bidders must have qualified personnel with relevant expertise.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS2
--Bidders must demonstrate sufficient financial capacity to undertake the project.
--Bidders may be required to provide financial statements or other proof of financial stability.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

3 documents available with AI summaries

Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības, 1.versijaPDF
167877_PD.ANY_1_1_1_20260310153203.pdf -- 98.4 KB

This document outlines the requirements for bidders, including exclusion conditions, selection criteria, technical and financial proposal requirements, and evaluation criteria for the renovation of apartments owned by the Riga City Municipality.

Nolikums ar pielikumiemZIP
Nolikums ar pielikumiem.zip -- 2.2 MB

This document contains the regulations and appendices for an open tender process, including information on the tender subject, identification, contact persons, and procedures for obtaining documentation and asking questions.

Main tender pageHTM
index.html

This document contains the basic data for an open tender for the renovation of apartments owned by the Riga City Municipality (4th round), including identification numbers, deadlines, and contact information.

Documents Preview

Sign up to view document summaries and analysis

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender for apartment renovation by Riga City Municipality is generally well-structured, with clear documentation and a reasonable timeline. However, the lack of disclosed value and specific evaluation criteria are notable concerns.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender adheres to general public procurement laws with a clear procedure and CPV code. Deadlines appear reasonable within the context of the tender's scope. No disputes are reported. The primary concern is the lack of disclosed value, which can impact transparency.

Estimated value not disclosed
Clarity80/100

The description of the works is clear, and the attached documents outline mandatory requirements and procedures. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria in the provided information hinders a complete understanding of how bids will be assessed.

No evaluation criteria specified
Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including deadlines, duration, and organizational details. The three attached documents cover the essential aspects of the tender. However, the non-disclosure of the estimated value impacts the overall completeness of financial information.

Estimated value not disclosed
Fairness85/100

The tender is an open procedure, and the use of e-procurement promotes accessibility. However, the 'Restricted document access' flag indicates a potential barrier for some bidders, which negatively impacts fairness. The lack of disclosed value also reduces transparency.

Restricted document access
Estimated value not disclosed
Practicality65/100

The tender utilizes e-procurement, which is a positive aspect. However, the 'No e-submission' flag suggests that the submission process might not be fully electronic, which could reduce practicality. Financing information is not explicitly detailed.

No e-submission (implied by 'No e-submission' flag)
Data Consistency90/100

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, and deadlines are populated. Dates are logical, and there are no reported suspensions or disputes. The tender status is active, indicating a consistent data flow.

Sustainability50/100

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not indicated as EU funded, suggesting a lack of specific sustainability considerations within this procurement.

Not green procurement
No social criteria

Strengths

Clear description of works
Open tender procedure
Use of e-procurement
Reasonable deadlines
CPV code provided

Concerns

Estimated value not disclosed
Missing evaluation criteria
Restricted document access
Lack of explicit sustainability criteria

Recommendations

1. Disclose the estimated value of the tender to enhance transparency.
2. Clearly specify the evaluation criteria for bid assessment.
3. Ensure full and unrestricted access to all tender documents.

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