T1051 - Infrastructure as a Service Managed Service Provider

This tender exhibits significant deficiencies in legal compliance, completeness, and fairness due to the absence of mandatory exclusion grounds, evaluation criteria, and detailed tender documents, alongside a lack of e-submission. While the service description is clear, critical information for bidders is missing, hindering transparency and equal treatment.

The tender lacks specified mandatory exclusion grounds and detailed evaluation criteria, which are fundamental requirements for legal compliance in public procurement. The missing procedure codes are minor, but the absence of critical legal frameworks is a major concern.

The core service description (IaaS, BaaS, DRaaS, 24x7x365 MSP) is clear and unambiguous. However, the absence of detailed financial requirements for bidders and, critically, the complete lack of specified evaluation criteria significantly reduce the overall clarity for potential tenderers.

While basic information like title, reference, organization, value, and duration are present, the tender is incomplete regarding crucial details. There are no detailed tender specifications, terms of reference, or contract drafts explicitly provided, and evaluation criteria are entirely missing. The listed 'documents' are high-level notices.

Fairness is severely impacted by the absence of transparent evaluation criteria, making it impossible for bidders to understand how their proposals will be judged. The lack of an e-submission option creates an unnecessary barrier, and the unclear access to full, detailed tender documents further compromises equal treatment.

The absence of electronic submission is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement. Furthermore, the lack of a direct document URL in the provided information makes it less practical for bidders to locate the full tender package. However, contract start date and duration are clearly specified.

Several inconsistencies are present, such as missing codes for procedure types, the contradiction between 'Value Classified: Yes' and the disclosed estimated value, and the conflict between 'Characteristics: Divided into Parts' and the stated intent to 'appoint a single Managed Service Provider'. Dates are logical.

The tender does not include any explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not indicated as EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.