Provision of physical activity classes for people with disabilities within the project “Liepāja.Healthy.Active.Happy.2.0”

This tender presents a clear purpose and well-structured requirements, but is significantly undermined by critical issues regarding transparency, data consistency, and document access, impacting fairness and legal compliance.

The tender benefits from a clear procedure, reasonable submission period, and EU funding. However, the 'Restricted document access' is a significant legal transparency concern, and the undisclosed estimated value, while not always a legal breach, reduces overall compliance with best practices for open procedures.

The tender description is clear, and requirements are well-structured, referencing specific detailed documents (Nolikum, Līgumprojekts, Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības). The presence of evaluation criteria in Document 4, as indicated by its summary, ensures good clarity.

Basic information, documents, and location are well-provided. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, and the contract duration is explicitly flagged as missing, which are notable gaps in completeness.

Fairness is severely impacted by 'Restricted document access', which creates an uneven playing field. The undisclosed estimated value also reduces transparency. Furthermore, the contradiction between 'E-Procurement' and 'No e-submission' raises concerns about equal access for all bidders.

Practicality is hampered by the unclear status of e-submission (contradiction between 'E-Procurement' and 'No e-submission') and the absence of a specified contract duration or start date, making planning difficult for potential bidders.

Significant contradictions exist, notably between 'E-Procurement' and 'No e-submission', and between 'Documents available' (strength) and 'Restricted document access' (issue). These inconsistencies undermine the reliability of the provided tender data.

The tender's core service inherently addresses a social aspect by providing activities for people with disabilities. However, it lacks explicit criteria for green procurement or innovation, limiting its overall sustainability focus beyond the social dimension.