Provision of Housing Repairs & Maintenance Software

This tender presents significant deficiencies in transparency, completeness, and fairness, primarily due to the highly questionable estimated value of 1 EUR and the absence of explicit evaluation criteria and mandatory exclusion grounds. While the project description is clear, these critical omissions pose substantial risks to the integrity and competitiveness of the procurement process.

Legal compliance is moderately concerning due to the highly unusual 1 EUR estimated value, which raises questions about transparency and adherence to financial thresholds. The explicit lack of detailed mandatory exclusion grounds and specified evaluation criteria are also significant compliance gaps. The procedure type and CPV code are correctly identified.

While the high-level description of the required system (COTS, configurable, data migration, integration, training, support) is clear, the overall clarity is significantly hampered by the absence of specified evaluation criteria and explicit mandatory exclusion grounds. The failure to download a key document ('Lot L-1') further reduces clarity regarding specific requirements.

The tender is notably incomplete. Critical information such as evaluation criteria and detailed mandatory exclusion grounds are missing. The 1 EUR estimated value renders the financial information practically incomplete or misleading, and the failure to access a key document ('Lot L-1') means not all tender documents are available for review.

Fairness is significantly compromised. The absence of specified evaluation criteria makes objective assessment impossible and raises concerns about potential bias. The highly suspicious 1 EUR estimated value could deter legitimate bidders or obscure the true scope, potentially favoring pre-selected suppliers. The failed document download and the reported lack of e-submission further limit equal access and transparency. Pre-market engagement, while not inherently unfair, requires robust transparency, which is lacking here.

Practicality is moderate. While a document URL, contract start date, and duration are provided, the reported lack of electronic submission is a practical drawback in modern procurement. The 1 EUR estimated value also makes the financial information practically useless for planning purposes.

Data consistency is generally good, with most key fields populated and logical dates. However, the 1 EUR estimated value is a significant inconsistency given the nature of the procurement (housing repairs and maintenance software system). The 'Liable Person' field is also empty.

The tender shows very low focus on sustainability. There are no explicit mentions or requirements related to green procurement, social aspects, or innovation, nor is it indicated as EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.