Provision for the Facilitation of Citizens Jury

This tender for citizens' jury facilitation is clear in its core description and supports e-procurement, but suffers from significant gaps in detailed requirements and the critical absence of evaluation criteria, severely impacting fairness and overall completeness.

The tender clearly defines the open procedure and assigns an appropriate CPV code. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. However, the absence of a reveal date and the lack of detailed mandatory exclusion grounds in the provided summaries are minor compliance concerns regarding full transparency and disclosure.

The core description of the service required and the technical capability requirements are clear and understandable. However, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria and detailed eligibility/financial requirements significantly reduces the overall clarity for potential bidders on how to formulate a competitive proposal.

The tender includes essential basic information such as title, reference, organization, description, deadlines, estimated value, duration, and location. However, it is incomplete regarding crucial details like specific mandatory exclusion grounds, eligibility requirements, financial requirements, and most notably, the evaluation criteria.

The tender benefits from full document access, disclosed value, and the use of an e-procurement platform, promoting equal access. The technical requirements appear generic. Nevertheless, the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria is a severe fairness concern, as bidders cannot objectively understand the basis for award, undermining transparency and equal opportunity.

Electronic submission via the PCS-Tender platform is clearly supported, and the contract duration is specified. While a direct document URL is not explicitly provided, the presence of documents and platform links implies accessibility. The main practical gap is the absence of a specific contract start date.

The key fields are largely populated, and dates are logical and consistent. There are no reported suspensions or disputes. Minor inconsistencies include missing codes for the procedure type and an unpopulated 'Liable Person' field.

The tender does not indicate any focus on green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also noted as not being EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.