Provision of maintenance and repair services for properties of Jūrmala State City Municipality

This tender for property maintenance and repair services exhibits good structural clarity and a reasonable timeline but is significantly hampered by restricted document access, undisclosed estimated value, and notable data inconsistencies.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV codes correctly, and the submission deadline is reasonable. However, the undisclosed estimated value and, critically, the restricted document access are significant concerns regarding transparency and compliance with procurement principles.

The tender description is clear, and the AI-extracted requirements categorize the necessary submissions well. Evaluation criteria, based on the lowest cost per work hour, are specified in the document summaries, despite a conflicting flag.

Basic information, deadlines, and duration are provided. Requirements and evaluation criteria are outlined in the document summaries. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, and restricted document access means the full tender content is not readily available to all bidders, impacting overall completeness.

The most significant concern for fairness is the restricted document access, which directly impedes equal opportunity for all potential bidders. The undisclosed estimated value also limits bidders' ability to assess the opportunity fairly. While evaluation criteria are objective, these access and transparency issues severely undermine fairness.

The duration is clearly specified, and 'E-Procurement' is indicated, suggesting electronic submission. However, the 'No e-submission' flag and 'Restricted document access' raise practical barriers. The absence of an estimated value and a specific contract start date also reduces practicality for bidders.

There are significant contradictions within the provided data, notably between 'E-Procurement' characteristic and 'No e-submission' flag, and between specified evaluation criteria in summaries and a 'No evaluation criteria specified' flag. The 'Restricted document access' flag also conflicts with 'Documents available' in automated checks, indicating poor data consistency.

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