Crisis Resilience Fund - Administration provider - EOI

This Expression of Interest (EOI) for the Crisis Resilience Fund administration is clear in its purpose and requirements but suffers from significant gaps in formal procedure definition and, critically, the absence of evaluation criteria.

The tender lacks a clearly defined procedure type and code, which is a significant formal omission. However, CPV codes are appropriate, and there are no reported disputes or suspensions. The 14-day submission period for an EOI is generally reasonable.

The description of the fund and the required administrative services is clear and unambiguous. AI-extracted requirements are understandable. However, the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria is a major clarity issue for potential bidders.

Basic information such as title, reference, organization, value, duration, and CPV code are present. Documents are available. However, the tender is incomplete due to the missing formal procedure type and, most notably, the absence of any defined evaluation criteria.

The tender discloses the estimated value and encourages SMEs and VCSEs, which are positive for fairness. Electronic submission via the ProContract platform ensures equal access. However, the complete lack of evaluation criteria severely undermines transparency and objectivity, making it difficult for bidders to understand how their expressions of interest will be assessed.

Electronic submission is supported via the ProContract platform, and the contract start date and duration are clearly specified. Financing information is available. While a direct document URL isn't explicitly provided, documents are listed as available.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical. There are no disputes or suspensions. Minor inconsistencies include the missing procedure type and a slight variation in the estimated value currency/range between the main data and a document summary.

While the Crisis Resilience Fund itself has a clear social purpose (providing aid to those in hardship), the procurement for its administration does not explicitly include green, social, or innovation criteria for the service provider. It is not indicated as EU funded.