Legal Compliance100/100
The tender appears to follow an open procedure, but the lack of explicit mandatory exclusion grounds and the absence of full tender documents raise significant concerns regarding full compliance with procurement regulations, particularly transparency and equal treatment.
•Missing explicit mandatory exclusion grounds in the provided information.
•Absence of full tender documents (e.g., Invitation to Tender, contract terms, full specification).
Clarity40/100
The service description is clear and comprehensive, detailing the scope and target groups. However, the absence of full tender documents means crucial details regarding submission, evaluation, and contractual obligations are entirely missing, leading to significant ambiguity for potential bidders.
•Lack of detailed submission instructions.
•Absence of evaluation criteria.
Completeness83/100
The tender information provided is highly incomplete due to the complete absence of any attached tender documents. This means essential components like the full specification, terms and conditions, contract draft, and detailed instructions for bidders are missing.
•No tender documents attached or available.
•Missing evaluation criteria.
Fairness60/100
The absence of evaluation criteria and full tender documents severely compromises the fairness and transparency of the procurement process. Bidders cannot adequately prepare proposals or understand how they will be judged, creating an uneven playing field. The broad technical requirements, while not explicitly tailored, could favor incumbents given the reference to 'long-standing services'.
•Absence of evaluation criteria, hindering fair assessment.
•Potential for incumbent advantage due to reference to 'long-standing services' and lack of detailed requirements for new entrants.
Practicality40/100
From a bidder's perspective, the tender is impractical to respond to effectively without the full suite of documents. The requirements listed are high-level, making it impossible to formulate a compliant and competitive bid.
•Impractical for bidders to prepare a comprehensive and compliant response without full tender documents.
•Vague financial capacity requirement makes it difficult for bidders to assess their eligibility.
Data Consistency100/100
The provided data points (e.g., estimated value, duration, description matching requirements) are internally consistent. However, the overall consistency and coherence of the tender cannot be fully assessed without the actual tender documents.
•Overall consistency cannot be fully assessed due to missing core documents.
Sustainability25/100
The tender explicitly mentions 'Social Criteria' as a characteristic and the service itself is inherently focused on social sustainability by supporting vulnerable individuals. However, the specific details of these social criteria and how they will be evaluated are not provided.
•Specifics of 'Social Criteria' are not detailed or linked to evaluation methodology.