Legal Compliance80/100
The notice functions effectively as a preliminary market engagement, adhering to transparency principles for pre-procurement. While a formal procedure type is absent, this is typical for a planning stage. The CPV code is appropriate, and there are no disputes. The 'Value Classified: Yes' alongside explicit lot values is a minor inconsistency.
•Missing formal procedure type
•"Value Classified: Yes" contradicts explicit lot values
Clarity90/100
The description of the service, its purpose, and the lot structure is exceptionally clear. The AI-extracted requirements are clear in what they specify and what they explicitly state is not yet detailed, which is appropriate for a market engagement notice.
Completeness85/100
For a preliminary market engagement notice, the information provided is largely complete, including basic details, financial estimates, and a clear breakdown into lots. However, the discrepancy in contract duration is a notable gap in precision.
•Inconsistent contract duration (36 months vs. up to 5 years)
Fairness80/100
The tender outlines generic requirements, indicating no tailoring to specific providers, and provides indicative values for each lot, promoting transparency. However, the absence of electronic submission capabilities could pose a barrier to equal access for all potential providers.
•No electronic submission support
Practicality60/100
The notice provides essential practical information such as the contract start date and estimated value. However, the lack of electronic submission is a practical hurdle, and the significant inconsistency regarding the contract duration (36 months vs. up to 5 years) creates uncertainty for potential bidders.
•No electronic submission support
•Inconsistent contract duration
Data Consistency50/100
While most key fields are populated and dates are logical, there are significant inconsistencies. The stated "Contract Duration: 36 months" directly conflicts with the "period of up to 5 years" mentioned in the description. Additionally, the "Value Classified: Yes" flag is inconsistent with the explicit indicative values provided for each lot.
•Inconsistent contract duration (36 months vs. up to 5 years)
•"Value Classified" flag contradicts explicit lot values
Sustainability80/100
The procurement is inherently focused on social welfare, aiming to improve outcomes for vulnerable young people, which represents a strong social sustainability aspect. While explicit green or innovation criteria are not detailed, the core purpose aligns well with social responsibility.
•No explicit green procurement or innovation focus