Construction supervision for renovation of premises at 7 objects in Limbaži, for shelter adaptation

This tender for construction supervision services is generally well-structured with clear requirements and an open procedure, benefiting from EU funding and e-procurement. However, the non-disclosure of the estimated value and a flagged 'restricted document access' significantly detract from its completeness and fairness.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV code correctly, and the submission deadline is reasonable. It is EU-funded and WTO/GPA compliant, indicating adherence to higher standards. However, the 'Restricted document access' flag, if it implies essential documents are not freely available, could pose a compliance risk. The non-disclosure of the estimated value is a transparency issue, though not necessarily a legal non-compliance depending on specific national thresholds.

The tender description is clear and unambiguous. Requirements are well-documented, referring to specific technical specifications for detailed information. Evaluation criteria (lowest price) are explicitly stated, and performance conditions are clearly referenced.

Most basic information, including title, reference, organization, deadlines, and duration, is provided. Requirements and evaluation criteria are defined through referenced documents. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, which is a significant omission. The 'Restricted document access' flag also raises concerns about the practical completeness for potential bidders.

The open procedure, e-procurement support, and objective 'lowest price' evaluation criterion contribute positively to fairness. However, the non-disclosure of the estimated value reduces transparency. Critically, the 'Restricted document access' flag is a major concern, as full and free access to all tender documents is fundamental for fair competition.

Electronic submission is supported, and the contract duration and financing source (EU Funded) are clearly specified. However, the contract start date is not provided, and the 'Restricted document access' flag implies potential practical difficulties in obtaining tender documents.

Key fields are largely populated, and dates are logical and consistent. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. While some automated flags conflicted with explicit tender information (e.g., evaluation criteria, e-submission), the core data provided by the contracting authority appears consistent.

The tender is EU-funded, which often implies higher standards, but it does not explicitly include any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus criteria in its requirements.