Legal Compliance100/100
The tender appears to follow an open procedure, which is generally compliant. However, the absence of explicitly stated mandatory exclusion grounds and detailed selection criteria (e.g., financial capacity, professional capacity) in the provided extract raises questions about full compliance with procurement directives, which typically require these to be clearly stated.
•Absence of explicitly stated mandatory exclusion grounds
•Lack of detailed selection criteria (e.g., financial capacity, professional capacity) beyond general eligibility
Clarity40/100
The description of the project's objective and desired outcomes is clear and well-articulated. However, the critical absence of actual tender documents means that detailed specifications, methodologies, and evaluation criteria, which are crucial for bidders to understand and respond clearly, are entirely missing from the provided information.
•Lack of detailed technical specifications and methodology requirements
•Absence of evaluation criteria
Completeness83/100
This is the most significant weakness. The provided information is an extract, and it explicitly states 'No documents attached' and 'No document content available'. This means critical components of a complete tender package, such as full terms and conditions, detailed scope of work, specific deliverables, submission instructions, and evaluation criteria, are entirely missing.
•Absence of full tender documents
•Missing detailed scope of work and deliverables
Fairness60/100
The technical capability requirements for 'extensive experience in large-scale, primary, human research within the community safety environment' specifically including 'policing, community safety, Criminal Justice and/or victims and witnesses of crime' are quite specific. While justifiable for the project's nature, without detailed evaluation criteria and a full understanding of the market, there's a potential for these to narrow the field significantly. The lack of full documentation makes it impossible to assess if all bidders will have equal access to information.
•Highly specific experience requirements potentially limiting competition
•Inability to assess fairness of evaluation without criteria
Practicality40/100
The project's scope (large-scale, representative cohort, segmentation) is ambitious and aligns with the estimated value and duration. However, the lack of detailed methodology requirements or expected deliverables in the provided extract makes it difficult for bidders to practically formulate a comprehensive and competitive proposal, increasing the risk of misaligned bids.
•Lack of detailed methodology requirements for bidders to formulate practical proposals
•Unclear expectations for deliverables without full documentation
Data Consistency100/100
The provided information is internally consistent regarding the project's aims and the type of experience sought. There are no apparent contradictions within the extracted data.
Sustainability25/100
The tender description does not explicitly mention any environmental, social, or economic sustainability criteria. The automated check also flagged 'Not green procurement' and 'No social criteria', indicating a missed opportunity to integrate sustainability objectives.
•Absence of explicit environmental sustainability criteria
•Absence of explicit social sustainability criteria