Legal Compliance100/100
The tender follows an open procedure, which is generally compliant. However, the summary lacks explicit mandatory exclusion grounds, a standard legal requirement. The missing NUTS code is a minor administrative omission.
•Absence of explicit mandatory exclusion grounds in the provided summary.
•Missing NUTS code.
Clarity40/100
While the overall scope and geographical areas are clearly defined, essential details regarding service delivery, pricing mechanisms, and lot bidding rules are deferred to external documents (Schedule 1, sections 96-115) that are not provided, significantly reducing clarity.
•Key details deferred to unavailable external documents (Schedule 1, sections 96-115).
Completeness83/100
The tender summary is incomplete due to the absence of full tender documents, particularly 'Schedule 1 – Specification' and detailed sections on lot bidding. This means crucial information for bidders, such as detailed technical specifications and evaluation criteria, is missing.
•Absence of full tender documents, including Schedule 1 – Specification.
•Missing detailed evaluation criteria.
Fairness60/100
The limitation of awarding no more than two regional lots per bidder promotes competition. However, the high expectation for the supplier to act 'as an extension of Hafod' and take 'full responsibility for end-to-end delivery' might favor very large, established companies, potentially limiting SME participation or tailoring requirements to specific providers.
•High expectation for supplier to act 'as an extension of Hafod' and take 'full responsibility for end-to-end delivery' may limit SME participation or favor specific large providers.
•Lack of accessible detailed requirements and evaluation criteria could hinder fair competition.
Practicality40/100
The contract's substantial value and duration indicate a significant undertaking. The CPI-linked pricing mechanism is a practical approach to managing inflation. However, the absence of detailed specifications makes it difficult for bidders to accurately assess practical implications for service delivery and resource allocation.
•Difficulty for bidders to accurately assess practical implications due to missing detailed specifications.
Data Consistency100/100
A significant inconsistency exists in the estimated contract value, which is stated in EUR in the financial information section but in GBP in the description for the initial 3-year term, potentially causing confusion.
•Inconsistent currency used for estimated contract value (EUR vs. GBP).
Sustainability0/100
The provided tender information lacks any explicit mention of green procurement, social criteria, or innovation focus, indicating a missed opportunity to integrate sustainability objectives into the procurement process.
•Absence of explicit green procurement criteria.
•Lack of social criteria.