Legal Compliance80/100
The tender defines the procedure type and CPV code correctly, and there are no reported disputes. While the reveal date is missing, overall compliance with national below-threshold procurement principles appears satisfactory.
Clarity50/100
The service description and AI-extracted requirements are clear and unambiguous. However, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria makes it difficult for bidders to understand how their proposals will be assessed, severely impacting the overall clarity of the tender process.
•Missing evaluation criteria
Completeness55/100
Basic information, financial details, and contract duration are well-defined. Nevertheless, the tender is significantly incomplete due to the critical omission of evaluation criteria, which are essential for a comprehensive bidding process.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•Liable person not specified
Fairness45/100
The tender value is disclosed, and requirements do not appear tailored to a specific company, with an intent to open competition. However, the lack of specified evaluation criteria introduces significant subjectivity and reduces transparency, while the absence of e-submission limits equal access for all potential bidders.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•No e-submission
Practicality60/100
The contract start date, duration, and estimated value are clearly stated. A significant practical drawback is the absence of electronic submission, which can hinder efficiency and accessibility for bidders.
Data Consistency85/100
Key dates are logical, and there are no reported disputes or suspensions. Minor inconsistencies include missing codes for the procedure type and an unspecified liable person.
•Liable person not specified
•Empty procedure codes
Sustainability25/100
The tender does not include any specific criteria or focus on green procurement, social aspects, or innovation, nor is it identified as EU-funded.
•Not green procurement
•No social criteria