Legal Compliance100/100
The tender correctly identifies the use of the Light Touch Regime under the Public Contract Regulations 2015, which is appropriate for health and social care services. The open procedure and continuous joining mechanism are compliant with the flexibility afforded by this regime.
Clarity40/100
While the strategic vision and two-stage framework process are clearly described, the actual minimum entry criteria and detailed evaluation processes for both framework entry and subsequent call-offs are stated as being detailed 'when the framework is open' or in 'further competition'. This creates significant ambiguity for potential bidders.
•Lack of specific, detailed minimum entry criteria.
•Absence of detailed evaluation criteria for Part 1 (framework entry) and Part 2 (further competitions).
Completeness75/100
The provided information is severely incomplete. There are no actual tender documents attached, and the 'extracted requirements' are high-level capabilities rather than concrete, measurable criteria. This makes it impossible for bidders to fully understand the scope and requirements.
•Critical absence of actual tender documents and detailed content.
•Missing specific, measurable evaluation criteria (quality/price) for both stages.
Fairness80/100
The open procedure and continuous joining mechanism promote broad market access and fairness. However, the significant lack of detailed, upfront criteria for both framework entry and subsequent competitions could lead to subjective evaluation and potentially disadvantage smaller providers who require clear guidance.
•Lack of detailed, upfront criteria for Part 1 and Part 2 could create an uneven playing field if not transparently communicated later.
•Broad requirements like 'high quality, personalised care' and 'sustainable way' without specific metrics could lead to subjective evaluation.
Practicality20/100
The framework's design, allowing continuous joining and utilizing the Light Touch Regime, is practical for managing dynamic, long-term service provision. However, the current lack of detailed information makes it impractical for bidders to effectively assess their suitability or prepare a robust submission.
•Bidders cannot practically assess their suitability or prepare a robust submission without detailed criteria and documents.
•Broad requirements like 'sustainable way' need practical, measurable definitions for effective implementation and evaluation.
Data Consistency100/100
Within the limited information provided, the description of the framework's intent and the extracted requirements are consistent. There are no direct contradictions.
Sustainability25/100
The tender explicitly emphasizes 'sustainable way' for service delivery and financing, indicating a focus on long-term viability. However, the lack of specific definitions or metrics for 'sustainable way' reduces its practical impact.
•The definition and measurement of 'sustainable way' are not detailed, which could lead to ambiguity.
•The automated check indicates 'Not green procurement', suggesting a missed opportunity for environmental sustainability criteria.