Legal Compliance75/100
The procedure type, CPV code, and lack of disputes are positive. However, the provided summary lacks detailed mandatory disclosure elements such as exclusion grounds, eligibility, financial, and technical requirements, which are fundamental for full transparency and compliance, even if available on an external portal.
•Lack of detailed mandatory exclusion grounds, eligibility, financial, and technical requirements in the provided summary.
Clarity40/100
While the description of the services and framework is clear, the AI-extracted requirements explicitly state that critical information, including specific eligibility, technical, financial requirements, and crucially, evaluation criteria, are not detailed in the provided text, making it very unclear for a bidder relying on this summary.
•Absence of detailed eligibility, technical, and financial requirements in the provided summary.
•No evaluation criteria specified.
Completeness50/100
Basic administrative information, deadlines, value, and duration are complete. However, the tender is significantly incomplete regarding critical procurement-specific requirements such as mandatory exclusion grounds, eligibility, technical, financial requirements, and evaluation criteria, which are explicitly stated as missing from the provided text.
•Critical procurement requirements (exclusion, eligibility, technical, financial) are not detailed in the provided summary.
•Evaluation criteria are not defined.
Fairness60/100
The use of an e-procurement portal and the disclosure of the estimated value contribute positively to fairness. The division into logical lots also appears fair. However, the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria is a major concern for transparency and objective assessment, potentially leading to subjective decisions.
•No evaluation criteria specified, hindering transparency and objective assessment.
Practicality85/100
Most practical aspects are well-covered, including support for electronic submission via the Delta eSourcing portal, provision of document URLs, and clear specification of the contract start date and duration.
Data Consistency90/100
The data is largely consistent and logical, with key fields populated and no disputes or suspensions. Minor inconsistencies include the 'Liable Person' field being empty and a slight ambiguity with 'Value Classified: Yes' despite an estimated value being disclosed.
•The 'Liable Person' field is empty.
•Minor ambiguity with 'Value Classified: Yes' alongside a disclosed estimated value.
Sustainability20/100
There is no indication within the provided tender information that sustainability, social aspects, or innovation focus are considered or integrated into the procurement criteria.
•No green procurement criteria.
•No social criteria.