Provision of outdoor area cleaning services for the needs of Liepāja Education Department at K.Ukstiņa Street 17/23, Liepāja

This tender for outdoor cleaning services presents a generally clear description and reasonable timeline but is significantly hampered by restricted document access, undisclosed estimated value, and inconsistencies regarding e-submission and evaluation criteria, raising serious concerns about fairness and completeness.

The tender defines a clear open procedure and uses an appropriate CPV code. Deadlines are reasonable, and no disputes are reported. However, the 'Restricted document access' flag indicates a significant legal transparency issue, potentially hindering compliance with equal treatment principles.

The service description is clear and unambiguous. AI-extracted requirements are well-structured and understandable. While 'lowest price' is mentioned as an evaluation criterion in AI-extracted data, the 'Missing evaluation criteria' flag creates ambiguity, slightly reducing the overall clarity.

Basic information such as title, organization, and location is provided. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, and the 'Restricted document access' flag means critical tender documents are not fully available, representing significant gaps in completeness.

Fairness is severely compromised by 'Restricted document access', which prevents equal access to information for all potential bidders. The undisclosed estimated value also reduces transparency. Furthermore, the 'No e-submission' flag (if accurate, despite 'E-Procurement' characteristic) creates an unnecessary barrier, although requirements do not appear tailored.

The tender's practicality is reduced by the 'No e-submission' flag, which contradicts the 'E-Procurement' characteristic and suggests a less efficient process. The contract start date and financing information are not provided, which can complicate bidder planning, though duration is clear.

Dates are logical and consistent, and no disputes are reported. However, there are significant inconsistencies: 'E-Procurement' is listed as a characteristic, but 'No e-submission' is flagged. Similarly, 'lowest price' is extracted as an evaluation criterion, but 'Missing evaluation criteria' is flagged. The 'Estimated Value: Not disclosed' also indicates a missing key data point.

The tender does not explicitly include any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not indicated as EU funded, suggesting a lack of emphasis on broader sustainability objectives.