Fabrication, installation, and dismantling of an environmental object - a small shield/emblem

This tender is generally structured but exhibits significant deficiencies in transparency and completeness, particularly concerning document access, estimated value, and evaluation criteria.

Deadlines are reasonable and the procedure type is clear. However, restricted document access, an undisclosed estimated value, and a potentially inaccurate CPV code (51000000 for environmental object manufacturing/assembly/disassembly) reduce overall compliance with best practices for transparency.

The tender description is clear. However, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria, as flagged, significantly impacts the clarity for potential bidders. AI summaries also indicate that specific details on eligibility, technical, and financial requirements are only 'expected to be detailed' in external documents, rather than being clearly summarized.

Basic information, including title, reference, and organization, is present. However, the tender is incomplete due to the undisclosed estimated value, missing contract duration, and the absence of specified evaluation criteria.

Fairness is significantly compromised by restricted document access, the undisclosed estimated value, and the absence of specified evaluation criteria, which are fundamental for objective and transparent bidding. While e-procurement is indicated, the lack of transparency on key aspects creates an uneven playing field.

The tender lacks practical details such as the contract start date and specific financing information. There is also conflicting information regarding e-submission, with 'E-Procurement' listed as a characteristic but 'No e-submission' flagged by automated checks, which could create practical hurdles for bidders.

While most dates are logical and consistent, there are notable inconsistencies. The 'E-Procurement' characteristic conflicts with the 'No e-submission' flag. Furthermore, AI summaries imply evaluation criteria are detailed in documents, yet the tender is flagged for having 'No evaluation criteria specified'. The undisclosed value and missing duration also represent data gaps.

The tender does not appear to incorporate any specific green procurement, social, or innovation criteria, indicating a lack of focus on sustainability aspects.