Legal Compliance100/100
The tender appears to follow a below-threshold open competition procedure. However, the absence of explicit mandatory exclusion grounds and detailed tender documents raises concerns regarding full compliance with procurement principles, particularly transparency and equal treatment.
•Absence of explicit mandatory exclusion grounds
•Lack of detailed tender documents and instructions for bidders
Clarity40/100
While the overall objective and scope of the program are generally clear, significant ambiguities exist due to missing details. The description of Lots is incomplete, lacking indicative budgets for two of the three Lots.
•Missing indicative budgets for Lot 1 and Lot 2
•Lack of detailed requirements for each Lot
Completeness83/100
The tender is critically incomplete. The absence of any attached documents, detailed requirements, and, most importantly, evaluation criteria means bidders lack essential information to prepare compliant and competitive quotations.
•No tender documents attached
•Missing detailed requirements for the services
Fairness60/100
The lack of detailed requirements and evaluation criteria creates a significant risk to fairness. Without clear rules for assessment, the procurement process is susceptible to subjective judgment, potentially disadvantaging bidders and undermining equal treatment.
•Absence of clear evaluation criteria compromises fair competition
•Lack of detailed requirements makes it difficult for all bidders to submit comparable proposals
Practicality40/100
The practical execution of this tender is challenging for both bidders and the contracting authority. Bidders cannot effectively prepare proposals without full documentation, and the contracting authority will struggle to objectively evaluate submissions without predefined criteria. The email submission method is less practical for auditability compared to e-procurement platforms.
•Email-based submission lacks the auditability and structure of e-procurement platforms
•Bidders face difficulty preparing proposals without comprehensive documentation
Data Consistency100/100
A minor inconsistency exists between the estimated value stated as EUR 70,000 and the budget cap specified as £70,000 in the description. While the amount is similar, the currency difference should be clarified.
•Inconsistency in currency for the estimated value (EUR) vs. budget cap (GBP)
Sustainability25/100
The tender does not explicitly incorporate green procurement or broader social criteria. While the project itself has a social focus (mental health), the procurement process does not detail how broader social or environmental sustainability aspects will be considered in supplier selection.
•Absence of explicit green procurement criteria
•Absence of explicit broader social criteria beyond the project's core objective