Legal Compliance100/100
A full assessment of legal compliance is severely limited by the absence of comprehensive tender documents. The provided extract lacks explicit mandatory exclusion grounds, which are fundamental in public procurement processes.
•Absence of full tender documents prevents comprehensive legal compliance assessment.
•No explicit mandatory exclusion grounds stated in the provided information.
Clarity40/100
The project's overall objective, scope, and the distinction between LEVI Tender 1 and 2 are clearly articulated in the description. Specific requirements for LEVI Tender 2 (lamppost, up to 5kW, minimum 800 charge points) are also clear. However, the detailed clarity of technical specifications, contractual terms, and evaluation criteria cannot be assessed due to missing tender documents.
•Clarity of detailed technical specifications, contractual terms, and evaluation criteria cannot be assessed due to missing tender documents.
Completeness83/100
Based solely on the provided extract, the tender information is significantly incomplete. Key elements such as full tender documents, detailed technical specifications, comprehensive contractual terms, and crucially, explicit evaluation criteria are missing.
•Absence of full tender documents (including detailed specifications, contractual terms, and appendices).
•Missing explicit evaluation criteria.
Fairness60/100
The requirement for a 'supplier-funded' project, albeit supported by grant funding, places a significant financial burden on bidders, potentially limiting participation to larger, well-capitalized entities. The absence of explicit evaluation criteria makes it impossible to assess the fairness and objectivity of the selection process.
•Significant supplier funding requirement may limit participation to larger entities.
•Absence of evaluation criteria makes it impossible to assess fairness of selection process.
Practicality40/100
The project addresses a clear need for EV charging infrastructure, and the concession model with supplier funding is a practical approach for the Council. The requirement for an 'end-to-end turnkey solution' is practical for the contracting authority. However, the long contract duration (15 years) and the need for substantial upfront investment from the supplier present practical challenges for bidders. The extract lacks detailed site information or a rollout plan, which could impact practical implementation feasibility.
•Long contract duration (15 years) and significant supplier funding requirement may pose practical challenges for some bidders.
•Absence of detailed site information or rollout plan in the extract makes it difficult to assess practical implementation feasibility.
Data Consistency100/100
The provided information is internally consistent. The estimated value, contract duration, and project description align with the stated scope of providing EV charging infrastructure. The split between LEVI Tender 1 and 2 is clearly explained.
Sustainability0/100
The tender inherently promotes environmental sustainability by expanding EV charging infrastructure. The focus on 'low-powered charging points in residential areas' and 'on-street lampposts' supports accessible, localized charging. However, the extract lacks explicit environmental, social, or governance (ESG) criteria for suppliers or the materials/processes used beyond the core objective of EV infrastructure deployment.
•Lack of explicit environmental, social, or governance (ESG) criteria for suppliers or materials/processes beyond the core objective of EV infrastructure deployment.