Legal Compliance75/100
The tender defines the procedure type and CPV code correctly, and provides a very reasonable submission period of over seven months. However, the absence of explicitly stated mandatory exclusion grounds in the provided summary is a notable legal omission, and the 'Liable Person' field is empty.
•No specific mandatory exclusion grounds explicitly stated (in summary)
•Liable Person field is empty
Clarity80/100
The description of the required services, school context, and performance conditions is clear and unambiguous. AI-extracted technical requirements are well-defined. However, the tender lacks explicit and detailed evaluation criteria, which is crucial for bidders to understand how their proposals will be assessed.
•No explicit evaluation criteria specified
Completeness70/100
Basic information, deadlines, duration, and location are provided, and tender documents are accessible. However, the tender is incomplete regarding specific financial requirements for bidders and detailed evaluation criteria. There is also an inconsistency in the stated estimated value and currency.
•No specific financial requirements for bidders explicitly stated
•No explicit evaluation criteria specified
Fairness85/100
The tender ensures fairness through full document access, disclosed value, a very reasonable preparation period of over seven months, and e-procurement enablement. Requirements appear generic and not tailored. The primary concern for fairness is the absence of explicit, objective evaluation criteria.
•Lack of explicit, objective, and transparent evaluation criteria
Practicality90/100
The tender demonstrates good practicality by supporting electronic submission via a provided portal URL. The contract start date and duration are clearly specified, facilitating bidder planning.
•Minor inconsistency in contract start date/time between basic info and description
Data Consistency50/100
This category presents significant issues. There are critical inconsistencies between the basic information and the description regarding the estimated value (EUR vs. GBP) and the contract start date, which is illogically listed as the same day as the submission deadline in the basic info. Key fields like 'Liable Person' and procedure codes are also empty.
•Critical inconsistency in estimated value (EUR vs. GBP)
•Illogical contract start date (same as submission deadline in basic info)
Sustainability70/100
The tender explicitly requests innovative approaches to sustainability, efficiency, and continuous improvement, indicating a positive focus on environmental and innovation aspects. However, it does not explicitly include social criteria.
•No explicit social criteria mentioned