Skip to main content
Looking to bid on government tenders? See our TaaS tender preparation service
Tenders

New school, Indre Ringvej - Total contract tender

Open
Deadline
9 days left
April 13, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Other
Reference
00170483-2026
Value
Not disclosed
Location
Syddanmark, Denmark
Published
March 27, 2026
CPV Code
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 11, 2026

Deadline for Questions

April 06, 2026

Submission Deadline

April 13, 2026

Budget
Not disclosed
Duration
Not specified
Location
Syddanmark
Type
Other
75
Quality Score/100
Good

Original Tender Description

The tender is conducted as a negotiated procedure in accordance with Sections 61-66 of the Tendering Act with a prior pre-qualification. The contracting authority reserves the right not to conduct negotiations and thus award the contract based on the initial offer. The award criterion is "The best ratio between price and quality" in accordance with Section 162, no. 3 of the Tendering Act. Four teams will be selected from the applicants for pre-qualification and invited to submit offers. The tender phase begins with a joint site visit.

Run Risk Analysis

Identify potential risks, inconsistencies, and red flags across all tender documents. Get a detailed risk report with severity levels and mitigation recommendations.

Login

Win Strategy

Get an AI-powered winning strategy tailored to this tender. Includes win probability score, key opportunities and challenges, recommended bid focus areas, competitive positioning insights, and actionable recommendations to maximize your chances.

Login

Competitors

Upgrade to see which companies are likely to bid on this tender, based on historical procurement data.

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

19 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (9)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (2)
Technical (6)
Financial (1)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS9
--The tender is conducted as a negotiated procedure with prior pre-qualification, according to the Public Procurement Act §§ 61-66.
--The contracting authority reserves the right not to conduct negotiations and to award the contract based on the initial tender.
--The award criterion is "The best ratio between price and quality" according to the Public Procurement Act § 162, no. 3.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--No specific mandatory exclusion grounds mentioned in the provided text.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS2
--Must be selected from applicants to the pre-qualification stage.
--Four teams will be selected to submit tenders.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS6
--Bidders will be invited to a voluntary dialogue meeting to discuss the intended architectural approach of their tender.
--The dialogue meeting aims to clarify questions and provide an updated understanding of architectural frameworks and intentions.
--The contracting authority will not evaluate qualitative sub-criteria before, during, or after the dialogue meeting.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS1
--No specific financial requirements mentioned in the provided text.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

Get AI-generated summaries of all tender documents. Quickly understand what each document contains without reading hundreds of pages — covering scope, conditions, evaluation criteria, and key obligations.

Login
75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender is a well-structured open procedure with pre-qualification, focusing on price-quality ratio. Key information is present, but financial details and specific evaluation criteria are missing, impacting completeness and clarity.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender follows a recognized legal procedure (negotiated procedure with pre-qualification) and specifies the relevant legal basis. The CPV code is appropriate. No disputes are indicated. Deadlines are present, though the submission deadline might be considered short by some standards, but not critically so given the procedure type.

Clarity80/100

The description of the procedure, including the pre-qualification, negotiation phases, and the award criterion ('best ratio between price and quality'), is generally clear. However, the specific sub-criteria for evaluating 'price and quality' are not detailed, which could lead to ambiguity for bidders.

Missing specific evaluation criteria for 'price and quality'.
Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including title, reference, organization, and CPV. The estimated value is not disclosed, which is a significant omission. While documents are available, their content is not accessible in the provided data, and contract duration is not specified.

Estimated value not disclosed.
Contract duration not specified.
Fairness85/100

The procedure is open, and the award criterion is objective ('best ratio between price and quality'). The use of e-procurement is noted. The selection of four teams for tender submission is a standard practice. No requirements appear to be tailored to specific companies.

Practicality65/100

E-submission is indicated via a project website. However, the contract start date is not specified, and financing information is absent. The availability of document content is crucial for practical submission, which is currently lacking.

Missing contract start date.
Financing information not provided.
Data Consistency90/100

Key fields like title, reference, organization, and deadline are populated. There are no indications of suspension or disputes. Dates are logical within the context of the tender publication and deadline.

Sustainability50/100

There is no explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, innovation, or EU funding within the provided text, suggesting a lack of focus on these areas.

No mention of green procurement.
No mention of social aspects.

Strengths

Clear procedure outlined (negotiated with pre-qualification).
Objective award criterion ('price and quality').
E-procurement utilized.
Reference number and organization clearly stated.

Concerns

Estimated value not disclosed.
Specific evaluation sub-criteria are missing.
Content of tender documents not accessible.
Lack of sustainability considerations.

Recommendations

1. Disclose the estimated contract value.
2. Provide detailed sub-criteria for the 'price and quality' evaluation.
3. Include information on sustainability aspects if applicable.

AI Scoring Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Complete quality score analysis
Detailed sub-score breakdown
Strengths & concerns insights
Strategic recommendations

No credit card required • Setup in 2 minutes

New Service

Want us to handle this tender?

Our procurement experts prepare everything. Proven to work — you review, approve, and submit.

~1hYour time only
80%+80%+
$0Upfront
See full comparison
Without TaaSWith TaaS
40-80 hrs
Preparation time
~1 hr
Your time only
15-25%
Average win rate
80%+
Win rate
Risk of errors
Manual review
Expert QA
Compliance check
You do all
Handle everything
We do all
End-to-end service
Let's Win This Tender
Pay only when you win · 400+ companies trust us
Or do it yourself

Add to Pipeline