Beaconsfield High School Cleaning Tender

This tender exhibits significant deficiencies in critical areas such as financial information, detailed requirements, and evaluation criteria, severely impacting its quality and fairness. While basic information is present, the lack of essential details makes it highly problematic for potential bidders.

The tender has reasonable deadlines for participation and a correct CPV code. However, the estimated value of 1 EUR is a critical legal compliance issue, potentially misrepresenting the contract's scope and impacting legal thresholds. Furthermore, the absence of explicitly stated mandatory exclusion grounds and missing procedure codes are notable deficiencies.

The tender's clarity is severely compromised by the complete absence of specific technical capability requirements, financial requirements, and, most critically, evaluation criteria. Bidders lack essential information to understand what is expected and how their proposals will be assessed, making it impossible to submit a competitive and relevant bid.

While basic information like title, reference, and organization is present, the tender is critically incomplete regarding essential details. The 1 EUR estimated value is a major data error, and the absence of technical, financial, and evaluation criteria, along with missing mandatory exclusion grounds, renders the tender significantly deficient.

Fairness is severely undermined by the complete lack of specified evaluation criteria, which introduces significant subjectivity and potential for arbitrary decision-making. The erroneous 1 EUR estimated value is misleading to potential bidders, and the absence of electronic submission creates an unnecessary barrier to equal access.

The tender's practicality is hampered by the lack of electronic submission, which is a standard expectation in modern procurement processes. While the contract start date and duration are clear, the estimated value of 1 EUR provides no useful financing information for practical planning.

Data consistency is poor due to several critical inconsistencies. The estimated value of 1 EUR is a glaring error. There is a minor inconsistency in the contract start date (23rd vs 24th August), and key fields like 'Liable Person' and procedure codes are unpopulated.

The tender shows no explicit focus on sustainability, lacking any mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation criteria. This represents a missed opportunity to integrate broader public value considerations into the contract.