Reconstruction works of the 3rd floor premises of RSU Red Cross Medical College at J. Asara Street 5, Riga

This tender for reconstruction works is generally well-structured with comprehensive documentation and detailed requirements, but it suffers from a lack of explicit evaluation criteria and minor data inconsistencies. The inclusion of a social criterion is a positive aspect.

The tender adheres to national law references (PIL) and specifies an open procedure. Deadlines are reasonable, and CPV codes are appropriate. The primary concern is the lack of explicit evaluation criteria in the summary, which is a legal requirement for transparency, and the 'restricted document access' flag, if accurate, would be a high severity issue.

The project description is clear, and AI-extracted requirements are detailed and understandable, supported by numerous specific forms. However, the absence of explicitly summarized evaluation criteria is a significant gap in clarity.

All essential basic information, financial details, and timelines are provided. A comprehensive set of 21 documents is listed, indicating thoroughness. The main concerns are the lack of explicit evaluation criteria in the summary and one document having no extracted content.

The tender benefits from value disclosure and e-procurement. However, the absence of clearly specified evaluation criteria in the summary significantly impacts transparency and fairness. The 'restricted document access' flag, if accurate, would be a severe impediment to fair competition. Requirements for experience and personnel seem standard and not tailored.

Electronic submission is supported, and contract duration and EU funding are clearly stated. The lack of an explicit contract start date is a minor detail.

Most key fields are consistently populated, and dates are logical. A minor inconsistency exists between the estimated value in the description (443,694.06 EUR) and the financial requirement (443,696.06 EUR). The automated check's 'No e-submission' contradicts the 'E-Procurement' characteristic.

The tender includes a positive social aspect by requiring the involvement of students. However, it lacks explicit criteria or focus on green procurement or innovation. EU funding often implies higher standards but doesn't guarantee these specific aspects.