Local Plan Programme Officer

This tender is generally well-structured with clear objectives and a reasonable estimated value. However, it lacks detailed evaluation criteria and specific submission instructions, impacting its overall completeness and practicality.

The tender appears to comply with basic legal requirements for an open competition below the threshold. The CPV code is provided, and there are no immediate indications of disputes or regulatory non-compliance. The deadline, while potentially short, is within a reasonable range for this type of procurement.

The description of the role and its objectives is clear and well-articulated, focusing on impartiality and efficiency. The technical requirements are also clearly defined, outlining the expected experience and capabilities of the Programme Officer. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria leaves some ambiguity regarding how proposals will be assessed.

Most basic information is present, including title, reference, organization, estimated value, and contract duration. The description is adequate. However, the lack of content for the tender documents and the absence of specific submission requirements reduce its completeness.

The tender is an open competition, which promotes fairness. The estimated value is disclosed, and the requirements are generally objective, focusing on experience and capability. There is no indication of tailoring requirements to specific companies. The main concern is the lack of explicit evaluation criteria, which could lead to subjective assessments.

The tender specifies a contract start date and duration. However, the absence of information regarding e-submission and the lack of content in the tender documents make the practical execution of the submission process less straightforward.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and dates are populated consistently. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. The dates provided are logical within the context of the tender timeline.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, innovation, or EU funding, which are common considerations in modern public tenders. This suggests a lack of focus on these important areas.