Temporary housing and care for stray animals in Dienvidkurzeme Municipality

This tender for stray animal care demonstrates good basic information and clear evaluation criteria, but is significantly hampered by restricted document access and a lack of detailed mandatory exclusion grounds, impacting fairness and completeness.

While the procedure type and deadlines are compliant, the AI summary indicates a lack of detailed mandatory exclusion grounds, which is a significant legal omission. Restricted document access also raises concerns about transparency requirements.

The tender description is clear, and Document 5 explicitly states 'lowest price' as the sole evaluation criterion, resolving a flagged issue. However, the absence of detailed mandatory exclusion grounds (as noted by AI) creates a clarity gap for bidders regarding eligibility.

Basic information, deadlines, value, and duration are provided. However, the critical flag of 'Restricted document access' means the tender is fundamentally incomplete for potential bidders. The lack of detailed mandatory exclusion grounds also contributes to incompleteness.

The tender's fairness is severely compromised by the 'Restricted document access' flag, preventing equal access to information for all potential bidders. While the value is disclosed and evaluation criteria are objective, this fundamental barrier significantly impacts transparency and equal opportunity.

Practicality is reduced by the 'Restricted document access' issue, making it difficult for bidders to prepare. There is also a contradiction regarding e-submission support, which, if not available, further reduces practicality for modern procurement.

Several inconsistencies are present, notably the contradiction between the 'E-Procurement' characteristic and the 'No e-submission' automated check. Additionally, the 'No evaluation criteria specified' flag is directly contradicted by the Document 5 summary.

The tender does not include any explicit green procurement, social, or innovation aspects, nor is it EU funded. This is common for smaller local service contracts but results in a low score for this specific criterion.