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

Construction of the Verēmi Primary School sports field

Open
Deadline
3 days left
April 07, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Construction
Reference
168591
Value
€430,000
Location
Latgale, Latvia
Published
March 18, 2026
CPV Code
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 18, 2026

Deadline for Questions

March 31, 2026

Submission Deadline

April 07, 2026

Tender Opening

April 07, 2026

Win ProbabilityPRO
🔒
Upgrade to Professional
See your estimated win probability based on historical data.
Upgrade to Professional →
Buyer IntelligencePRO
🔒
Unlock Buyer Intelligence
See spending patterns, preferred procedures, and more.
Upgrade to Professional →
Sector InsightsPRO
🔒
Unlock Sector Insights
See average winning prices, competition levels, and market trends.
Upgrade to Professional →
Budget
€430,000
Duration
4 months
Location
Latgale
Type
Construction
75
Quality Score/100
Good
Market Benchmark
Avg. Winning Price
€491,981
Avg. Bids
3.0
Competition
Low
SME Winners
99%
20,606 tenders analyzed

Original Tender Description

Construction of the Verēmi Primary School sports field

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

AI-powered analysis of this tender's requirements, opportunities, and challenges. Get strategic insights to maximize your win probability.

65%
Estimated Win ProbabilityModerate Fit

This tender presents a moderate competition opportunity for experienced construction firms. The strategy should focus on demonstrating robust technical capability and a competitive financial offer, leveraging the lack of explicit evaluation criteria to our advantage by exceeding baseline expectations in all submission areas.

Key Winning Messages

Reliable and Experienced Sports Field Construction Partner

Value-Driven Solution for Verēmu Primary School

Key Opportunities
Lack of specified evaluation criteria allows for a proactive approach to exceeding expectations in all areas.
The estimated value and duration suggest a standard, well-defined project, reducing the risk of scope creep and allowing for efficient resource allocation.
The absence of explicit Green or Social Procurement requirements means that while not mandatory, demonstrating a commitment to best practices in these areas can serve as a differentiator.
Key Challenges
The absence of detailed technical and eligibility requirements necessitates a thorough understanding of standard construction practices and potential implicit expectations from the contracting authority.

Conduct thorough due diligence on similar projects undertaken by Rēzeknes novada pašvaldība and research standard best practices for school sports field construction in Latvia. Ensure the technical proposal is comprehensive and addresses all potential aspects of sports field construction, even if not explicitly stated.

With no specified evaluation criteria, it's difficult to precisely gauge the weighting of different proposal components, requiring a balanced and high-quality submission across all sections.

Assume a balanced evaluation approach. Focus on delivering exceptional quality in both the technical and financial proposals, ensuring all mandatory requirements are met with a high degree of professionalism and detail.

Ideal Bidder Profile
An experienced construction company with a proven track record in public works projects, specifically in sports facility construction. The ideal bidder will possess strong project management skills, a skilled workforce, and a history of delivering projects on time and within budget. They should also be adept at preparing comprehensive technical and financial proposals.
Key Requirements
Qualification criteria
Technical proposal submissions
Financial proposal submissions
Other necessary documents
Mandatory exclusion grounds compliance
Key Discriminators
Demonstrated experience in constructing similar sports facilities for educational institutions.
A detailed and well-presented technical proposal that goes beyond minimum requirements, showcasing innovative construction techniques or material choices (even if not explicitly requested).
A highly competitive and transparent financial proposal that clearly outlines value for money.
A proactive approach to risk management and project scheduling, presented within the technical proposal.
Social Value Opportunities
Commit to prioritizing local labor for a portion of the workforce during construction, contributing to the local economy of Rēzeknes novads.
Bid Focus Areas
Technical Proposal

Develop a comprehensive technical proposal that details the construction methodology, materials, quality control processes, health and safety plans, and project management approach. Include a detailed project schedule and demonstrate a clear understanding of the site and its specific needs. Highlight past successful projects of similar scope.

Financial Proposal

Present a clear, detailed, and competitive financial proposal. Ensure all costs are justified and transparent. Consider offering value-added services or alternative material options that could provide long-term benefits without significantly increasing upfront costs.

Qualification Criteria

Ensure all mandatory exclusion grounds are meticulously addressed. Provide clear evidence of financial stability, technical expertise, and relevant past performance. If specific eligibility criteria are not detailed, assume a high standard is expected and provide robust documentation.

Recommendations7
Thoroughly Address All Mandatory Exclusion Grounds
CriticalMed effort

Scrutinize all mandatory exclusion grounds and ensure absolute compliance. Any oversight here will lead to immediate disqualification. Gather all necessary documentation well in advance.

Ensures bid is not disqualified on technicality.
Develop a Comprehensive Technical Proposal
CriticalHigh effort

Given the lack of specific criteria, create a detailed technical proposal that showcases best practices in sports field construction, including methodology, materials, quality assurance, health & safety, and project management. Assume the contracting authority expects a high standard of detail and professionalism.

Maximizes potential score by exceeding implicit expectations.
Submit a Highly Competitive and Transparent Financial Proposal
CriticalMed effort

Ensure the financial proposal is not only competitive but also clearly itemized and justified. Demonstrate value for money and cost-effectiveness. Consider offering options or value-adds that enhance the proposal without compromising profitability.

Directly influences the financial score and overall competitiveness.
Highlight Relevant Past Project Experience
HighMed effort

Provide detailed case studies and references for similar sports field construction projects, especially those for public institutions or schools. Quantify achievements where possible (e.g., on-time completion, budget adherence).

Builds credibility and trust with the contracting authority.
Proactive Due Diligence on Contracting Authority
HighMed effort

Research Rēzeknes novada pašvaldība's past procurement practices, any publicly available information on their priorities for school infrastructure, and typical standards for public works in Latvia. This can help infer implicit expectations.

Informs proposal content and strategy.
Incorporate Local Employment Commitment
MediumLow effort

Include a commitment to utilizing local labor for a percentage of the construction workforce. This aligns with general public sector interest in supporting local economies, even if not explicitly mandated.

Adds a positive social dimension and potential differentiator.
Develop a Detailed Risk Management Plan
MediumMed effort

Within the technical proposal, outline potential risks associated with sports field construction (e.g., weather delays, material availability) and detail the mitigation strategies. This demonstrates foresight and preparedness.

Reduces perceived risk for the contracting authority.
Competitive Positioning
Position the bid as offering the best combination of proven expertise, reliable delivery, and competitive pricing. Emphasize a 'no-surprises' approach to project execution, assuring the contracting authority of a smooth and successful project completion.

Competitors

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

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

8 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (4)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (1)
Technical (1)
Financial (1)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS4
--Qualification criteria
--Technical proposal submissions
--Financial proposal submissions
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--No specific requirements provided in the document summaries.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS1
--No specific requirements provided in the document summaries.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS1
--No specific requirements provided in the document summaries.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS1
--No specific requirements provided in the document summaries.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

2 documents available with AI summaries

Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības, 1.versijaPDF
168591_PD.ANY_1_1_1_20260318162621.pdf -- 94.2 KB

This document outlines the procurement requirements, including qualification criteria, technical and financial proposal submissions, and other necessary documents for the construction of a sports field for Verēmu Primary School in Rēzekne municipality.

Main tender pageHTM
index.html

This document contains the basic data for an open competition tender for the construction of a sports field at Verēmu Primary School, with a deadline for proposal submission on April 7, 2026.

Documents Preview

Sign up to view document summaries and analysis

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender for the construction of a sports field is generally well-structured, with clear basic information and a reasonable timeline. However, it lacks specific details on evaluation criteria and potential restrictions on document access, impacting clarity and fairness.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender adheres to general legal compliance by having a clear procedure, a proper CPV code, and no reported disputes. The deadlines appear reasonable within the context of the tender's scope. Regulatory compliance is assumed based on the provided information.

Clarity80/100

The description of the works is clear, and the basic requirements for proposal submissions are mentioned. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria and detailed eligibility/technical/financial requirements within the provided summaries reduces overall clarity.

No evaluation criteria specified
Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including the estimated value, contract duration, and tender validity. However, the lack of detailed technical specifications and explicit mention of financing information could be improved.

Missing detailed technical specifications
Fairness85/100

The tender is an open competition, and the value is disclosed, promoting fairness. The use of e-procurement is a positive aspect. However, the 'Restricted document access' flag raises concerns about full document accessibility for all potential bidders.

Restricted document access
Practicality65/100

The tender is advertised as e-procurement, which is a positive for practical submission. However, the 'No e-submission' flag in the checks contradicts this, creating ambiguity. The contract start date is not explicitly mentioned, and financing information is not detailed.

Ambiguity regarding e-submission
Contract start date not specified
Data Consistency90/100

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, and deadlines are populated. There are no reported suspensions or disputes, and the dates provided are logical. The CPV code is present and appropriate.

Sustainability50/100

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not indicated as EU funded, suggesting a lack of emphasis on these sustainability dimensions.

No explicit green procurement criteria
No explicit social criteria

Strengths

Clear basic information and title
Open competition procedure
E-procurement mentioned
Reasonable timeline and value disclosure

Concerns

Restricted document access
Missing evaluation criteria
Lack of detailed technical/financial requirements
Ambiguity regarding e-submission

Recommendations

1. Clarify document access policies and ensure full availability.
2. Publish detailed evaluation criteria and specific eligibility/technical/financial requirements.
3. Confirm e-submission process and provide contract start date.

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