GMC2412-A Small Works Manchester (sub 250k GBP)

This tender for small works in Manchester is generally well-structured, with clear basic information and a reasonable estimated value. However, it lacks specific details on evaluation criteria and document content, impacting completeness and clarity.

The tender appears to comply with general procurement regulations, with a clear CPV code and no reported disputes. The procedure is defined as 'Competitive flexible procedure'. The deadline, while potentially short, is specified. The absence of explicit regulatory compliance details or dispute history prevents a higher score.

The description of the works is clear, outlining the need for fit-out and refurbishment projects up to GBP 250,000. However, the lack of specified evaluation criteria is a significant omission, making it difficult for bidders to understand how their submissions will be assessed.

Most basic information is present, including title, reference, organization, and estimated value. Contract duration and start date are provided. However, the critical issue of zero documents with content or summaries severely impacts completeness, as bidders cannot fully understand the scope and requirements without them.

The tender is open to a competitive flexible procedure, and the value is disclosed. The criteria for eligibility and technical capability are listed as requirements, suggesting an objective approach. The lack of specific company tailoring is positive. The absence of e-submission details is a minor concern for fairness.

The tender specifies a contract duration and start date. Financing information is not explicitly detailed. The primary practicality issue is the lack of information regarding e-submission, which is a standard for modern procurement. The availability of documents with content is also a practical concern.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, and value are populated. There are no reported suspensions or disputes. The dates provided (submission deadline and contract start) are logically aligned, although the contract start date being the same as the submission deadline is unusual and may indicate an error or a very rapid commencement post-award.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not indicated as EU funded. This lack of emphasis on sustainability aspects limits the score in this category.