University External Audit Services

This tender for external audit services exhibits moderate quality with notable deficiencies in transparency and completeness, particularly regarding the undisclosed estimated value and lack of detailed evaluation criteria. While basic information is present, the absence of e-submission and specific requirements hinders fairness and practicality.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV code correctly, and there are no disputes. However, the reveal date is missing, the estimated value is classified, and explicit mandatory exclusion grounds are not detailed, which are significant transparency and compliance gaps.

The service description is clear, but the AI-extracted requirements are very generic, lacking specific detail for bidders. Furthermore, evaluation criteria are inconsistently presented, being mentioned in one document summary (70/30 quality-price) but flagged as missing in the overall issues.

While basic information like title, reference, and organization is present, the estimated value is not disclosed. Requirements are defined but are too generic, and specific evaluation criteria are either missing or inconsistently presented, representing significant gaps in completeness.

The classified estimated value significantly impacts fairness by preventing bidders from adequately assessing scope. The absence of an e-submission option creates an unequal access barrier, and the lack of detailed evaluation sub-criteria reduces transparency in the assessment process.

The lack of an electronic submission platform is a major practical impediment for bidders. Additionally, the undisclosed estimated value makes it difficult for potential providers to gauge the project's scale and allocate resources effectively.

There is a notable inconsistency regarding the specification of evaluation criteria (flagged as missing versus mentioned in a document summary). Minor fields like 'Liable Person' and 'Type/Procedure Code' are also unpopulated, though dates are logical.

The tender does not include any explicit criteria or focus on green procurement, social aspects, or innovation, indicating a complete absence of sustainability considerations.