Skip to main content
Tenders

002150 - Library Management System (LMS)

Open
Deadline
3 days left
March 30, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Open Procedure
Reference
027429-2026
Value
£540,000
Location
Tees Valley and Durham, United Kingdom
Published
March 20, 2026
Organization
CPV Code
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 25, 2026

Deadline for Questions

March 23, 2026

Submission Deadline

March 30, 2026

Contract Start Date

April 30, 2026

Buyer IntelligencePRO
🔒
Unlock Buyer Intelligence
See spending patterns, preferred procedures, and more.
Upgrade to Professional →
Budget
£540,000
Duration
70 months
Location
Tees Valley and Durham
Type
Open Procedure
75
Quality Score/100
Good

Original Tender Description

The purpose of this project is to replace the existing Library Management System (LMS) used by Durham County Council Library Services, including 39 public libraries, prisons and a Schools Library Service. The current LMS, developed in house, is outdated and no longer meets the operational and strategic needs of the service. This project will deliver a modern, scalable LMS that enhances operational efficiency, improves user experience, supports digital transformation goals and complies with current compliance standards.

Risk Analysis

Please log in to use risk analysis.

Login

Win Strategy

Please log in to access winning strategy recommendations.

Login

Competitors

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

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

AI requirements analysis not yet available for this tender.

Requirements will be generated automatically when tender documents are processed.

Documents

No processed documents available for this tender.

Documents will appear here once they are downloaded and analyzed.

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender for a Library Management System is generally well-structured with clear objectives and basic information provided. However, it lacks crucial details regarding evaluation criteria and document accessibility, impacting its overall practicality and completeness.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender adheres to standard open procedure requirements, with a clear CPV code and no reported disputes. Deadlines are present, though the submission deadline appears tight given the contract start date. Regulatory compliance is assumed but not explicitly detailed.

Submission deadline may be too short relative to contract start date.
Clarity80/100

The description of the project's purpose and scope is clear, outlining the need to replace an outdated system and the desired outcomes. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria leaves potential bidders uncertain about how their submissions will be assessed.

Missing evaluation criteria.
Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including estimated value, duration, and contract start date. However, the critical issue of having no document content available significantly hinders completeness, as bidders cannot access the full scope of requirements.

No document content available for the 5 tender documents.
Fairness85/100

The tender is an open procedure, suggesting a fair process. The value is disclosed, and criteria are objective in principle, though the lack of specified evaluation criteria is a concern. The absence of explicit e-submission details is a minor drawback.

Missing evaluation criteria.
Practicality65/100

The tender is active and has a specified contract start date. However, the lack of document content and the absence of explicit e-submission instructions reduce its practicality. Financing information is not detailed.

No document content available.
No e-submission specified.
Data Consistency90/100

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and dates are populated. There are no reported disputes or suspensions, and the dates provided are logical, with the contract start date following the submission deadline.

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 modern procurement considerations.

Not green procurement.
No social criteria.

Strengths

Clear project description and objectives.
Open procedure for fair competition.
All basic information (value, duration, dates) provided.
CPV code correctly specified.

Concerns

No document content available for tender documents.
Missing evaluation criteria.
Tight submission deadline relative to contract start date.
Lack of sustainability and innovation considerations.

Recommendations

1. Provide full access to all tender documents with detailed content.
2. Clearly define and publish the evaluation criteria.
3. Consider extending the submission deadline or adjusting the 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