Want tender expert help? See our tender preparation service
Tenders

Garage renovation, Meža prospekts 1

Closed

Updated October 09, 2026

Submission Deadline Has Passed

This tender's submission deadline has passed and is no longer accepting applications. The information below is kept for reference purposes.

Browse Active Tenders
Deadline
Expired
March 31, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Construction
Reference
168191
Value
Not disclosed
Location
Latvia
Published
March 16, 2026
CPV Code
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 16, 2026

Deadline for Questions

March 24, 2026

Submission Deadline

March 31, 2026

Tender Opening

March 31, 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 →

Key facts

Deadline
Expired
CPV Code
45000000 — Construction work
Procedure
Open procedure
Budget
Not disclosed
Duration
2 months
Location
Latvia
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

Garage renovation, Meža prospekts 1

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 for garage renovation at Riga National Zoo presents a moderate competition opportunity. A winning strategy will focus on demonstrating strong technical capability and cost-effectiveness, given the lack of specified evaluation criteria. Proactive engagement and a clear understanding of the 'tāme' will be crucial.

Key Winning Messages

Reliable and efficient renovation delivered on time and within budget.

Expertise in practical, functional upgrades for institutional facilities.

Key Opportunities
Lack of specified evaluation criteria allows for strategic emphasis on cost and technical execution.
The provided 'tāme' offers a clear baseline for cost proposals, enabling competitive pricing.
Short 2-month duration implies a need for efficient project management and resource allocation.
Key Challenges
Absence of explicit evaluation criteria makes it difficult to optimize bid scoring.

Focus on delivering a technically sound proposal that clearly addresses the implied needs of renovation and a highly competitive financial offer based on the 'tāme'.

Potential for unforeseen site conditions or complexities not detailed in the tender documents.

Conduct a thorough site visit (if permitted) and build in a small contingency within the financial proposal for unforeseen issues.

High competition due to the lack of specific eligibility/capability requirements, potentially attracting many bidders.

Differentiate through a clear, concise, and well-structured proposal that highlights relevant experience and a highly competitive price.

Ideal Bidder Profile
A medium-sized construction company with proven experience in renovation projects, particularly those involving existing structures and potentially sensitive environments (like a zoo). They should have a robust understanding of cost estimation and project management, capable of delivering within a tight 2-month timeframe.
Key Requirements
Submission of technical and financial proposals.
Adherence to evaluation methods outlined in documents.
Understanding and utilizing the provided cost estimate ('tāme').
Demonstrating capability to complete the 2-month duration.
Key Discriminators
A detailed, realistic project plan demonstrating how the 2-month deadline will be met.
A financial proposal that is demonstrably competitive against the provided 'tāme', with clear cost breakdowns.
Evidence of successful completion of similar renovation projects, even if not explicitly requested.
Social Value Opportunities
While not a formal requirement, consider a brief mention of local employment opportunities or waste reduction strategies during the renovation process to subtly enhance the bid's appeal.
Bid Focus Areas
Financial Proposal (Cost-effectiveness)

Develop a highly competitive price that aligns with but ideally undercuts the provided 'tāme'. Ensure clarity in the cost breakdown to demonstrate value and transparency.

Technical Proposal (Execution and Timeline)

Provide a clear, concise, and actionable project plan that explicitly addresses how the 2-month duration will be achieved. Highlight relevant past experience in similar renovations.

Recommendations6
Thoroughly Analyze the 'Tāme'
CriticalMed effort

Scrutinize the provided cost estimate ('tāme') in DOCUMENT 3. Understand its assumptions and identify areas where cost efficiencies can be achieved without compromising quality. This will form the basis of your competitive financial proposal.

Enables a highly competitive and justifiable financial bid.
Prioritize Cost-Effectiveness and Execution Clarity
CriticalHigh effort

Given the lack of specified evaluation criteria, assume cost and the ability to deliver within the tight timeframe are paramount. Your financial proposal must be sharp, and your technical proposal must clearly articulate a robust plan for the 2-month duration.

Maximizes chances of winning by addressing likely key decision factors.
Develop a Detailed Project Schedule
HighMed effort

Create a realistic and detailed project schedule that demonstrates how the renovation will be completed within the 2-month timeframe. Break down tasks, identify critical path items, and allocate resources effectively.

Builds confidence in your ability to meet the deadline.
Highlight Relevant Past Project Experience
MediumLow effort

Even if not explicitly requested, include a brief section showcasing successful completion of similar renovation projects. Focus on projects that demonstrate efficiency, quality, and adherence to timelines.

Adds credibility and demonstrates proven capability.
Consider a Site Visit (if possible)
MediumLow effort

If the tender documents or contracting authority permit, arrange a site visit to Meža prospekts 1. This will help identify any potential unforeseen challenges and refine your project plan and costings.

Reduces risk of unexpected costs and delays, improves proposal accuracy.
Subtly Integrate Local Impact
LowLow effort

In your technical proposal, briefly mention any plans for utilizing local labor or implementing waste reduction measures during the renovation. This can add a positive, albeit non-scored, element.

May subtly enhance the bid's overall appeal.
Competitive Positioning
Position your bid as the most cost-effective solution that guarantees timely completion of the renovation, leveraging a clear understanding of the provided 'tāme' and a well-defined project execution plan.

Competitors

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

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

6 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (2)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (1)
Technical (1)
Financial (1)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS2
--Submit technical and financial proposals.
--Follow evaluation methods outlined in documents.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--No specific grounds mentioned.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS1
--No specific eligibility requirements mentioned.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS1
--No specific technical capability requirements mentioned.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS1
--No specific financial requirements mentioned.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

2 documents available with AI summaries

Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības, 1.versijaPDF
168191_PD.ANY_1_1_1_20260316113038.pdf -- 96.1 KB

This document outlines the tender requirements for the renovation of garages at the Riga National Zoo, detailing selection criteria, technical and financial proposal submissions, and evaluation methods.

Nolikums ar pielikumiemXLS
Būvniecības apjomu tāme_TS_P2.xlsx -- 43.9 KB

This document contains a cost estimate (tāme) for the renovation of garages at Meža prospekts 1 in Rīga, including a summary of costs.

Documents Preview

Sign up to view document summaries and analysis

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender for garage renovation is generally well-structured with clear basic information and available documents. However, it lacks specific details on evaluation criteria and financial requirements, and document access is noted as restricted.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender appears to comply with general procurement regulations, including a clear procedure and CPV code. Deadlines are reasonable. No disputes are reported. The primary concern is the potential for restricted document access, which could impact legal compliance if it hinders full participation.

•Restricted document access
Clarity80/100

The tender title and description are clear. The existence of specific requirement documents is indicated, suggesting a structured approach. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria within the provided summary is a significant clarity issue.

•No evaluation criteria specified
Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including the organization, title, and contract duration. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, which is a key piece of information for potential bidders. The AI-extracted requirements are notably sparse, indicating that crucial details might be buried within the documents.

•Estimated value not disclosed
•Sparse AI-extracted requirements
Fairness85/100

The tender is an open procedure, which is a positive indicator of fairness. The AI-extracted requirements do not suggest tailoring to specific companies. However, the lack of disclosed value and unspecified evaluation criteria can create an uneven playing field.

•Value not disclosed
•No evaluation criteria specified
Practicality65/100

The tender is marked as 'E-Procurement', which is a positive sign for practical submission. However, the AI-extracted requirements do not explicitly confirm e-submission, and the 'Issues' section flags 'No e-submission'. The contract start date is not specified.

•Potential lack of e-submission confirmation
•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. The dates provided (Reveal Date, Submission Deadline, Opening Date) are logically ordered.

Sustainability50/100

There is no explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the provided information. The tender is not indicated as EU funded.

•No green procurement mentioned
•No social criteria mentioned

Strengths

Clear basic information (title, organization, reference)
Open procedure
Documents are available
Reasonable submission deadline

Concerns

Estimated value not disclosed
No evaluation criteria specified
Restricted document access
Sparse AI-extracted requirements

Recommendations

1. Disclose the estimated contract value.
2. Clearly specify the evaluation criteria within the tender documents.
3. Ensure full and unrestricted access to all tender documents.

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