ITT 27/2025 - ICT Appointment for Castlewellan FP Tree Tops Access Linkages

This tender provides a clear service description but suffers from critical omissions regarding evaluation criteria, significantly impacting transparency and fairness. Several data inconsistencies also require clarification.

The procedure type and CPV codes are correctly assigned, and there are no disputes. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria is a significant legal compliance issue, as is the missing reveal date, undermining transparency and fair competition.

The description of the required services, including the use of NEC contract and RIBA stages, is clear. However, the complete absence of evaluation criteria makes it impossible for potential bidders to understand how their proposals will be assessed, creating significant ambiguity.

Most basic information such as title, reference, organization, deadlines, duration, and location is provided. However, the critical omission of evaluation criteria and a discrepancy in the estimated value (EUR vs GBP) represent significant completeness gaps.

The complete absence of evaluation criteria severely compromises the fairness and transparency of the procurement process, as bidders cannot objectively prepare their proposals or understand the basis of award. The value discrepancy and e-submission contradiction also raise minor fairness concerns.

The tender specifies a contract start date and duration, and 'MultiQuote' suggests electronic submission, which is practical. However, the contradiction regarding e-submission in the automated checks and the lack of an explicit document URL slightly reduce the overall practicality.

There are notable inconsistencies, specifically the discrepancy between the estimated value stated in EUR and GBP, and the contradiction regarding e-submission (MultiQuote vs. automated check 'No e-submission'). The 'Liable Person' field is also empty.

The tender does not include any explicit criteria or focus on green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also not indicated as EU funded, which typically implies higher sustainability standards.