Planning and implementation of advertising campaigns in Google Ads and Meta accounts and SEO service

This tender for advertising and SEO services is generally well-structured with clear requirements and an objective evaluation criterion. However, the critical issue of restricted document access significantly undermines fairness and completeness, posing a major barrier to potential bidders.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV codes correctly, and the submission deadline is reasonable. However, the restricted document access is a significant concern regarding transparency and equal treatment, which are fundamental legal principles in public procurement.

The tender description is clear and unambiguous, and the AI-extracted requirements are well-defined and understandable. The evaluation criterion, based solely on the lowest price, is explicitly stated, ensuring transparency in the assessment process.

Basic information, financial details, and timelines are comprehensively provided. However, the restricted access to essential tender documents (Nolikums, Technical Specification) means that bidders cannot fully access all necessary information, making the tender incomplete from a participant's perspective.

The tender's fairness is severely compromised by the restricted document access, which prevents equal access to information for all potential bidders. While the evaluation criterion is objective and requirements appear generic, this fundamental flaw undermines the competitive process and equal opportunity.

The tender explicitly states 'E-Procurement' and 'Elektronisko iepirkumu sistēma' for opening, indicating electronic submission is supported, which enhances practicality. However, the restricted document access makes it impractical for bidders to properly prepare and submit a comprehensive offer. The contract start date is not explicitly stated.

The core data fields, including title, reference, organization, financial details, and timelines, are consistently populated. The tender's internal information is coherent, despite some discrepancies in the automated flags provided (e.g., regarding e-submission and evaluation criteria).

The tender does not include any explicit criteria or considerations for green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. This indicates a lack of focus on broader sustainability goals, which is common for tenders of this nature but limits its sustainability score.