Legal Compliance100/100
The tender describes a competitive flexible procedure with a participation stage, which aligns with standard procurement practices. However, the complete absence of tender documents hinders a full assessment of legal compliance regarding specific requirements and evaluation criteria.
Clarity40/100
The description provides a reasonably clear overview of the framework's purpose, scope, and initial procedural steps. However, the lack of detailed ITT documents makes it impossible to fully assess the clarity of specific requirements, evaluation criteria, and contractual terms.
•Ambiguity regarding the exact scope and requirements for 'full tender costings and proposals' for initial direct award schools without ITT documents.
Completeness83/100
This is the tender's most significant weakness. The complete absence of any attached documents (ITT, PSQ, specifications, draft contract) means crucial information for potential bidders is missing, making a comprehensive understanding of the tender impossible.
•Complete absence of tender documents (ITT, PSQ, specifications, draft contract).
•Missing detailed evaluation criteria (only mentioned PSQ will include scoring criteria, but no specifics).
Fairness60/100
The requirement for a minimum Employer's liability insurance of 10,000,000 GBP for a 6,000,000 EUR framework (over 3 years) appears disproportionately high. This could significantly limit participation, particularly from SMEs, and potentially favor larger, established companies. The emphasis on 'good local infrastructure' could also be restrictive if not clearly defined and objectively assessed.
•Disproportionately high Employer's liability insurance requirement (10,000,000 GBP) relative to the estimated contract value (6,000,000 EUR), potentially tailoring the tender for specific large companies.
•Potential for 'good local infrastructure' requirement to be restrictive if not clearly defined and objectively assessed.
Practicality40/100
The framework approach offers flexibility for the Trust, and the phased procurement process is generally practical. However, the complete lack of documents makes it impractical for bidders to prepare adequately. The tight turnaround time between site surveys (early March) and the tender response deadline (late March) could be challenging for detailed proposals.
•Impractical for bidders to prepare comprehensive proposals without access to tender documents.
•Potentially tight turnaround time between site surveys/briefing and tender response deadline for detailed catering proposals.
Data Consistency100/100
The provided information is generally consistent within itself regarding the estimated value, duration, and framework nature. However, the NUTS code is missing.
•Missing NUTS code for geographical location.
Sustainability0/100
The tender description does not mention any specific green procurement, social, or innovation criteria. This represents a missed opportunity to integrate sustainability objectives into the catering services.
•Absence of explicit green procurement criteria.
•Absence of explicit social criteria.