Legal Compliance100/100
The open procedure and multi-supplier framework align with principles of competition and non-discrimination. However, the lack of full tender documents prevents a thorough assessment of compliance with detailed legal requirements, such as proportionality of specific criteria or transparency of the full procurement process. Standard UK/EU exclusion grounds are expected but not detailed in the summary.
Clarity40/100
The extracted eligibility and technical requirements are generally clear in their intent. However, the complete absence of full tender documents, including specifications and terms, makes the overall clarity of the procurement process extremely poor. A significant inconsistency exists with the estimated value stated in EUR while financial requirements refer to GBP.
•Complete absence of full tender documents.
•Inconsistency in currency (EUR vs. GBP) for estimated value and financial requirements.
Completeness83/100
The tender summary is critically incomplete. The absence of any attached documents, detailed evaluation criteria, and specific financial thresholds means bidders lack essential information to prepare a compliant and competitive offer. The NUTS code is also missing, which is standard for geographical identification.
•No tender documents attached or available.
•Missing detailed evaluation criteria.
Fairness80/100
The open procedure and multi-supplier framework are positive for promoting fair competition. However, the lack of detailed evaluation criteria and specific financial requirements could lead to an opaque assessment process, potentially undermining fairness for bidders who cannot fully understand how their proposals will be judged.
•Lack of detailed evaluation criteria could compromise fair assessment.
Practicality40/100
The practicality for potential bidders is extremely low. Without access to the full tender documents, detailed specifications, and evaluation criteria, it is practically impossible for interested parties to prepare a meaningful, compliant, or competitive submission.
•Impossible for bidders to prepare a meaningful submission without full tender documents.
Data Consistency100/100
A notable inconsistency exists between the estimated value being stated as EUR 200,000,000.00 and the financial requirements section referring to "£200,000,000 over 120 months". This requires clarification.
•Inconsistency in currency (EUR vs. GBP) for estimated value and financial requirements.
Sustainability0/100
The tender summary, and as confirmed by automated checks, lacks any explicit mention of green procurement, social criteria, or innovation focus. For a long-term, high-value social care contract, this represents a missed opportunity to integrate broader sustainability and societal value considerations.
•Absence of green procurement criteria.
•Absence of social criteria.