Mystery Shopper Service (Public Inquiry)

This tender for 'Mystery client research service' is generally well-structured with clear basic information and CPV codes. However, it lacks disclosure of the estimated value and detailed evaluation criteria, impacting completeness and fairness.

The tender provides a clear CPV code, organization details, and an open procedure type. The deadline is specified. Regulatory compliance is assumed given it's an active tender, but the absence of explicitly stated regulatory references is a minor point. No disputes are indicated.

The title and description are clear. The tender specifies it's an open procedure and provides CPV codes. However, the lack of explicit evaluation criteria and detailed requirements within the extracted documents (many with no content) significantly reduces overall clarity.

Most basic information like title, organization, and duration is present. The submission deadline and opening date are provided. However, the crucial 'Estimated Value' is not disclosed, and several attached documents have no extracted content, leaving key requirements undocumented.

The tender uses an e-procurement characteristic, indicating a level of fairness. The procedure is open. However, the lack of disclosed value and missing evaluation criteria prevent potential bidders from fully assessing the opportunity and may hinder objective comparison. The short submission deadline is also a concern for fairness.

The tender is designated as 'E-Procurement', which is a positive indicator. A contract duration is specified. However, financing information is missing, and the 'e-submission' is not explicitly detailed beyond the general 'E-Procurement' characteristic. The contract start date is not provided.

Key fields like title, reference, organization, CPV, and dates are populated. The tender is active with no indications of suspension or disputes. The dates provided (submission deadline and opening date) are logically sequential.

There is no explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, innovation, or EU funding in the provided tender information. This category is therefore scored low due to the absence of any such considerations.