Development of construction project amendments and author supervision for the object “Construction of an animal cemetery and a street section at Talsu iela 2, Liepāja”

This tender presents a clear project description and reasonable submission deadline, but is critically flawed by restricted document access and the complete absence of evaluation criteria, severely impacting fairness and transparency.

The tender defines the procedure type, provides a reasonable submission deadline (30 days), and assigns a relevant CPV code. However, the flagged 'Restricted document access' is a significant legal compliance issue for an open procedure, hindering transparency and equal access. The estimated value is also not disclosed, which, while not always a legal breach, reduces transparency.

The project description is clear and unambiguous. While requirements categories are listed and point to a specific document, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria makes it impossible for potential bidders to understand how their offers will be assessed, leading to significant ambiguity.

Basic information such as title, reference, organization, description, deadlines, and duration are provided. However, the tender lacks the estimated value, suffers from restricted document access, and critically, does not specify evaluation criteria, leaving significant gaps in essential information for bidders.

The tender benefits from e-procurement and a reasonable submission deadline. However, 'Restricted document access' and the complete absence of 'No evaluation criteria specified' are critical flaws that severely undermine fairness and transparency, making it difficult for all bidders to compete on an equal footing. The undisclosed estimated value further reduces transparency.

Electronic submission via the Latvian Electronic Procurement System (EIS) is supported, which is a strong positive for practicality. However, the lack of a direct document URL, specific contract start date, and detailed financing information (beyond duration) reduces overall practicality. The restricted document access also practically hinders bidders.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical and consistent. There are no disputes or suspensions. A minor inconsistency exists between 'E-Procurement' in characteristics and 'No e-submission' in automated checks, though the explicit text supports e-submission. The missing estimated value is also a data gap.

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