Legal Compliance70/100
The tender utilizes a compliant DPS procedure and has appropriate CPV codes. However, missing procedure type codes, a classified estimated value, and severe inconsistencies in contract start and duration dates raise concerns about full compliance and potential legal clarity issues if not rectified.
•Missing procedure type codes
•Estimated value is classified
Clarity80/100
The tender description is clear and unambiguous, outlining the purpose of the DPS and the application process. AI-extracted requirements are well-structured and understandable, though detailed evaluation criteria within the Selection Questionnaire (SQ) are not explicitly provided in the notice.
•Detailed evaluation criteria within the SQ are not explicitly detailed in the notice
Completeness70/100
Basic information like title, reference, and organization is present. While deadlines and duration are specified, they suffer from inconsistencies. The estimated value is not disclosed, and crucial documents like the full Selection Questionnaire are not directly attached, requiring portal registration.
•Estimated value is classified and not disclosed
•Key documents (Selection Questionnaire) are not directly attached, requiring portal registration
Fairness85/100
The requirements appear generic and not tailored to a specific company, promoting fair competition. E-procurement is supported, ensuring equal access. However, the classified value and the need to register on a portal to access the full SQ slightly reduce overall transparency.
•Estimated value is classified
•Full Selection Questionnaire requires portal registration for access
Practicality60/100
Electronic submission is supported via the Kent Business Portal, which is practical. However, the classified value, lack of a direct document URL, and especially the highly inconsistent and problematic contract start date (tomorrow, while DPS was live since 2024) significantly hinder practicality for potential suppliers.
•Contract start date (2026-01-29) is effectively tomorrow, while the DPS has been live since 2024-09-11
•Contract duration (8 months) is inconsistent with the DPS live period (2024-2026)
Data Consistency40/100
This category presents the most significant issues. The contract start date (2026-01-29) is inconsistent with today's date (2026-01-28) and the DPS's stated live period (2024-09-11 to 2026-09-10). The 8-month contract duration also conflicts with the DPS's two-year operational period. Missing procedure codes are minor but contribute to overall inconsistency.
•Contract start date (2026-01-29) is inconsistent with today's date (2026-01-28) and the DPS live period (2024-09-11)
•Contract duration (8 months) is inconsistent with the DPS live period (2024-09-11 to 2026-09-10)
Sustainability50/100
While the core service (supporting Children's Services) inherently has social value, the tender documentation does not explicitly incorporate green procurement, broader social clauses, or innovation-focused criteria in its procurement process. This results in a neutral score.
•No explicit green procurement criteria
•No explicit social criteria beyond the service description