Legal Compliance65/100
The tender defines the procedure and CPV code correctly, and no disputes are noted. However, the explicit absence of evaluation criteria is a significant legal compliance concern regarding transparency and equal treatment, even for a below-threshold procedure. The 'Value Classified: Yes' flag contradicts the disclosed estimated value.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•Inconsistent value classification
Clarity60/100
The tender description and AI-extracted technical requirements are clear and unambiguous regarding the scope of work and required capabilities. However, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria creates substantial ambiguity for potential bidders on how their proposals will be assessed.
•No evaluation criteria specified
Completeness65/100
Basic tender information, including title, organization, value, duration, and deadlines, is provided. However, the tender is incomplete due to the explicit absence of evaluation criteria and the lack of specific details from the attached documents, which appear to be generic notices rather than comprehensive tender specifications or contract terms.
•Missing evaluation criteria
•Lack of detailed tender specifications/contract terms
Fairness55/100
While e-procurement is enabled and the estimated value is disclosed, the complete absence of evaluation criteria is a major fairness concern. This lack of transparency prevents bidders from understanding the objective basis for award decisions, potentially undermining equal treatment and competition.
•No evaluation criteria specified
Practicality75/100
The tender supports electronic submission via a specified platform, and key dates like contract start and duration are clearly defined. However, the absence of an explicit document URL and the apparent lack of detailed tender documents (e.g., technical specifications, contract terms) could hinder practical bid preparation.
•No explicit document URL
•Apparent lack of detailed tender documents
Data Consistency80/100
Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical. However, there is a direct contradiction where the estimated value is disclosed (90,000.00 EUR) but simultaneously flagged as 'Value Classified: Yes.' The 'Liable Person' field is also empty.
•Contradiction in value classification
•Empty 'Liable Person' field
Sustainability20/100
The tender does not include any explicit requirements or considerations related to green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also noted as not being EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.
•No green procurement criteria
•No social criteria