Legal Compliance65/100
The tender clearly defines the procedure type and CPV codes. However, the absence of explicit mandatory exclusion grounds, as noted by the AI extraction, represents a significant legal oversight. Missing procedure codes are minor.
•No explicit mandatory exclusion grounds listed
•Missing procedure type and procedure codes
Clarity55/100
While specific technical and eligibility requirements are well-defined, the tender suffers from significant ambiguity regarding the final lot structure, precise quantities, and framework term, which are stated as "under review." Crucially, no evaluation criteria are specified, making it difficult for tenderers to understand how their proposals will be assessed.
•No evaluation criteria specified
•Ambiguity regarding final lot structure, quantities, and framework term
Completeness65/100
Basic information is present, but the tender lacks critical details such as explicit evaluation criteria. There is also an inconsistency in the estimated value (EUR vs GBP) and the duration, which is stated as both fixed and "under review." Furthermore, one of the listed tender documents failed to provide a summary, indicating a potential issue with document access or processing.
•No evaluation criteria specified
•Inconsistent estimated value and duration
Fairness45/100
The tender's fairness is severely compromised by the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria, which is fundamental for transparent and objective assessment. The lack of electronic submission capabilities also creates a barrier to equal access and modern procurement practices. The failed download of one document further impacts full access.
•No evaluation criteria specified
•No electronic submission supported
Practicality45/100
The tender's practicality is significantly hampered by the lack of electronic submission, which is a major drawback in contemporary procurement. Ambiguity regarding the final framework duration and estimated value also makes it challenging for potential suppliers to plan and prepare their bids effectively.
•No electronic submission supported
•Ambiguity regarding final framework duration and estimated value
Data Consistency55/100
A major inconsistency exists between the estimated value stated in the financial information (EUR) and the value range provided in the description (GBP), which also differs significantly. The contract duration is stated as 48 months but also as "under active review," creating conflicting information. Minor issues include missing codes for type and procedure.
•Inconsistent estimated value (EUR vs GBP, specific value vs range)
•Inconsistent contract duration (fixed vs under review)
Sustainability85/100
The tender demonstrates a strong commitment to sustainability and social responsibility by explicitly including requirements for the Evergreen Sustainable Supplier Assessment, Carbon Reduction Plan (CRP), Modern Slavery Statement, and Modern Slavery Assessment Tool (MSAT). However, there is no explicit focus on innovation.
•No explicit innovation focus