Study of values, attitudes, and beliefs shaping the food choices of the Estonian adult population for the National Institute for Health Development

This tender requires a robust, mixed-methods research study on Estonian adult food choices. Success hinges on demonstrating deep methodological expertise, a strong project team with relevant experience, and a cost-effective proposal that clearly articulates added value, particularly in environmental sustainability.

Expertise in integrated mixed-methods research for public health insights.

Commitment to sustainable research practices and delivering actionable, evidence-based recommendations.

Cost-effective and high-quality research delivered by a highly qualified team.

Detail a comprehensive, phased approach that explicitly addresses the integration of qualitative and quantitative data. Showcase innovative yet practical data collection and analysis methods. Emphasize the team's specific expertise and prior success in similar complex studies. Include a clear plan for ensuring environmental sustainability in research execution.

Provide a competitive yet realistic price. Ensure the cost breakdown is transparent and justifiable, demonstrating value for money. Consider offering tiered options or value-added services that don't significantly increase cost but enhance the proposal.

Develop a detailed methodology for the integrated analysis (Stage 3) that clearly shows how qualitative findings will explain and enrich quantitative results, and how this synthesis will directly inform policy and interventions. This is a core requirement and a key differentiator.

Thoroughly document the CVs of the Project Manager and Analyst, explicitly mapping their past projects to the tender's requirements (health/social sector, qualitative/quantitative, team size). Use clear language and provide concise summaries of their relevant contributions.

Go beyond mere compliance. Propose specific, measurable actions for environmentally friendly research execution (e.g., digital tools, reduced travel, sustainable office practices). This adds value even if not explicitly scored.

Create a detailed cost breakdown that clearly justifies each expenditure. This builds trust and demonstrates efficiency, supporting the 40% financial score. Highlight any cost-saving measures or efficiencies achieved through the proposed methodology.

Since evaluation criteria are not specified, assume a balanced weighting. Focus on excelling in all stated technical requirements and providing a competitive price. Avoid making assumptions about specific scoring nuances and instead deliver a comprehensive, high-quality bid across all aspects.

Include a commitment to share findings and insights beyond the final report, perhaps through a workshop or presentation to the contracting authority. This demonstrates a commitment to partnership and maximizing the impact of the research.

This tender for a combined research study demonstrates good clarity and data consistency, with well-defined objectives and evaluation criteria. However, its completeness and practicality are slightly hampered by the fragmentation of detailed requirements across numerous documents and the lack of a direct document access URL.

The tender generally complies with legal requirements, featuring reasonable deadlines, proper CPV codes, and the use of ESPD. No disputes or suspensions are noted. The procedure type is indicated by a code ('A'), which is standard in the national system but less descriptive for international bidders.

The tender's description is clear and unambiguous, outlining the study's objectives and methodology effectively. Evaluation criteria are explicitly defined (60% technical, 40% cost), and AI-extracted requirements are understandable. However, the extensive number of documents may require bidders to synthesize information from various sources.

All essential basic, financial, and timeline information is provided. While 12 documents are listed, the content of the XML ESPD was not processed, and the comprehensive set of requirements and criteria is distributed across these documents, making it less consolidated.

The tender exhibits good fairness with full document access, disclosed value, and reasonable deadlines. Evaluation criteria are objective and transparent, and e-procurement is enabled. The experience requirements for key personnel are specific but appear justifiable for the research nature and not tailored. The decision not to divide the tender is also reasonably explained.

Electronic submission is supported, contract start and duration are clear, and financing information is available. However, the tender provides only a general e-procurement portal URL rather than a direct link to the specific tender documents, which could slightly reduce immediate practicality for bidders.

Key fields are consistently populated, and all dates are logical and sequential. There are no reported suspensions or disputes, indicating high data integrity.

The tender explicitly mentions 'Green Procurement' and a preference for environmentally friendly solutions, and it is EU-funded. However, it lacks explicit social criteria for the contractor's operations and does not specifically emphasize innovation beyond the inherent nature of the research project itself.