Purchase of foodstuffs in 2026

This tender for foodstuff procurement demonstrates good clarity and fairness, with electronic submission and clear evaluation criteria. However, there are moderate concerns regarding the completeness of accessible information and the absence of explicit sustainability considerations.

The tender generally complies with legal requirements, featuring a reasonable submission period, defined procedure type, and appropriate CPV codes. The use of ESPD indicates adherence to EU standards. A minor concern is the lack of explicit mandatory exclusion grounds in the provided summaries, though these are typically covered by law and implied by the ESPD.

The tender description is clear, and evaluation criteria (lowest price) are well-defined. Technical capability requirements are specific and understandable. While some eligibility requirements are generic, they refer to specific tender documents. The automated check's flag for 'Missing evaluation criteria' appears incorrect based on document summaries.

Basic information, deadlines, and estimated value are provided. However, the 'Mahtude tabel' (volumes table) in XLS format was not analyzed, potentially omitting crucial details. Contract duration and specific location information, while inferable from documents, are not explicitly stated in the basic tender overview.

The tender exhibits good fairness, offering full document access, disclosing the estimated value, and providing reasonable deadlines. Evaluation criteria are objective (lowest price), and e-procurement ensures equal access. Technical capability requirements are reasonable and not overly restrictive, and the division into seven parts promotes broader competition.

Electronic submission is supported, and the e-procurement portal URL is provided. However, the contract start date is not explicitly stated, and financing conditions are vaguely referenced to the contract. The duration is somewhat inferred rather than clearly specified as contract duration.

Key fields are mostly populated, and dates are logical and consistent. There are no disputes or suspensions. Minor inconsistencies exist between the 'Value Classified: Yes' flag and the disclosed estimated value, and between automated checks and document summaries regarding evaluation criteria, duration, and location, but these are not critical.

The tender does not explicitly incorporate green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. As a standard foodstuff procurement, it lacks specific sustainability criteria, which is common but represents a missed opportunity for higher standards.