Want tender expert help? See our tender preparation service
Tenders

Perimeter Waterproofing and Courtyard Reconstruction at Raua 2 Tallinn

Closed

Updated October 14, 2026

Submission Deadline Has Passed

This tender's submission deadline has passed and is no longer accepting applications. The information below is kept for reference purposes.

Browse Active Tenders
Deadline
Expired
March 06, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Construction
Reference
305779
Value
€782,500
Location
Estonia
Published
February 03, 2026
CPV Code
Evaluation Criteria
TOTAL (Total cost of works)100%
Project Timeline

Tender Published

February 03, 2026

Deadline for Questions

February 27, 2026

Submission Deadline

March 06, 2026

Tender Opening

March 06, 2026

Contract Start Date

May 01, 2026

Win ProbabilityPRO
🔒
Upgrade to Professional
See your estimated win probability based on historical data.
Upgrade to Professional →
Buyer IntelligencePRO
🔒
Unlock Buyer Intelligence
See spending patterns, preferred procedures, and more.
Upgrade to Professional →
Sector InsightsPRO
🔒
Unlock Sector Insights
See average winning prices, competition levels, and market trends.
Upgrade to Professional →

Key facts

Estimated value
€782,500
Deadline
Expired
CPV Code
45332300-6 — Drain-laying work
Procedure
Open procedure
Budget
€782,500
Duration
6 months
Location
Estonia
Type
Construction
75
Quality Score/100
Good
Market Benchmark
Avg. Winning Price
€524,963
Avg. Bids
4.7
Competition
Medium
SME Winners
94%
5,932 tenders analyzed

Original Tender Description

Reconstruction of the building's perimeter drainage and courtyard, construction of light shafts, and installation of basement windows.
Electronic Submission

Run Risk Analysis

Identify potential risks, inconsistencies, and red flags across all tender documents. Get a detailed risk report with severity levels and mitigation recommendations.

Login

Win Strategy

AI-powered analysis of this tender's requirements, opportunities, and challenges. Get strategic insights to maximize your win probability.

65%
Estimated Win ProbabilityModerate Fit

This tender focuses on a straightforward construction project with price as the sole evaluation criterion. Success hinges on meticulous cost estimation, demonstrating technical capability through qualified personnel, and adhering strictly to all submission requirements. Differentiation will be minimal, making a highly competitive price and flawless execution paramount.

Key Winning Messages

Uncompromising Value: Delivering the required technical solution at the most competitive price.

Proven Expertise: Demonstrating the capability of our qualified personnel to execute the project efficiently and to specification.

Flawless Execution: A commitment to meeting all tender requirements and delivering a high-quality outcome within the specified timeframe.

Key Opportunities
Price-driven evaluation offers a clear path to winning if cost is aggressively managed.
The 'or equivalent' clause for standards allows for potential cost savings through alternative, compliant materials or methods.
The 6-month duration is achievable with efficient project management, allowing for a focused bid.
Key Challenges
Intense price competition due to the sole evaluation criterion.

Conduct a thorough and accurate cost breakdown, leveraging efficient procurement of materials and labor. Explore economies of scale and optimized construction methodologies. Consider a lean operational approach.

Ensuring the availability of qualified Project and Site Managers for the entire contract duration.

Secure commitments from key personnel early. Have backup options identified and pre-vetted. Clearly outline their roles and responsibilities in the bid.

Strict adherence to all submission requirements and deadlines to avoid disqualification.

Develop a detailed bid checklist. Assign responsibility for each document. Conduct internal reviews and quality checks before submission. Submit well in advance of the deadline.

Ideal Bidder Profile
A well-established construction company with a proven track record in drainage, waterproofing, and courtyard reconstruction projects. They must possess highly competent and available Project and Site Managers, a robust understanding of cost control, and efficient operational processes to deliver the project within the tight 6-month timeframe at a competitive price. Experience with Riigi Kinnisvara Aktsiaselts (RKAS) projects would be advantageous.
Key Requirements
Mandatory site visit and signed confirmation
Qualified and available Project Manager and Site Manager
Lowest total cost of works
Compliance with all tender conditions and technical specifications
Accurate unit pricing and overall bid cost consistency
Successful completion of background checks for employees
Key Discriminators
While the tender lacks explicit areas for differentiation, a bidder could subtly highlight their streamlined project delivery process, which indirectly supports cost-effectiveness and timely completion. This could be framed through the efficiency of their proposed working design preparation and construction execution.
Demonstrating a proactive approach to risk management, even if not explicitly requested, can build confidence in a bidder's ability to deliver without cost overruns.
Social Value Opportunities
Given 'No' for Social Aspects, focus on demonstrating how efficient project delivery will benefit the local community through minimal disruption and timely completion of public infrastructure improvements. This is an indirect social value contribution.
Bid Focus Areas
Total Cost of Works100%

Achieve the absolute lowest possible price while ensuring all technical requirements can be met. This requires meticulous cost engineering, efficient resource allocation, and potentially aggressive margin setting. Leverage any 'or equivalent' clauses to source cost-effective compliant materials.

Recommendations7
Conduct Thorough Site Visit and Document Findings
CriticalMed effort

Mandatory site visit is a prerequisite. Document all observations, potential challenges, and opportunities for efficiency during the visit. This ensures a realistic bid and demonstrates due diligence.

Avoids disqualification and informs accurate cost estimation.
Aggressive Cost Optimization and Unit Price Accuracy
CriticalHigh effort

As price is the sole criterion, focus intensely on cost reduction. Ensure unit prices in Form 3 are accurate, competitive, and consistent with the total bid cost. Explore all avenues for cost savings without compromising quality or compliance.

Directly impacts the winning score.
Secure and Confirm Key Personnel Availability
CriticalMed effort

Obtain firm commitments from the proposed Project Manager and Site Manager. Confirm their professional qualifications and availability for the entire 6-month duration. Prepare Form 4 meticulously.

Prevents disqualification and ensures project execution capability.
Thorough Review of Technical Description and Draft Contract
HighMed effort

Understand all technical specifications in 'Lisa 1 Tehniline kirjeldus' and all obligations in 'Lisa 2 Hankelepingu projekt'. Ensure the bid fully aligns with these documents, including any 'or equivalent' interpretations.

Ensures bid compliance and avoids future contractual disputes.
Develop a Robust Subcontractor Management Plan
HighMed effort

Clearly outline plans for using subcontractors in Form 2, confirming their compliance with the law. Ensure any selected subcontractors are reliable and cost-effective.

Demonstrates responsible planning and avoids potential issues during contract performance.
Prepare for Employee Background Checks
MediumLow effort

Understand the process and requirements for employee background checks. Ensure all proposed site personnel are aware and prepared to undergo this process.

Prevents delays and potential issues during contract commencement.
Highlight Operational Efficiency
LowLow effort

While not a formal evaluation criterion, subtly emphasize in the bid narrative (if space allows or in supporting documents) the company's efficient operational processes that contribute to timely and cost-effective project delivery.

Builds confidence in execution capability.
Competitive Positioning
Position as the most cost-effective provider without compromising on essential technical requirements. Emphasize the reliability of your proposed team and your commitment to meeting the strict 6-month deadline. Focus on demonstrating a clear understanding of the project scope and a streamlined approach to execution.

Competitors

Upgrade to see which companies are likely to bid on this tender, based on historical procurement data.

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

25 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (9)
Mandatory (3)
Compliance (4)
Technical (6)
Financial (3)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS9
--Bids must be submitted electronically.
--The submission deadline is 2026-03-06 at 11:00:00.
--Bids can only be submitted after visiting the contract performance site(s) and obtaining a signed confirmation from the bidder's representative on-site.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS3
--Bidders must meet the exclusion grounds specified in the explanatory ESPD (European Single Procurement Document).
--Bidders must accept the conditions for checking and grounds for exclusion of first-tier subcontractors during the contract performance stage.
--Successful bidder's employees will undergo a background check before being allowed on site.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS4
--Bidders must accept all tender conditions.
--Bids can only be submitted after visiting the contract performance site(s) and obtaining a signed confirmation from the bidder's representative on-site.
--Bidders must declare their plans for using subcontractors and confirm their compliance with the law (Form 2).
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS6
--The Project Manager and Site Manager must meet the prescribed professional qualifications.
--Bidders must provide the Project Manager's and Site Manager's details (name, date of birth, professional certificate number) and confirm their availability for contract performance (Form 4).
--The main contractor is responsible for preparing the working design, organizing expertise, and carrying out the construction works for the perimeter waterproofing, drainage, and courtyard reconstruction of the Raua 2 Tallinn building.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS3
--The sole criterion for evaluating bids is the total cost of works (100%), with the lowest-priced bid receiving the maximum number of points.
--Bidders must submit unit prices for the perimeter waterproofing and courtyard reconstruction works of the Raua 2 building (Form 3).
--The bid cost must be consistent with the amount presented in Form 3.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

11 documents available with AI summaries

Alltöövõtjate kontrollimise tingimused lepingu täitmise etapisPDF
305779_alltoovotjate_kontrollimise_tingimused... -- 20.7 KB

This document outlines the conditions and exclusion grounds for first-tier subcontractors during contract performance, requiring tenderers to provide information on their subcontractors' trustworthiness.

VastavustingimusedPDF
305779_vastavustingimused.pdf -- 9.2 KB

This document outlines the mandatory compliance conditions for the Raua 2 Tallinn perimeter waterproofing and courtyard reconstruction tender, requiring bidders to accept all terms, submit specific forms (Form 2 for subcontractor and business secret details, Form 3 for pricing), and ensure key personnel, such as the project manager, meet specified professional qualifications.

Vorm 2DOC
Vorm 2.docx -- 19.0 KB

Bidders must submit this application, confirming their bid's compliance with all tender conditions, agreeing to the cost presented in Form 3, and declaring their plans for subcontractor involvement and their legal compliance.

Vorm 3XLS
Vorm 3.xlsx -- 19.8 KB

This document is a tender cost table requiring bidders to submit unit prices for the perimeter waterproofing and courtyard reconstruction works at the Raua 2 building.

Vorm 4DOC
Vorm 4.docx -- 17.5 KB

Bidders must provide details for the Project Manager and Site Manager (name, date of birth, professional certificate number) on this form and confirm their availability for the contract duration.

Vorm 8DOC
Vorm 8.docx -- 13.7 KB

This form is a power of attorney for a joint bid, authorizing one specific bidder to act on behalf of other joint bidders in the tender for the perimeter waterproofing and courtyard reconstruction at Raua 2 Tallinn.

Hindamiskriteeriumid ja hinnatavad näitajadPDF
305779_hindamiskriteeriumid.pdf -- 2.8 KB

This document outlines the tender evaluation methodology, where the sole criterion is the total cost of works (100%), with the lowest-priced bid receiving the maximum points.

Hankepass täiendatavate selgitustegaPDF
305779_hankepass_taiendavate_selgitustega.pdf -- 71.6 KB

This document is an explanatory ESPD (European Single Procurement Document) detailing the exclusion grounds and qualification conditions for the Raua 2 Tallinn perimeter waterproofing and courtyard reconstruction tender, intended for review, not for direct submission.

Lisa 1 Tehniline kirjeldusDOC
Lisa 1 Tehniline kirjeldus.docx -- 296.7 KB

This document outlines the technical requirements for the main contractor, who will be responsible for preparing the work project, organizing its expertise, and executing the construction works, including perimeter waterproofing, drainage, and courtyard reconstruction at the Raua 2 Tallinn building.

Lisa 2 Hankelepingu projektDOC
Lisa 2 Hankelepingu projekt.docx -- 97.1 KB

This document is a draft construction contract, outlining general and special conditions for the Raua 2 Tallinn perimeter waterproofing and courtyard reconstruction procurement, specifying client and contractor obligations and project details.

Pakkumuse esitamise ettepanekDOC
Pakkumuse esitamise ettepanek (1).docx -- 43.4 KB

This document outlines the proposal submission procedure, electronic submission requirements, handling of unreasonably low bids, and refers to the technical description and draft contract, also including contact details and site visit times.

Documents Preview

Sign up to view document summaries and analysis

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender is generally well-structured and comprehensive, providing clear requirements and documentation for a construction project. Key strengths include detailed technical specifications, clear evaluation criteria, and the use of e-procurement.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

Legal compliance is good, with reasonable deadlines and proper CPV codes. The tender references national law for the mandatory site visit. However, the 'Negotiation Allowed' characteristic for an 'Open' procedure (Type A) is an unusual combination that might require clarification under national law.

•The 'Negotiation Allowed' characteristic for an 'Open' procedure (Type A) is ambiguous and potentially inconsistent with standard open procedures.
Clarity80/100

The tender description and requirements are generally clear and well-documented. Evaluation criteria are explicitly stated as 100% lowest price. There is a minor inconsistency in the general characteristics regarding evaluation criteria.

•Inconsistency between 'Evaluation Criteria: relative_weighting' in characteristics and 'sole criterion is the total cost of works (100%)' in the detailed requirements.
Completeness70/100

All basic information, deadlines, value, and duration are specified. A comprehensive set of documents is attached and summarized. However, there's a contradiction regarding value classification.

•Contradiction between 'Value Classified: Yes' and the disclosed 'Estimated Value: 782,500.00 EUR'.
Fairness85/100

The tender offers full document access, discloses the value, and provides reasonable deadlines. Evaluation criteria are objective and e-procurement is enabled. The 'or equivalent' clause enhances fairness. However, the mandatory site visit, while legally compliant, could be a barrier to broader market participation.

•Mandatory site visit and signed confirmation requirement, while legally compliant, may limit broader market participation, especially for international bidders.
Practicality65/100

Electronic submission is supported, and the contract start date and duration are clear. However, a direct document URL is not explicitly provided (though implied by e-procurement), and financing information is not detailed beyond the estimated value.

•Lack of explicit direct URL for tender documents (beyond the e-procurement portal).
•No specific financing information (e.g., EU funding source) is provided.
Data Consistency90/100

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical. The tender is free of disputes or suspensions. Minor inconsistencies exist regarding value classification and evaluation criteria description, but these are resolvable by referring to detailed documents.

•Inconsistency between 'Value Classified: Yes' and the disclosed estimated value.
•Inconsistency between 'Evaluation Criteria: relative_weighting' and the detailed '100% lowest price' criterion.
Sustainability50/100

The tender does not explicitly include green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.

•No explicit green procurement criteria.
•No explicit social criteria beyond standard background checks.

Strengths

Clear and detailed technical requirements and project scope.
Comprehensive documentation, including ESPD, draft contract, and specific forms.
Transparent evaluation criteria (100% lowest price).
Full utilization of e-procurement for submission and opening.
Inclusion of 'or equivalent' clause for standards, promoting competition.

Concerns

Inconsistency between 'Value Classified: Yes' and the disclosed estimated value.
Inconsistency between 'Evaluation Criteria: relative_weighting' and 'sole criterion is the total cost of works (100%)'.
Mandatory site visit and signed confirmation requirement, potentially limiting broader market participation.
'Negotiation Allowed' for an 'Open' procedure (Type A) is an unusual combination.
Lack of explicit sustainability, social, or innovation criteria.

Recommendations

1. Clarify and correct data inconsistencies, particularly regarding value classification and evaluation criteria type, to ensure absolute clarity.
2. While legally permissible, consider the impact of mandatory site visits on international participation and explore alternative verification methods if feasible for future tenders.
3. Integrate sustainability, social, or innovation criteria where relevant for future tenders to align with modern procurement best practices.

AI Scoring Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Complete quality score analysis
Detailed sub-score breakdown
Strengths & concerns insights
Strategic recommendations

No credit card required • Setup in 2 minutes