Tenders

Purchase of incontinence products for Otepää Health Centre

Open
Deadline
2 days left
March 05, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Supplies
Reference
306037
Value
€115,000
Location
Estonia
Published
February 17, 2026
CPV Code
Evaluation Criteria
Cost100%
Project Timeline

Tender Published

February 17, 2026

Deadline for Questions

February 26, 2026

Submission Deadline

March 05, 2026

Tender Opening

March 05, 2026

Contract Start Date

March 15, 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 →
Budget
€115,000
Duration
36 months
Location
Estonia
Type
Supplies
76
Quality Score/100
Good
Market Benchmark
Avg. Winning Price
€92,792
Avg. Bids
2.2
Competition
Low
SME Winners
86%
3,220 tenders analyzed

Original Tender Description

The objective of the procurement is to conclude a framework agreement for the purchase of incontinence products and medical supplies based on the names and descriptions provided in Annex 1 of the tender documents.
Electronic Submission

Risk Analysis

Please log in to use risk analysis.

Login

Win Strategy

Please log in to access winning strategy recommendations.

Login

Competitors

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

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

10 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (4)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (3)
Technical (1)
Financial (1)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS4
--Submit the application form for participation to confirm interest (Annex 2).
--Submit the cost form (Annex 3), detailing product names, descriptions, and unit prices according to the contracting authority's list and estimated quantities.
--Adhere to the general conditions of the open procurement procedure, including specific submission requirements.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--Confirm non-existence of exclusion grounds as per Public Procurement Act (criminal background, tax debts, sanctions).
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS3
--(For joint bidders) Appoint a representative.
--(For joint bidders) Confirm joint and several liability.
--(For joint bidders) State if the submission is a joint bid.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS1
--Offered products must meet detailed technical requirements and standards for incontinence products and hospital supplies.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS1
--Submit a competitive price, as bids will be evaluated solely on cost, with the lowest price receiving maximum points.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

8 documents available with AI summaries

VastavustingimusedPDF
306037_vastavustingimused.pdf -- 3.0 KB

This document specifies the requirement for joint bidders to appoint a representative and submit a power of attorney, confirming their joint and several liability, and asks if it's a joint bid and if the power of attorney has been attached.

Hindamiskriteeriumid ja hinnatavad näitajadPDF
306037_hindamiskriteeriumid.pdf -- 2.8 KB

This document specifies that bids for the Otepää Health Centre's incontinence products procurement will be evaluated solely based on cost, with the lowest price receiving maximum points.

Hankepass täiendatavate selgitustegaPDF
306037_hankepass_taiendavate_selgitustega.pdf -- 70.8 KB

This document serves as an explanatory guide to the conditions and expected information for the European Single Procurement Document (ESPD) for the Otepää Health Centre's incontinence product procurement, intended for familiarization rather than direct submission.

Tehniline kirjeldusDOC
Lisa 1 Tehniline kirjeldus.doc -- 56.5 KB

This document details the technical requirements and standards for the incontinence products to be procured for the Otepää Health Center.

Riigihankes osalemise avaldusDOC
Lisa 2 Riigihankes osalemise avaldus.doc -- 33.0 KB

This document is an application form for participating in the tender, which the bidder must submit to confirm their intent to participate.

MaksumusvormXLS
Lisa 3 Maksumusvorm.xlsx -- 14.0 KB

This document is a pricing form where bidders must provide the names, descriptions, and unit prices of the offered incontinence products according to the contracting authority's list and estimated quantities.

HankepassDOC
Lisa 4 Hankepass.docx -- 18.1 KB

This document requires bidders to confirm they do not meet any of the exclusion criteria specified in the Public Procurement Act, such as criminal background, tax arrears, or sanctions.

RHADDOC
RHAD inko.docx -- 21.7 KB

This document outlines the general terms and conditions for the open procurement procedure for a framework agreement for incontinence products and hospital supplies for Otepää Tervisekeskus, including submission requirements and the contract period from 15.03.2026 to 14.03.2029.

Documents Preview

Sign up to view document summaries and analysis

76
Good

Tender Quality Score

This public procurement is generally well-structured and transparent, but requires clarification regarding the evaluation criteria. The tender provides comprehensive documentation and utilizes e-procurement, enhancing accessibility.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The procedure type and CPV codes are clearly defined, and the submission period of 16 days is reasonable. However, a significant inconsistency exists between the stated 'relative_weighting' evaluation criteria in the basic information and the 'solely on cost' criterion detailed in Document 9 and AI-extracted requirements, posing a legal compliance risk.

Inconsistency in evaluation criteria description ('relative_weighting' vs. 'solely on cost')
Clarity80/100

The description of the procurement and its requirements are generally clear and well-documented. However, the conflicting information regarding the evaluation criteria significantly reduces overall clarity for potential bidders.

Inconsistency in evaluation criteria description
Completeness90/100

The tender is highly complete, providing all essential information such as title, reference, organization, deadlines, estimated value, and duration. All necessary documents are listed and summarized, ensuring bidders have access to comprehensive details.

Fairness85/100

The estimated value is disclosed, and the use of e-procurement ensures equal access for bidders. The evaluation criterion of 'lowest price' is objective and transparent, although the initial inconsistency with 'relative_weighting' could cause initial confusion. Requirements do not appear tailored to a specific company.

Initial inconsistency in evaluation criteria description
Practicality75/100

Electronic submission is supported, and the contract start date and duration are clearly specified. While the opening place URL is provided, a direct URL to the tender documents would further enhance practicality for bidders.

No direct URL to tender documents provided in basic information
Data Consistency60/100

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical and consistent. However, the direct contradiction between 'Evaluation Criteria: relative_weighting' and the detailed 'evaluated solely on cost' is a significant data inconsistency that could lead to confusion and potential challenges.

Inconsistency in evaluation criteria description ('relative_weighting' vs. 'solely on cost')
Sustainability20/100

The tender does not include any explicit green procurement, social, or innovation criteria. While common for commodity procurements, this represents a missed opportunity to integrate broader sustainability objectives.

Absence of green procurement criteria
Absence of social criteria

Strengths

Clear identification of goods and purpose (incontinence products and hospital supplies)
Comprehensive documentation provided, including technical specifications and required forms
Transparency in estimated value and use of e-procurement for accessibility
Clear timeline and contract duration
Objective evaluation criterion (lowest price) specified in detail within documents

Concerns

Significant inconsistency in evaluation criteria description ('relative_weighting' vs. 'solely on cost')
Lack of explicit sustainability, social, or innovation considerations
Minor ambiguity due to 'Value Classified: Yes' alongside a disclosed estimated value
Absence of a direct URL to tender documents in the basic information

Recommendations

1. Clarify and ensure consistency in the stated evaluation criteria across all tender documents and characteristics to avoid ambiguity.
2. Consider incorporating sustainability or social responsibility clauses, where feasible, even for commodity procurements.
3. Provide a direct link to the tender documents for easier access and improved practicality.

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

Add to Pipeline