Appointment of Independent Member / Chair of the Dyfed Pension Fund Pension Board

This tender presents a clear role description but suffers from significant deficiencies, such as the absence of evaluation criteria and a critical document summary error, which substantially diminish its overall quality and fairness.

The procedure type and CPV code are appropriate, and no disputes are noted. The 26-day submission period is generally reasonable for a below-threshold open competition. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria is a significant legal transparency and compliance issue. The erroneous summary for Document 1 also raises concerns about the integrity of the tender documentation.

The role description and core technical requirements are clearly articulated, distinguishing between mandatory and preferred skills. However, the lack of detailed 'MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS,' 'FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS,' and critically, the complete absence of evaluation criteria, significantly diminishes the overall clarity of the tender process.

Basic information such as title, organization, reference, value, duration, and location are provided. However, the tender is incomplete due to the absence of detailed evaluation criteria, and insufficient detail for financial requirements and exclusion grounds. Furthermore, the summary for Document 1 is entirely irrelevant to this tender, indicating a significant error in the provided documentation package.

The estimated value is disclosed, and the submission period allows for reasonable preparation. However, the absence of objective and transparent evaluation criteria is a major impediment to fairness, as it introduces subjectivity into the selection process. The lack of e-submission also creates an unnecessary barrier to equal access for potential bidders. While the requirements are specialized, the lack of clear evaluation criteria for these preferences could lead to perceived bias.

Key practical details like the contract start date and duration are clearly specified. However, the absence of electronic submission support is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement, potentially increasing administrative burden for bidders and the contracting authority.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical and consistent. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. However, the summary for Document 1 being completely unrelated to the tender is a critical data inconsistency issue, undermining the reliability of the provided information. Minor inconsistencies include empty codes for Type and Procedure.

The tender does not include any explicit green procurement, social, or innovation aspects. While the nature of the role (pension board member) may not lend itself directly to these criteria, their complete absence reflects a missed opportunity to integrate broader public value considerations.