Tarjouspyyntö – Suffolk työllisyystutkimus

This tender for a Suffolk Employment Study is generally well-structured with clear basic information and a disclosed value. However, it lacks specific technical and financial requirements, and the absence of evaluation criteria is a notable concern.

The tender appears to comply with basic legal requirements, including a clear CPV code and an open competition procedure. Deadlines are specified, although the submission deadline might be considered tight. No disputes are reported. The procedure is 'Below threshold - open competition', which implies certain regulatory considerations are met.

The description of the service required is clear, and the process for expressing interest and gaining access to documentation is outlined. However, the absence of specific technical capability and financial requirements leaves room for interpretation and could lead to a less focused pool of applicants.

Most basic information is present, including title, reference, organization, estimated value, and contract duration. However, the crucial absence of detailed evaluation criteria and the fact that no tender documents with content are available significantly impacts completeness.

The tender is open to all interested parties, and the value is disclosed, promoting transparency. The process of expressing interest to gain full access is standard. There are no apparent requirements tailored to specific companies, which is positive for fairness. The use of an e-procurement portal is implied.

The tender specifies a contract start date and duration. Financing information is not explicitly detailed. The requirement to express interest to gain full access to documentation and the submission deadline are clear. However, the lack of explicit mention of e-submission and the absence of document URLs for direct access reduce practicality.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and deadlines are populated. Dates are logical, with the submission deadline preceding the contract start date. No suspensions or disputes are reported, contributing to high data consistency.

There is no explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the tender description or requirements. The tender is not indicated as EU funded. This suggests a lack of focus on sustainability criteria.