Prestation de services de sécurité à Umoja House, aux résidences du personnel de la Haute Commission britannique à Dar es Salaam et au bureau de la BHC à Dodoma, Tanzanie

This tender for security services is generally well-structured with clear basic information and a reasonable estimated value. However, it lacks detailed requirements and evaluation criteria, and the submission process is not specified as electronic.

The tender adheres to basic legal compliance by providing a reference number, organization, and CPV code. The deadline is clearly specified. However, the absence of a reveal date and explicit evaluation criteria could be a minor compliance concern depending on specific regulations.

The description of the services required is clear, outlining the locations and duration. The CPV code is appropriate. However, the lack of specified eligibility, technical, financial, and submission requirements significantly reduces overall clarity.

Essential information such as title, reference, organization, estimated value, and contract duration is present. The submission deadline is also provided. However, the absence of detailed requirements and the fact that none of the 4 tender documents have content or summaries severely impacts completeness.

The tender appears fair by disclosing the estimated value and providing access to the basic tender information. The procedure is described as 'Competitive flexible procedure'. However, the lack of specified objective evaluation criteria and the absence of information regarding e-submission could be perceived as less fair.

The contract start date is unfortunately the same as the submission deadline, which is impractical. While a duration is specified, the lack of information on financing and the absence of explicit e-submission details hinder practicality.

Key fields like title, reference, organization, value, and deadlines are populated consistently. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. The dates provided, while having a practical issue with the start date, are logically presented within the timeline section.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is not indicated as EU funded. This suggests a lack of emphasis on sustainability criteria.