Entrepreneur archéologique – Bradbourne Re-bourne Rejuvenate

This tender for archaeological contracting is moderately well-defined, with clear project objectives and strong partnership requirements. However, it lacks explicit evaluation criteria and information on document access, impacting overall quality.

The tender appears to comply with basic legal requirements for below-threshold procurements. The CPV code is broad but acceptable for the service. Deadlines are provided, and the procedure is open. No disputes or suspensions are noted. The primary weakness is the lack of specified evaluation criteria, which is a significant omission for legal compliance in tender assessment.

The description of the project and its goals is quite clear, outlining the context, objectives, and the collaborative nature of the work. Specific eligibility and technical requirements are detailed. The conditions for collaboration with West Kent Mind are also well-articulated.

Most basic information is present, including title, reference, organization, estimated value, contract duration, and start date. However, crucial details like the content of the tender documents are missing, and the absence of specified evaluation criteria leaves a significant gap.

The tender promotes fairness by being an open competition and disclosing the estimated value. The requirements are generally objective, focusing on capabilities and collaboration. The emphasis on partnership with specific organizations (WKM) is clear. However, the lack of direct document URLs for full access is a minor concern regarding complete transparency of documentation.

The tender specifies an e-submission requirement, which is good practice. The contract start date and duration are clearly defined. However, the absence of direct links to tender documents and detailed financing information beyond the estimated value limits practicality.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and deadlines are consistently populated. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. The dates provided are logical in sequence.

While the project aims to improve wellbeing and life chances for vulnerable young people, there are no explicit requirements for green procurement, innovation, or specific social criteria beyond this beneficial outcome. It is not explicitly stated as EU-funded.