Production de livres imprimés/CFP/PRO/2026

This tender for printed book production is generally well-structured with clear objectives and a defined process. However, it lacks specific evaluation criteria and details on sustainability aspects.

The tender adheres to standard procurement procedures, including a clear CPV code and a competitive flexible procedure. The estimated value and contract duration are specified. The submission deadline, while potentially tight given the complexity of a two-stage process, is provided. No disputes are reported. The procedure appears compliant with general procurement regulations.

The description of the required services (paper supply, printing, finishing, binding of educational materials) is clear. The two-stage process with a questionnaire and subsequent tender invitation is well-defined. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria for both stages introduces ambiguity.

Most basic information is present, including title, reference, organization, estimated value, and contract duration. The description of services is adequate. However, the content of the tender documents is not available, and specific financial or technical requirements beyond the general scope are not detailed.

The process is designed as a competitive flexible procedure with a clear pathway for suppliers to progress through stages. The value is disclosed, and the criteria for advancing to Stage 2 (top 5 scoring) and appointment (top 2 scoring) are objective, promoting fairness. The use of a questionnaire in Stage 1 is a standard practice.

The tender specifies a submission deadline and contract start date, though the latter is identical to the deadline, which is unusual. The contract duration is clear. However, the lack of information regarding e-submission and financing details limits practicality. The 'Competitive flexible procedure' might imply a less straightforward submission process than a standard e-submission.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, estimated value, and CPV code are populated. The dates provided are logical in sequence, although the contract start date coinciding with the submission deadline is an anomaly. No disputes are reported, and the status is active.

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.