EDC/2025/4334 Service de conseil scolaire

This tender for school counselling services is generally well-structured with clear objectives and a reasonable estimated value. However, it lacks detailed technical and submission requirements, and the absence of evaluation criteria is a significant concern.

The tender adheres to basic legal requirements by specifying a clear procedure (Open procedure), providing a CPV code, and indicating no disputes. The deadline, while potentially short, is present. The absence of a reveal date is a minor procedural oversight.

The description of the service required is clear, outlining the target age group and desired outcomes aligned with GIRFEC principles. Eligibility requirements are also reasonably defined. However, the lack of specified technical capability and submission requirements reduces overall clarity.

Most basic information is present, including title, reference, organization, estimated value, and contract duration. However, the absence of detailed technical and submission requirements, and crucially, evaluation criteria, leaves significant gaps.

The tender is open, and the value is disclosed, promoting fairness. The criteria for eligibility are objective. The lack of specific technical requirements could be seen as a positive for broader participation, but the absence of evaluation criteria is a concern for transparency.

The tender is marked as E-Procurement, which is positive. However, the AI-extracted requirements indicate 'No e-submission' which contradicts the procurement characteristic, suggesting a potential discrepancy or missing information. The contract start date is provided, but financing information is absent.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and deadlines are populated. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. Dates are logically presented, with the contract start date following the submission deadline.

The tender does not explicitly mention green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also not indicated as EU funded, suggesting a lack of focus on these important sustainability dimensions.