Évaluations des risques d'incendie pour les domaines d'entreprise (2026)

This tender for Fire Risk Assessments is generally well-structured with clear basic information and a disclosed value. However, it lacks specific evaluation criteria and details on document content, impacting clarity and completeness.

The tender follows a 'Below threshold - open competition' procedure, suggesting compliance with relevant procurement regulations for its value. A clear CPV code is provided. There are no reported disputes. The submission deadline appears to be within a reasonable timeframe for an open competition, though could be tighter for some potential bidders.

The core service is clearly described. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria is a significant clarity issue. Potential bidders cannot ascertain how their submissions will be assessed, which is a crucial part of the tender documentation. The availability of tender documents is noted, but their content is not summarized or accessible.

Most basic information like title, reference, organization, estimated value, and contract duration are present. The CPV code is provided. However, the lack of accessible content for the tender documents and the absence of specific evaluation criteria detract from its overall completeness.

The procedure is an open competition, which is inherently fair. The value is disclosed, and the criteria for assessment are objective (though not specified). The tender does not appear to be tailored to specific companies. E-procurement is not explicitly mentioned, which is a potential concern, but the provided documents indicate an intention for digital submission.

The contract start date and duration are specified. Financing information is not detailed. While an e-submission is not explicitly stated, the presence of tender documents suggests a structured process. The lack of document content makes it difficult to assess the practicality of submission requirements.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, deadlines, and duration are populated logically. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. Dates are consistent and reasonable for the contract timeline.

The tender does not mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not explicitly stated as EU funded. This suggests a lack of emphasis on these modern procurement characteristics.