Acquisition de travaux d'aménagement paysager environnemental à VILNIUS TECH près des bâtiments S3 et S5, Saulėtekio al. 11, Vilnius (SAK)

This tender presents a mixed quality, with clear basic information and a defined procedure, but suffers from significant deficiencies in clarity and completeness regarding requirements and evaluation criteria.

The tender clearly defines the procedure type and references the EU directive (2014/24/ES), and CPV codes are appropriately assigned. There are no reported disputes or suspensions. However, the absence of a reveal date and, critically, the lack of specified evaluation criteria are significant transparency and compliance issues.

While the tender title and description are clear, the AI-extracted requirements for eligibility, financial, technical, and submission are all empty. This indicates a severe lack of clarity in presenting essential information to potential bidders. The explicit absence of evaluation criteria further compounds this issue.

Basic information such as title, reference, organization, estimated value, and contract duration are provided. However, the tender is incomplete regarding detailed requirements, with all AI-extracted categories being empty. The NUTS code and liable person are also missing, and evaluation criteria are not defined.

The tender offers full document access and discloses the estimated value, and e-procurement is indicated. However, the critical absence of evaluation criteria severely compromises fairness, as bidders cannot understand the objective basis for selection. The lack of specific, clearly stated requirements also creates uncertainty.

The tender specifies 'E-Procurement' as a characteristic, which is positive for practicality. However, the automated check flags 'No e-submission', creating a contradiction that could hinder practical application. The contract start date is not explicitly known, though duration is specified.

Most key fields are populated, and there are no reported disputes or suspensions. Dates are generally logical. However, the missing NUTS code, empty liable person field, the contradiction regarding e-submission, and the unreadable 'README.txt' document indicate inconsistencies and gaps in the provided data.

The technical specifications document explicitly mentions 'green procurement requirements including environmental management system standards', which is a positive aspect. However, the tender lacks explicit social criteria or an innovation focus, and it is not identified as EU funded.