Services de consultant en dépendances

This tender for dependency consultant services is generally well-structured with clear documentation, but lacks specific details on evaluation criteria and financial aspects, impacting overall completeness and practicality.

The tender adheres to general procurement principles with a clear CPV code and EU funding indication. However, the absence of a specified procedure type (beyond 'OPEN') and the lack of a reveal date for submissions are minor procedural gaps. The short submission deadline is a potential concern.

The tender provides a clear title, description, and essential documents like the technical specification and offer form. The general and special conditions are available, contributing to good clarity. However, the lack of explicit evaluation criteria leaves some ambiguity for bidders.

Most essential information is present, including the contract duration and available documents. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, and crucial details regarding mandatory exclusion grounds, eligibility, technical, financial, and submission requirements are missing from the AI-extracted section, suggesting these might be detailed within the documents but not readily apparent.

The tender appears fair, with full document access and an EU-funded status. The use of e-procurement is a positive indicator. There are no immediately apparent requirements tailored to specific companies. The lack of disclosed value and specific criteria could be improved.

The tender is marked as e-procurement, which is positive. However, the AI-extracted requirements indicate a lack of explicit information on e-submission details, contract start date, and financing, which could hinder practical application. The short deadline also impacts practicality.

Key fields like title, reference, organization, CPV, and duration are populated. The dates are logical, and there are no reported disputes or suspensions. The tender status is active.

The tender is EU funded, which often implies adherence to certain standards. However, there are no explicit mentions of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the provided information, leading to a moderate score in this category.