Services de protection de territoire et d'objets

This tender for security services is generally well-structured with clear basic information and available documents. However, it lacks detailed eligibility and technical requirements, and the sustainability aspects are not explicitly addressed.

The tender adheres to general legal compliance by providing a clear procedure and CPV code. Deadlines are present, though their reasonableness for a restricted procedure could be debated. No disputes are indicated. The procedure type (Restricted) is specified.

The description of the procurement object is clear, and the tender is divided into parts. Key documents like the contract draft and application forms are available. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria reduces overall clarity.

Most basic information is present, including estimated value, contract duration, and deadlines. Three tender documents are attached. However, crucial sections like mandatory exclusion grounds, eligibility, technical capability, and financial requirements are marked as 'No information provided', significantly impacting completeness.

The tender is conducted via e-procurement, promoting transparency. The value is disclosed, and the procedure is restricted, which is a standard practice. The division into parts is also a positive aspect for fairness. However, the lack of detailed requirements makes it difficult to assess the objectivity of criteria.

The tender is active and uses e-procurement. The contract duration is specified. However, the 'Issues' section notes 'No e-submission', which contradicts the 'E-Procurement' characteristic and raises practical concerns. Financing information is not explicitly detailed.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and deadlines are populated. The tender status is active, and no disputes are reported. Dates appear logical within the provided context.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not indicated as EU funded, which limits its sustainability score.