Retour aux appels d'offres

Construction du bloc E de l'hôpital de Kuressaare

Ouvert
Date limite
14 jours restants
Mars 17, 2026
Détails du contrat
Catégorie
Construction
Référence
301280
Valeur
€12,500,000
Lieu
Estonia, Estonie
Publié
Février 11, 2026
Code CPV
Critères d'évaluation
Cost of construction works100%
Calendrier du projet

Publication de l'appel d'offres

Février 11, 2026

Date limite pour les questions

Mars 10, 2026

Date limite de soumission

Mars 17, 2026

Ouverture de l'appel d'offres

Mars 17, 2026

Date de début du contrat

Avril 08, 2026

Probabilité de gainPRO
🔒
Passer au Professionnel
Consultez votre probabilité de gain estimée basée sur les données historiques.
Passer au Professionnel →
Intelligence acheteurPRO
🔒
Débloquer l'intelligence acheteur
Consultez les modèles de dépenses, les procédures préférées et plus encore.
Passer au Professionnel →
Aperçu du secteurPRO
🔒
Débloquer les aperçus du secteur
Consultez les prix gagnants moyens, les niveaux de concurrence et les tendances du marché.
Passer au Professionnel →
Budget
€12,500,000
Durée
26 mois
Lieu
Estonia
Type
Construction
58
Score de qualité/100
Acceptable
Référentiel de marché
Prix moyen gagnant
€524,963
Offres moyennes
4.7
Concurrence
Moyenne
PME gagnantes
94%
5,932 appels d'offres analysés

Description originale de l'appel d'offres

Construction du bloc E de l'hôpital de Kuressaare conformément au projet « Conception du bloc E de l'hôpital de Kuressaare et reconstruction des blocs A, B, C », travail 2414E, PP, préparé par Esplan OÜ.
Achats écologiquesFinancement UESoumission électronique

Analyse des risques

Veuillez vous connecter pour utiliser l'analyse des risques.

Se connecter

Stratégie gagnante

Connectez-vous pour accéder aux recommandations de stratégie gagnante.

Se connecter

Concurrents

Passez à un plan supérieur pour voir quelles entreprises sont susceptibles de soumissionner pour cet appel d'offres, basé sur les données historiques.

Se connecter

Exigences et qualifications

22 exigences dans 5 catégories

Soumission (9)
Obligatoire (2)
Conformité (5)
Technique (5)
Financier (1)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS9
--The bid must be submitted via the e-RHR system.
--A mandatory site visit is required for the tenderer.
--A price breakdown table must be included with the bid.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS2
--The economic operator must electronically confirm that there are no grounds for exclusion applicable to them (ESPD).
--Subcontractors must not be subject to exclusion grounds related to criminal offenses such as money laundering and human trafficking.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS5
--The economic operator must electronically confirm that they meet the qualification criteria (ESPD).
--The tenderer must have appropriate responsible specialists, including a construction manager and a high-voltage specialist.
--The construction manager must possess a specific professional qualification.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS5
--The bid must comply with the technical requirements for the construction works of Kuressaare Hospital E-wing, including demolition works, construction of the new wing, and outdoor area.
--Quality standards must be adhered to during the execution of works.
--Required warranty conditions must be offered and guaranteed.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS1
--The price of the bid is the sole evaluation criterion; the lowest price receives maximum points.

Aperçu des exigences

Inscrivez-vous pour consulter les exigences et l'analyse complètes

Documents

9 documents disponibles avec des résumés IA

Alltöövõtjate kontrollimise tingimused lepingu täitmise etapisPDF
301280_alltoovotjate_kontrollimise_tingimused... -- 20.8 KB

This document outlines the conditions for checking subcontractors and the grounds for exclusion of first-tier subcontractors during the contract execution phase, focusing on criminal offenses such as money laundering and human trafficking.

VastavustingimusedPDF
301280_vastavustingimused.pdf -- 12.5 KB

This document outlines mandatory tender submission conditions, such as site visits, specific price breakdown and cost structure requirements, and details the qualification criteria for the bidder's responsible specialists, including the construction manager and strong current specialist.

HinnajaotustabelXLS
RH 301280 Hinnajaotustabel.xlsx -- 104.5 KB

This price distribution table is a form where bidders must submit a detailed breakdown of their tender price by various cost types and unit prices for the Kuressaare Hospital E-wing construction project.

Pakkuja vastutavad spetsialistidDOC
Vorm_Pakkuja vastutavad spetsialistid.docx -- 23.8 KB

Bidders must provide details of a construction project manager who meets specific professional qualification and at least 7 years of work experience requirements, including managing similar (preferably healthcare-related) construction projects.

Hindamiskriteeriumid ja hinnatavad näitajadPDF
301280_hindamiskriteeriumid.pdf -- 2.8 KB

This document specifies that the sole evaluation criterion for the Kuressaare Hospital E-wing construction tender is the cost of construction works, where the lowest price receives the maximum points.

Hankepass täiendatavate selgitustegaPDF
301280_hankepass_taiendavate_selgitustega.pdf -- 73.4 KB

This document is an explanatory guide for the European Single Procurement Document (ESPD), detailing the contracting authority's qualification and exclusion criteria that companies must confirm electronically.

Juhised pakkujalePDF
RH 301280 E korpus HD.pdf -- 595.3 KB

This document provides general information about the Kuressaare Hospital E-wing construction tender, including project scope, deadlines, and instructions for preparing and submitting bids via the e-RHR system, while referring to the tender notice for specific qualification requirements.

Tehniline kirjeldusPDF
RH 301280 HD Lisa 1 Tehniline kirjeldus.pdf -- 654.3 KB

This document outlines the technical requirements for the construction of the Kuressaare Hospital E-wing, including demolition, building a new wing and external area, quality standards, warranty conditions, and project documentation.

Lepingu projektPDF
RH 301280 HD Lisa 2 Lepingu projekt.pdf -- 688.5 KB

This draft contract outlines the scope, timeline, payment terms, and obligations for the construction of the Kuressaare Hospital E-wing, to be signed with the successful bidder.

Aperçu des documents

Inscrivez-vous pour consulter les résumés et l'analyse des documents

58
Acceptable

Score de qualité de l'appel d'offres

This tender for the construction of Kuressaare Hospital's E-wing exhibits significant inconsistencies, particularly regarding evaluation criteria and CPV codes, which pose legal and fairness risks. While it includes positive aspects like electronic submission and sustainability focus, critical ambiguities need immediate rectification.

Répartition du score

Conformité légale60/100

The tender has several legal compliance issues. The CPV code '5992' is invalid; the correct 8-digit code for hospital construction should be used. There is a direct contradiction in the stated evaluation criteria ('relative_weighting' vs. 'lowest price is sole criterion'). The 'Value Classified: Yes' flag for a disclosed 12.5M EUR estimated value is confusing and potentially non-compliant with transparency requirements for a tender of this size, especially given it's EU funded. The 'Over Sum Limit: No' statement for 12.5M EUR is questionable against EU thresholds for works contracts.

Invalid CPV code (5992)
Contradictory evaluation criteria specified
Clarté50/100

Clarity is severely impacted by the fundamental contradiction in the evaluation criteria. Bidders are presented with conflicting information on how their proposals will be assessed ('relative_weighting' in characteristics vs. 'lowest price is sole criterion' in requirements and a document). This ambiguity is a critical flaw that can lead to confusion, incorrect bids, or legal challenges.

Major contradiction in evaluation criteria
Exhaustivité70/100

The tender provides a comprehensive set of documents, including technical specifications, draft contract, and submission forms. However, the completeness of clear and unambiguous information is compromised by the inconsistencies in evaluation criteria and the 'Value Classified' status, which leaves critical aspects unclear.

Contradictory information regarding evaluation criteria
Conflicting 'Value Classified' status and disclosed estimated value
Équité40/100

Fairness is significantly undermined by the contradictory evaluation criteria, which prevents equal treatment and transparency for all bidders. The 'Value Classified: Yes' flag, if it implies actual classification despite the value being shown, also raises transparency concerns. While the justification for not dividing into lots is provided, the mandatory site visit could pose a barrier for some bidders, and the 'preferably healthcare-related' experience for the construction manager is slightly restrictive.

Contradictory evaluation criteria undermines transparency and equal treatment
Conflicting 'Value Classified' status
Aspect pratique80/100

The tender demonstrates good practical aspects, including electronic submission via the e-RHR system, clear contract start and duration dates, and explicit mention of EU funding. The provision of a document URL for the opening place is also helpful. The mandatory site visit, while common for complex construction, is a minor practical hurdle.

Mandatory site visit may pose a practical challenge for some bidders
Cohérence des données30/100

Data consistency is very poor due to multiple critical contradictions. The CPV code is invalid. The evaluation criteria are stated contradictorily. The tender simultaneously states 'Value Classified: Yes' and provides an 'Estimated Value'. Furthermore, 'Over Sum Limit: No' for a 12.5M EUR EU-funded project is inconsistent with typical EU thresholds. These inconsistencies are fundamental and problematic.

Invalid CPV code
Contradictory evaluation criteria
Durabilité75/100

The tender scores well on sustainability, explicitly stating 'Green Procurement' and 'Social Criteria' as characteristics. Being 'EU Funded' often implies adherence to higher sustainability standards. The only minor detractor is the automated check indicating 'No innovation focus'.

Automated check indicates no innovation focus

Points forts

Electronic submission and e-procurement enabled
Clear timelines and contract duration specified
Explicit inclusion of Green Procurement and Social Criteria
Comprehensive set of tender documents provided
Justification for not dividing the procurement into lots

Préoccupations

Contradictory evaluation criteria (relative weighting vs. lowest price)
Invalid CPV code (5992)
Conflicting 'Value Classified: Yes' status with a disclosed estimated value
Inconsistency of 'Over Sum Limit: No' for a 12.5M EUR EU-funded project
Mandatory site visit could be a barrier for some bidders

Recommandations

1. Immediately clarify and correct the evaluation criteria to ensure consistency and transparency.
2. Correct the CPV code to the appropriate 8-digit code for hospital construction works.
3. Clarify the 'Value Classified' status and its implications, ensuring full transparency of the estimated value.

Aperçu de la notation IA

Inscrivez-vous pour consulter les exigences et l'analyse complètes

Analyse complète du score de qualité
Répartition détaillée des sous-scores
Aperçu des forces et des préoccupations
Recommandations stratégiques

Aucune carte de crédit requise • Configuration en 2 minutes

Ajouter au Pipeline