APSaugos paslaugų teikimas

This tender for security services is generally well-structured, with clear service descriptions and a single provider requirement, but lacks detailed evaluation criteria and digital submission options.

The tender adheres to standard procurement practices with a clear CPV code and a competitive flexible procedure. Deadlines appear reasonable for a restricted procedure, and no disputes are noted. Regulatory compliance is assumed given the absence of specific flags.

The scope of services is clearly detailed, with specific tasks listed. The requirement for Document 2 Service Information and appendices provides further clarity, although the content of these documents is not accessible. The single provider intention is explicit.

Basic information such as title, reference, organization, estimated value, duration, and contract start date are present. However, critical documents like 'Document 2 Service Information' are not accessible, hindering a full assessment of completeness. No specific financial or submission requirements beyond the deadline are detailed.

The tender requires a single provider for all services, which could limit competition. However, the requirements are based on stated needs rather than tailoring to a specific company. The CPV code is broad, and the procedure is competitive. The main fairness concern is the lack of disclosed evaluation criteria.

While the contract duration and start date are specified, the absence of e-submission details and a general URL for documents impacts practicality. Information on financing is not provided. The reliance on attached documents without online access is a drawback.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and dates are populated logically. No suspension or disputes are reported, indicating good data integrity within the provided information.

There is no explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, innovation, or EU funding. This suggests a lack of focus on these important sustainability criteria.