Statybos projekto rengimas ir autorinė priežiūra objektui „Krustpilio geležinkelio stoties teritorijos ir Stacijas gatvės rekonstrukcija Jekabpilyje, Jekapilio savivaldybėje“

This tender for construction project development and author supervision in Jēkabpils is generally well-structured, with clear technical specifications and a reasonable timeline. However, the lack of disclosed financial value and specific evaluation criteria are notable concerns.

The tender adheres to open procedure and provides a CPV code. Deadlines appear reasonable given the contract duration. The primary concern is the lack of disclosed financial value, which can impact legal compliance regarding transparency. The absence of explicitly stated evaluation criteria also raises questions about procedural fairness and regulatory compliance.

The tender title and description are clear, and the scope of work is detailed across multiple technical specification documents. Requirements for eligibility and technical capability are outlined. However, the absence of financial requirements and specific evaluation criteria leaves some aspects of the tender less clear.

Most basic information is present, including title, organization, procedure type, and contract duration. Key documents like technical specifications and regulations are attached. However, the critical omission of the estimated financial value and detailed financial requirements for bidders impacts the completeness of the tender information.

The tender utilizes an open procedure, promoting broad participation. The use of e-procurement is a positive aspect. However, the 'Issues: Restricted document access' flag suggests potential limitations in full document access for all parties, which is a significant concern for fairness. The lack of disclosed evaluation criteria also hinders objective assessment and fairness.

The tender is marked as 'E-Procurement', implying e-submission is likely, though not explicitly stated as a requirement. The contract duration of 6 months is specified. However, the lack of disclosed financial value makes it difficult to assess the practicality of financing for potential bidders. The absence of a contract start date is also a minor practical drawback.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, and dates are populated. The tender status is active, and there are no reported disputes or suspensions. The dates provided (Reveal, Submission, Opening) are logically ordered. The CPV code and NUTS code are present.

The tender is marked as 'EU Funded', which often implies adherence to certain EU standards. However, there are no explicit mentions of green procurement criteria, social aspects, or innovation within the provided information, suggesting a limited focus on these areas.