Statybos projekto ekspertizė ir statybos priežiūra objektui „Jelgavos miesto ligoninės“ UAB Priėmimo skyriaus rekonstrukcija"

This tender for construction project expertise and supervision is generally well-structured, with clear basic information and a reasonable timeline. However, it lacks transparency regarding the estimated value and specific evaluation criteria, and document access appears restricted.

The tender adheres to general legal compliance by having a clear procedure, a proper CPV code, and no reported disputes. The deadlines appear reasonable within the context of an open procedure. The primary concern is the potential for restricted document access, which could impact legal compliance if it prevents full understanding of requirements.

The tender provides a clear title and description of the service required. The existence of specific documents like 'Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības' and 'Nolikums' suggests documented requirements. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria in the summary reduces overall clarity on how bids will be assessed.

Most basic information is present, including the organization, title, reference, and deadlines. Key documents are indicated as required. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, which is a significant omission for completeness.

The tender utilizes an open procedure and e-procurement, promoting fairness. The eligibility requirements mentioned (experience, qualifications) are standard. The main concern is the restricted document access, which can hinder full participation and understanding, and the lack of disclosed evaluation criteria, which could lead to subjective assessments.

The tender is set up for e-procurement and has a specified contract duration. However, the 'Issues' section flags 'No e-submission', which contradicts the 'E-Procurement' characteristic and significantly impacts practicality. Financing information is also missing.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, and deadlines are populated. The dates provided (Reveal, Submission, Opening) are logically sequenced. There are no reported suspensions or disputes, contributing to good data consistency.

The tender is marked as 'EU Funded', which often implies adherence to certain sustainability standards. However, there are no explicit mentions of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the provided summary, limiting the score in this category.