Konsultavimo ir psichologinės paslaugos

This tender for Staff Psychological Support Services is generally well-structured with clear objectives and a reasonable estimated value. However, it lacks specific evaluation criteria and details on e-submission, impacting its practicality and completeness.

The tender appears to comply with general procurement regulations, including a clear CPV code and a defined procedure. The deadline, while potentially tight given the scope, is specified. No disputes are noted. The primary concern is the absence of a reveal date, which is a minor procedural oversight.

The description of services required is clear, outlining the types of therapies and delivery methods. The objective of providing best value and supporting staff is well-articulated. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria leaves some ambiguity on how bids will be assessed.

Most basic information is present, including title, organization, estimated value, and contract duration. The potential for increased value is disclosed. However, the lack of accessible content for the tender documents and the absence of a reveal date reduce its completeness.

The tender is open to 'suitably qualified organisations' and the value is disclosed, promoting fairness. The potential for other Ambulance Services to use the contract is a positive aspect of shared procurement. The criteria for participation are not overly restrictive, and the process appears objective, although specific evaluation criteria are missing.

The tender specifies a contract start date and duration, and financing is implied through the estimated value. However, the lack of explicit mention of e-submission and the absence of accessible document URLs hinder practical application for potential bidders.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and deadlines are populated. The dates provided are logical, and there are no noted suspensions or disputes. The contract start date coinciding with the submission deadline is unusual but not inherently inconsistent if it refers to the end of the submission period.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is not indicated as EU-funded. This suggests a lack of emphasis on sustainability criteria.