Šildymo keitimo darbai – 2 etapas

This tender is generally well-structured with clear basic information and a disclosed value. However, it lacks detailed requirements and evaluation criteria, impacting clarity and completeness.

The tender follows an open procedure and provides a CPV code. Deadlines are present, and no disputes are noted. The absence of specific regulatory compliance details or potential disputes prevents a higher score.

The description of the works is concise but lacks specific technical details. The absence of explicit evaluation criteria and detailed requirements for exclusion, eligibility, technical capability, and financial standing reduces overall clarity.

Most basic information is present, including value, duration, and deadlines. However, the lack of content in the tender documents and the absence of detailed requirements significantly impact completeness.

The tender is open, and the value is disclosed. The deadlines appear reasonable for the scope. There are no apparent requirements tailored to specific companies, promoting fairness. The lack of e-submission is a minor drawback.

The contract start date and duration are specified. However, the absence of an e-submission option and the lack of explicit financing information reduce practicality for potential bidders.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and dates are populated. There are no noted disputes or suspensions, and the dates are logically presented.

The tender does not explicitly mention green procurement, social aspects, innovation, or EU funding, resulting in a moderate score in this category.