Atgal į konkursus

Sakalos bataliono techninių sistemų priežiūra

Atviras
Galutinis terminas
Liko 18 dienų
Kovas 20, 2026
Informacija apie sutartį
Kategorija
Paslaugos
Nuoroda
305829
Vertė
€35,000
Vieta
Estonia, Estija
Paskelbta
Vasaris 17, 2026
Organizacija
CPV kodas
Vertinimo kriterijai
Total cost of works/services performed over 36 months100%
Projekto grafikas

Konkursas paskelbtas

Vasaris 17, 2026

Klausimų pateikimo terminas

Kovas 13, 2026

Pasiūlymų pateikimo terminas

Kovas 20, 2026

Konkurso atidarymas

Kovas 20, 2026

Laimėjimo tikimybėPRO
🔒
Atnaujinti į Professional
Peržiūrėkite savo apskaičiuotą laimėjimo tikimybę pagal istorinius duomenis.
Atnaujinti į Professional →
Pirkėjo analitikaPRO
🔒
Atrakinkite pirkėjo analitiką
Peržiūrėkite išlaidų modelius, pageidaujamas procedūras ir kita.
Atnaujinti į Professional →
Sektoriaus įžvalgosPRO
🔒
Atrakinkite sektoriaus įžvalgas
Peržiūrėkite vidutines laimėjimo kainas, konkurencijos lygius ir rinkos tendencijas.
Atnaujinti į Professional →
Biudžetas
€35,000
Trukmė
36 mėnesių
Vieta
Estonia
Tipas
Paslaugos
78
Kokybės įvertinimas/100
Gerai
Rinkos lyginamoji analizė
Vidutinė laimėjimo kaina
€265,238
Vidutinis pasiūlymų skaičius
2.7
Konkurencija
Žema
MVĮ laimėtojai
90%
843 išanalizuotų pirkimų skaičius

Originalus konkurso aprašymas

Šio pirkimo objektas yra Sakalos bataliono štabo ir aprūpinimo centro techninių sistemų priežiūros paslaugų pirkimas 36 mėnesiams, taip pat kitų susijusių darbų/paslaugų ir tiekimų atlikimas pagal šio pirkimo pagrindiniuose dokumentuose nustatytus kiekius, sąlygas ir reikalavimus.
Elektroninis pateikimas

Rizikos analizė

Prisijunkite, kad galėtumėte naudoti rizikos analizę.

Prisijungti

Laimėjimo strategija

Prisijunkite, kad galėtumėte naudoti laimėjimo strategijos rekomendacijas.

Prisijungti

Konkurentai

Atnaujinkite, kad matytumėte, kurios įmonės greičiausiai pateiks pasiūlymą šiam konkursui, remiantis istoriniais viešųjų pirkimų duomenimis.

Prisijungti

Reikalavimai ir kvalifikacija

15 reikalavimų 5 kategorijose

Pateikimas (6)
Privalomas (2)
Atitiktis (2)
Techninis (3)
Finansinis (2)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS6
--Submission of power of attorney for joint bidders.
--Marking business secrets in the bid.
--Submission of the bid according to the response format described in the ESPD.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS2
--Compliance with sanctions.
--Fulfillment of exclusion criteria described in the ESPD.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS2
--Fulfillment of qualification criteria described in the ESPD.
--Agreement to the terms of the draft contract.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS3
--Performing maintenance work on technical systems (water supply, sewage, heating, electricity, ventilation, etc.) according to the technical description.
--Performing maintenance work according to the specified frequency.
--Submission of detailed service descriptions.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS2
--Submission of the bid cost structure.
--Submission of a bid for the total cost of 36 months of work/services.

Reikalavimų peržiūra

Prisiregistruokite, kad peržiūrėtumėte visus reikalavimus ir analizę

Dokumentai

Yra 8 dokumentų su AI santraukomis

VastavustingimusedPDF
305829_vastavustingimused.pdf -- 9.8 KB

This document outlines the conditions for submitting a bid, including requirements for joint bidder power of attorney, bid cost structure, marking business secrets, providing detailed service descriptions, and compliance with sanctions for subcontractors.

Hindamiskriteeriumid ja hinnatavad näitajadPDF
305829_hindamiskriteeriumid.pdf -- 2.8 KB

This document outlines the evaluation criteria for the Sakala malev technical systems maintenance tender, where the sole criterion is the total cost for 36 months of work/services, with the lowest price receiving the maximum score.

Hankepass täiendatavate selgitustegaPDF
305829_hankepass_taiendavate_selgitustega.pdf -- 66.9 KB

This ESPD document explains the contracting authority's qualification and exclusion criteria and the expected response format, serving as an informational guide rather than a submission form.

RHAD_Hanke alusdokumentDOC
202062101_Hanke alusdokument_HA.docx -- 21.7 KB

This document outlines the evaluation criteria for Kaitseliit's technical systems maintenance tender, where the lowest price receives the maximum points.

Lisa 4_volikiriDOC
20251113_A_RHAD_lisa_4_ühispakkujate_volikirj... -- 22.6 KB

Tender document 'Lisa 4_volikiri' in .DOCX format (23,128 bytes).

Lisa 1_TK_tehniline kirjeldusDOC
Lisa 1_Tehniline kirjeldus.docx -- 21.7 KB

This document details the technical requirements and frequency for the maintenance of technical systems (water supply, sewage, heating, electricity, ventilation, etc.) at Sakala malev, and includes a pricing table for the services.

Lisa 2_Lepingu projektDOC
Lisa_2_hankelepingu_projekt_Sakala_STK_TS.doc... -- 30.6 KB

Tender document 'Lisa 2_Lepingu projekt' in .DOCX format (31,385 bytes).

Lisa 3_maksumuse vormDOC
Lisa_ 3_OSTUKORV_Sakala.docx -- 12.5 KB

Tender document 'Lisa 3_maksumuse vorm' in .DOCX format (12,784 bytes).

Dokumentų peržiūra

Prisiregistruokite, kad peržiūrėtumėte dokumentų santraukas ir analizę

78
Gerai

Konkurso kokybės įvertinimas

This tender for technical systems maintenance is generally well-structured and transparent, featuring clear requirements and objective evaluation based on the lowest price. However, it suffers from notable data inconsistencies regarding evaluation criteria and lacks explicit sustainability considerations.

Įvertinimo detalės

Atitiktis teisės aktams85/100

The tender appears to comply with national procurement regulations. Deadlines are reasonable, CPV codes are appropriate, and mandatory disclosures are largely met. The contradiction regarding 'Value Classified' is a minor system anomaly rather than a legal non-compliance, as the value is indeed disclosed. No disputes or suspensions are noted.

The 'Value Classified: Yes' flag contradicts the explicit disclosure of the estimated value (35,000.00 EUR).
Aiškumas70/100

The tender description and AI-extracted requirements are generally clear and understandable. Requirements are well-documented. However, there is a direct contradiction in how evaluation criteria are described, which can cause confusion for bidders.

Contradiction between 'Evaluation Criteria: relative_weighting' in characteristics and 'lowest price receiving the maximum score' in documents 2 and 5.
Užbaigtumas90/100

All basic information, financial details, timelines, and classification are provided. A comprehensive set of 9 documents is attached, covering conditions, evaluation, technical specifications, a draft contract, and necessary forms. Requirements and criteria are well-defined across these documents.

Sąžiningumas95/100

The tender demonstrates high fairness with full document access, a disclosed value, reasonable preparation deadlines, and objective evaluation criteria (lowest price). E-procurement is enabled, ensuring equal access. Requirements appear generic and not tailored to a specific company.

Praktiškumas85/100

Electronic submission is supported, and the contract duration is clearly specified. While a specific contract start date is not explicitly mentioned, this is common and usually determined post-award. Financing information (estimated value) is available.

Contract start date is not explicitly mentioned.
Duomenų nuoseklumas50/100

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical. However, there are two significant inconsistencies: the 'Value Classified: Yes' flag conflicting with the disclosed estimated value, and more critically, the conflicting descriptions of the evaluation criteria.

Contradiction: 'Value Classified: Yes' vs. explicit Estimated Value.
Contradiction: 'Evaluation Criteria: relative_weighting' vs. 'lowest price receiving maximum score'.
Tvarumas20/100

The tender does not explicitly incorporate green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus, as indicated by the automated checks. This is typical for routine maintenance services but results in a low score for this specific criterion.

No explicit sustainability criteria.
No social criteria.

Privalumai

Clear and objective evaluation criteria (lowest price).
Comprehensive documentation provided.
Electronic submission and e-procurement enabled.
Reasonable deadlines for bid preparation.
Requirements appear generic and not tailored.

Problemos

Contradictory descriptions of evaluation criteria ('relative_weighting' vs. 'lowest price').
Inconsistency regarding 'Value Classified' vs. disclosed estimated value.
Lack of explicit sustainability, social, or innovation criteria.
Contract start date not explicitly mentioned.

Rekomendacijos

1. Clarify and harmonize the description of evaluation criteria across all tender documents and system fields to avoid bidder confusion.
2. Review and correct the 'Value Classified' flag if the estimated value is intended to be public.
3. Consider incorporating basic sustainability or social responsibility clauses in future tenders, even for routine services.

AI įvertinimo peržiūra

Prisiregistruokite, kad peržiūrėtumėte visus reikalavimus ir analizę

Išsami kokybės balo analizė
Detali sub-balų analizė
Privalumų ir trūkumų įžvalgos
Strateginės rekomendacijos

Nereikia kreditinės kortelės • Sąranka per 2 minutes

Įtraukti į „Pipeline“