Opracowanie projektu Planu Ochrony dla Suwalskiego Parku Krajobrazowego

This tender for the development of a protection plan for the Suwałki Landscape Park is generally well-structured, with clear documentation and EU funding. However, it lacks specific evaluation criteria and details on contract duration and financing, impacting practicality and completeness.

The tender adheres to general legal requirements, including a proper CPV code and reference to relevant legislation. The procedure is not explicitly defined but is implied to be a standard procurement process. No disputes are indicated. The deadline, while active, is relatively short given the scope.

The title and description are clear. The attached documents, including the SWZ and contract draft, provide detailed requirements and scope of work. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria creates ambiguity for bidders.

Most basic information is present, including the organization, title, and CPV code. The submission deadline is specified. However, crucial details such as the estimated value, contract duration, and financing information are missing, which affects the overall completeness of the tender documentation.

The tender appears fair, with full document access and the use of e-procurement. The criteria for exclusion and participation are likely detailed within the provided forms. The lack of disclosed value and specific evaluation criteria could be perceived as a minor fairness concern.

The tender utilizes e-procurement, which is positive. However, the absence of a disclosed contract start date, financing information, and a clearly specified contract duration limits the practical assessment for potential bidders. The deadline may also be considered short.

Key fields such as title, reference number, organization, and deadline are populated. The CPV code is provided, and the tender is active with no indicated disputes or suspensions. Dates are logical.

The tender is EU funded, which often implies adherence to certain standards. However, there are no explicit mentions of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the provided information, limiting its sustainability score.