Wykonanie robót budowlanych w ramach zadania inwestycyjnego pn.: „Przebudowa i wyposażenie lokalu w Pasażu Kultury Andromeda na potrzeby Biura Informacji o Mieście”

This tender for construction works is generally well-structured, with clear documentation and a proper CPV code. However, it lacks specific evaluation criteria and details on financing and contract duration, impacting its practicality and completeness.

The tender adheres to basic legal requirements, including a proper CPV code and a clear procedure type. The submission deadline, while active, could be considered short for complex construction works, but without further context on the project's complexity, it's difficult to definitively flag as non-compliant. No disputes are noted.

The title and description clearly outline the scope of the construction works. Key documents like technical specifications are provided. However, the absence of specified evaluation criteria means bidders cannot fully understand how their submissions will be assessed.

Most basic information is present, including the title, organization, and deadline. Several essential documents are attached, including technical specifications. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, and crucial details like contract duration and financing information are missing, which hinders a complete understanding of the tender.

The tender is conducted via e-procurement, which promotes transparency. All documents appear to be accessible, and the criteria, while not fully specified for evaluation, do not appear to be tailored to specific companies. The value is not disclosed, which is a minor concern for fairness.

The tender is marked as e-procurement, which is positive. However, the lack of disclosed contract start date, financing information, and contract duration significantly reduces the practicality for potential bidders who need to plan resources and financial commitments.

Key fields such as title, reference number, organization, and deadline are populated. The tender status is active, and there are no reported disputes or suspensions. Dates appear logical within the provided information.

There is no explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the provided tender information. This suggests a lack of focus on sustainability criteria.