Rozbudowa i budowa drogi gminnej ul. Dębnik w Łańcucie wraz z budową i przebudową infrastruktury technicznej

This tender for road construction in Łańcut is generally well-structured with clear documentation and a proper CPV code. However, it lacks crucial details regarding evaluation criteria and financial aspects, impacting completeness and fairness.

The tender adheres to basic legal requirements, including a specified CPV code and a clear procedure type. Deadlines appear reasonable given the active status. No disputes are noted. The primary concern is the lack of disclosed evaluation criteria, which is a significant aspect of regulatory compliance in procurement.

The description of the road construction project is clear, and the attached documents provide necessary details. The CPV code is appropriate. However, the absence of explicit evaluation criteria makes it difficult for bidders to fully understand the decision-making process.

Essential information such as the title, reference, organization, and CPV code is present. Several documents are attached, including a draft contract. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, and contract duration is missing, which are key components for a complete tender.

The tender utilizes e-procurement, which promotes fairness. The CPV code is standard. However, the undisclosed estimated value and the absence of specified evaluation criteria could potentially disadvantage bidders by creating uncertainty about the award process.

The tender is active and has a submission deadline. E-procurement is indicated. However, the lack of explicit information on contract start date, financing details, and contract duration reduces its practicality for bidders needing to plan resources effectively.

Key fields like title, reference, organization, and deadline are populated. The CPV code is present and logical. No disputes or suspensions are noted. The dates are consistent with an active tender. The main inconsistency is the lack of financial details and evaluation criteria, which are critical data points.

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.