CPC /JE/01/2025

This tender notice provides only a high-level summary, critically lacking full tender documents and detailed requirements, which severely limits a comprehensive quality assessment. A significant concern is the stated 1-month contract duration for a 430,000 EUR 'Framework Agreement', which appears highly inconsistent and impractical.

The summary mentions mandatory exclusion grounds and a 'Restricted' procedure, which are standard. However, without the full tender documents, it's impossible to assess the detailed legal compliance of specific requirements or the procedure's execution.

The tender's title and description are clear. However, the listed requirements are extremely generic, lacking the necessary detail for bidders to understand the specific scope and expectations. The 1-month duration for a framework agreement is highly unclear and contradictory.

The tender information is critically incomplete, with no attached documents and a severe lack of detail regarding mandatory exclusion grounds, eligibility, technical, financial, and crucially, evaluation criteria. The missing NUTS code also points to incompleteness.

The absence of detailed requirements and evaluation criteria makes it impossible to assess fairness. This lack of transparency creates a high risk of subjective evaluation and could potentially allow for tailoring to a specific company, hindering fair competition. The 1-month framework duration could also unfairly deter bidders.

The submission method via the CPC Portal is practical. However, a 1-month contract duration for an 'ICT Network, Storage and Service Solutions Framework Agreement' with an estimated value of 430,000 EUR is highly impractical for both the contracting authority and potential suppliers, suggesting a fundamental misunderstanding or error.

The most significant inconsistency is the 'Contract Duration: 1 months' for an 'ICT Network, Storage and Service Solutions Framework Agreement' with an 'Estimated Value: 430,000.00 EUR'. Framework agreements are typically multi-year, making this duration highly contradictory and problematic.

Based on the provided summary and automated checks, there is no indication of green procurement, social criteria, or innovation focus, representing a missed opportunity to incorporate broader public value objectives.