Legal Compliance70/100
The document functions as a Pre-Market Engagement (PME) notice, which is a legitimate pre-procurement activity. The CPV code is appropriate. However, the structured fields for "Type" and "Procedure" are marked as "None," and "Liable Person" is empty, indicating incomplete metadata for a formal tender, though understandable for a PME. The contradiction between "Value Classified: Yes" and the disclosed budget is a minor inconsistency.
•"Type" and "Procedure" are "None"
•"Liable Person" is empty
Clarity85/100
The description of the project, its background, objectives, and the essential first-stage requirements are exceptionally clear and well-articulated. The AI-extracted requirements accurately reflect the detailed narrative. The purpose of the PME is unambiguous.
Completeness75/100
All fundamental information such as title, organization, reference, deadlines, contract duration, start date, and estimated budget are provided. The requirements are comprehensively detailed for a PME. The absence of formal tender documents (e.g., ITT, SOW) and evaluation criteria is consistent with its PME status.
•No formal tender documents (expected for PME)
•No evaluation criteria (expected for formal tender)
Fairness60/100
The estimated value is disclosed, and the PME submission deadline provides reasonable time for market participants to respond. However, the automated check indicates "No e-submission," which is a significant barrier to equal access and transparency in modern procurement. While requirements are specific, they appear solution-oriented rather than tailored to a single company.
•No e-submission
•No evaluation criteria specified (for future formal tender)
Practicality55/100
Key practical details like contract start date, duration, and budget are clearly specified. The primary practical drawback is the reported lack of electronic submission capabilities, which can complicate the process for potential strategic partners.
Data Consistency65/100
Dates are logical and consistent. However, several structured data fields, such as "Type," "Procedure," and "Liable Person," are unpopulated. The "Value Classified: Yes" field directly contradicts the explicit budget range provided in the description, indicating a data entry inconsistency.
•"Type" and "Procedure" are "None"
•"Liable Person" is empty
Sustainability50/100
The tender description emphasizes transformation, integrated IT solutions including Agentic AI, and fostering continuous improvement, indicating an inherent focus on innovation. However, there are no explicit mentions of green procurement criteria or social aspects.
•No explicit green or social criteria