Civil Engineering Contractors Framework (CECF) 2026-2030

This tender for a Civil Engineering Contractors Framework is fundamentally incomplete due to the absence of any tender documents and detailed evaluation criteria, making it impractical for bidders and raising significant concerns regarding fairness and transparency.

The tender uses an open procedure, which is standard. However, the explicit mention of 'No mandatory exclusion grounds are explicitly mentioned' is a significant legal omission. Crucially, the complete absence of evaluation criteria is a major legal compliance failure, as the basis for award must be clearly defined. The inconsistency in currency (EUR for estimated value, GBP for lots) also requires clarification.

The general description of the works and the lot structure is reasonably clear. However, the 'Extracted Requirements' are presented at a very high, generic level (e.g., 'Must be a suitable Supplier,' 'Must possess the capability'). Without detailed tender documents, specifications, and clear evaluation criteria, the actual requirements and how they will be assessed are entirely unclear to potential bidders.

This tender is critically incomplete. The most significant issue is the explicit statement 'DOCUMENTS (0 total)' and 'No document content available.' Without any tender documents, instructions, or forms, bidders cannot prepare a compliant submission. Furthermore, essential elements like detailed financial requirements, specific location information (beyond NUTS N/A), and e-submission details are missing.

While the open procedure and lotting strategy (catering to different contract sizes) generally promote fairness and wider participation, the complete absence of tender documents and, critically, evaluation criteria, severely undermines the fairness of the process. Without transparent criteria, the award decision could be subjective, arbitrary, and potentially tailored to specific, pre-selected companies, creating an uneven playing field.

The framework contract approach with lotting is practical for the procuring entity to manage ongoing civil engineering works. However, from a bidder's perspective, the tender is highly impractical. Without any documents or detailed instructions, it is impossible for a supplier to understand the full scope, prepare a comprehensive, compliant, and competitive bid, or even determine if they meet the unquantified 'suitability' and 'capability' requirements.

A significant inconsistency exists in the financial information. The 'Estimated Value' is stated in EUR (30,000,000.00 EUR), while the lot values are specified in GBP (£0-£100k and £100k+). This currency discrepancy needs immediate clarification to avoid confusion for bidders.

The provided information does not include any specific criteria or mentions related to green procurement, social considerations, or innovation. This indicates a missed opportunity to leverage public procurement for broader sustainability and societal goals.