Play Area

This tender for a play area demonstrates good basic structure but suffers from significant issues regarding data consistency, document accessibility, and the absence of detailed evaluation criteria, impacting overall fairness and completeness.

The tender defines an Open procedure and assigns a relevant CPV code. However, the critical discrepancy in the estimated value (£100,000 vs 120,000 EUR) and the failure to access essential tender documents raise concerns about full compliance with transparency and equal treatment principles. The lack of detailed eligibility and exclusion grounds in the provided extract also presents a compliance risk.

The technical requirements for the play area (ages, learning abilities, colourful, no wooden structures, excluded items) are clearly stated. However, the tender critically lacks specified evaluation criteria, and detailed mandatory exclusion and eligibility grounds are only mentioned without content, creating significant ambiguity for potential bidders.

While basic information like title, organization, and deadlines are present, the tender is significantly incomplete due to the failure to access 3 out of 7 listed documents. Furthermore, the absence of detailed eligibility, exclusion, and evaluation criteria, along with the value discrepancy, indicates substantial gaps in the tender documentation.

The absence of clear evaluation criteria is a major impediment to fairness and transparency, as bidders cannot understand how their proposals will be judged. The failure to access essential tender documents also creates an unequal playing field. The lack of an e-submission option may further limit equal access for all potential bidders. Requirements do not appear overtly tailored.

The tender's practicality is hampered by the absence of an electronic submission option, which can complicate the bidding process for many contractors. The issues with document accessibility (3 failed downloads) also pose a significant practical challenge for bidders trying to gather complete information.

A critical inconsistency exists in the estimated value, stated as 120,000 EUR in the basic information but £100,000 in the Tender Notice and Official PDF. This discrepancy is a major concern. Minor inconsistencies include empty fields for 'Liable Person' and procedure codes.

The tender does not explicitly incorporate any green procurement, social, or innovation criteria. While not always mandatory, their absence means the tender does not actively promote broader sustainability objectives.