Legal Compliance65/100
The tender lacks a clearly defined procedure type and code, and the 'Liable Person' field is empty. While a CPV code is assigned and no disputes are noted, the missing reveal date and fundamental procedural information are significant compliance concerns, even considering its 'planning' status.
•Procedure type and code are not defined.
•Missing reveal date.
Clarity75/100
The description of the services and the AI-extracted requirements are clear and unambiguous, detailing the scope and target audience. However, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria significantly hinders clarity for potential bidders.
•No evaluation criteria specified.
Completeness70/100
Basic information such as title, reference, organization, estimated value, duration, and location are provided. However, the tender is incomplete due to the lack of specified evaluation criteria and the unusual 'Required: No' status for all listed documents, which suggests an early stage of development or missing essential tender documentation.
•No evaluation criteria specified.
•All listed documents are marked as 'Required: No', indicating potential incompleteness for a formal tender.
Fairness65/100
The absence of specified evaluation criteria is a major concern for fairness and transparency, as bidders cannot objectively understand how their proposals will be judged. The lack of e-submission also limits equal access for all potential providers. Requirements for designated buildings are specific but not tailored to a single company.
•No evaluation criteria specified, impacting transparency and objectivity.
•No e-submission support, potentially limiting equal access for bidders.
Practicality60/100
The tender lacks support for electronic submission, which is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement. A document URL is not explicitly provided. However, the contract start date, duration, and financing information are available.
•No electronic submission support.
•Document URL is not explicitly provided.
Data Consistency70/100
While most key fields are populated and dates are logical, the 'Type' and 'Procedure' fields are marked 'None', and 'Liable Person' is empty. The 'planning' status might explain some of these gaps, but they represent inconsistencies in the provided data.
•Tender 'Type' and 'Procedure' are marked 'None'.
•Liable Person field is empty.
Sustainability75/100
The tender demonstrates a strong focus on social aspects, aiming to provide safe spaces and positive activities for young people, which aligns well with social sustainability goals. However, it does not explicitly incorporate green procurement or innovation criteria, nor is it EU funded.
•No explicit green procurement criteria.
•No explicit innovation focus.