Employee Assistance- Independent Counselling

This tender for Employee Assistance Programme demonstrates good foundational information but suffers from significant gaps in detailed requirements, evaluation criteria, and practical submission methods, impacting clarity, completeness, and fairness.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV codes correctly for a below-threshold open competition. No disputes or suspensions are noted. However, the provided information lacks explicit mandatory exclusion grounds and a reveal date, making a full assessment of compliance with disclosure requirements and reasonable deadlines challenging.

The overall description is clear, and the 40% quality / 60% price evaluation split is stated. However, the lack of detailed sub-criteria for 'quality' and the placeholder 'short description of contract' significantly reduce clarity. Bidders are frequently referred to 'full tender documentation' for critical details not present in the provided summary.

Basic information such as title, organization, value, duration, and deadlines is present. However, the tender lacks detailed requirements, comprehensive evaluation sub-criteria, and elaboration on 'Divided into Parts'. The provided 'documents' are mostly metadata, not the full detailed tender specification, indicating significant incompleteness in the accessible information.

The estimated value is disclosed, and requirements appear generic, not tailored. However, the absence of detailed evaluation sub-criteria for 'quality' compromises objectivity and transparency. The lack of e-submission capabilities creates an unequal access barrier, and the implied lack of full detailed tender documentation within the provided context further impacts fairness.

The contract start date and duration are clearly specified. However, the absence of electronic submission is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement. Furthermore, no direct document URL is provided, which is crucial for bidders to access the full tender documentation.

Dates are logical and consistent, and the estimated value is provided consistently in both GBP and EUR. No suspensions or disputes are reported. Minor inconsistencies include empty codes for the procedure type and a missing 'Liable Person' field, along with the 'short description of contract' placeholder.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. For an Employee Assistance Programme, incorporating social value or specific sustainability criteria could be highly relevant.