Legal Compliance75/100
As a preliminary market engagement notice, it largely complies with principles of transparency and market consultation. The CPV code is appropriate. However, the 'Type' and 'Procedure' fields are undefined, and the 'Submission Deadline' is confusing given no formal submission is required at this stage, which would be a concern for a full tender.
•Undefined 'Type' and 'Procedure' fields
•Confusing 'Submission Deadline' for a non-submission stage
Clarity80/100
The description of the research program, its work packages, required expertise, methods, and expected outputs is exceptionally clear and detailed. The AI-extracted requirements are comprehensive and accurately reflect the tender's scope. The absence of evaluation criteria is appropriate for a preliminary market engagement.
Completeness70/100
Basic information, financial details, timeline, and classification are all present. The description is thorough, and AI-extracted requirements are detailed. However, the 'Type' and 'Procedure' fields are empty, and formal evaluation criteria are not yet defined, which is expected for a planning notice but noted for completeness.
•Empty 'Type' and 'Procedure' fields
•Absence of formal evaluation criteria (expected for this stage, but a future requirement)
Fairness85/100
The tender explicitly encourages consortium formation due to the breadth of topics, promoting broader participation. The estimated value is disclosed, and the supplier event facilitates market engagement. Requirements are broad and not tailored. While 'No e-submission' is flagged, it's a preliminary notice, and the event is online.
Practicality65/100
The contract start date, duration, and estimated value are clearly specified. The supplier event is held electronically via MS Teams, which is practical for engagement. However, the general 'No e-submission' flag and the lack of an explicit document URL in the provided text are minor practical limitations.
•No explicit e-submission platform mentioned for future stages
•Document URL not explicitly provided in the basic information
Data Consistency90/100
Dates are logical and consistent, with no disputes or suspensions. The description is consistent across all provided document summaries. Most key fields are populated, though 'Type', 'Procedure', and 'Liable Person' are empty, which is common for a planning notice.
•Empty 'Liable Person' field
Sustainability85/100
The tender's core subject is environmental sustainability (industrial decarbonisation, carbon management, energy efficiency, CCUS, GGRs, LCA), indicating a strong green procurement focus. It also clearly emphasizes innovation as a research program. Social aspects are not explicitly detailed.
•Lack of explicit social criteria