DELIVERY OF A DIGITAL STOP SMOKING SERVICE

This tender for a digital stop smoking service provides a clear service description but is significantly hampered by a lack of critical information, particularly the absence of evaluation criteria and detailed eligibility requirements, impacting fairness and clarity.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV code appropriately. However, the absence of specific mandatory exclusion grounds, eligibility requirements, and crucially, evaluation criteria, represents significant legal compliance gaps. The missing reveal date and contradictory value classification also raise concerns.

The core service description and technical requirements are clear and unambiguous. However, the complete absence of evaluation criteria and detailed eligibility/exclusion grounds makes it unclear for bidders how their proposals will be assessed, significantly reducing overall clarity.

Basic information such as title, reference, organization, deadlines, value, duration, and location are provided. However, the tender is incomplete due to the critical absence of detailed eligibility/exclusion criteria and, most importantly, evaluation criteria, which are essential for a comprehensive bid.

The lack of specified evaluation criteria is a major fairness concern, as it prevents bidders from understanding the basis of assessment and creates an uneven playing field. The absence of e-submission also limits equal access, and the contradictory value classification adds to transparency issues.

The contract start date and duration are clearly specified. However, the lack of electronic submission support is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement, potentially increasing administrative burden for bidders and the contracting authority. A direct document URL is also not explicitly provided.

Dates are logical and consistent, and there are no reported disputes or suspensions. However, the 'Liable Person' field is empty, and there's a contradiction between 'Value Classified: Yes' and the stated estimated value. A currency mismatch between the estimated value (EUR) and the official PDF summary (GBP) also indicates inconsistencies.

The tender does not explicitly incorporate green procurement principles, social aspects, or an innovation focus. It is also not indicated as EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.