Legal Compliance60/100
The 7-day submission deadline meets the minimum threshold but is borderline given the complexity. However, the critical issues are the unavailability of the Contract Template and Technical Specifications at the time of publication, with the contract noted to follow 'next week', which is non-compliant. The absence of an e-procurement portal for a tender of this value also raises compliance concerns with modern UK public procurement standards.
•Critical tender documents (Contract Template, Technical Specifications) are unavailable.
•Reliance on email for submissions instead of an e-procurement portal.
Clarity50/100
The general project description is clear, but the tender lacks detailed clarity due to the 'Page not found' error for the 'ACTIVE Cup Programme Specification' (Technical Specifications) and the explicit absence of evaluation criteria. Bidders cannot fully understand the detailed requirements or how their proposals will be judged.
•Technical Specifications document is unavailable.
•No evaluation criteria are specified.
Completeness40/100
The tender is critically incomplete. Key documents such as the Contract Template, Technical Specifications, and evaluation criteria are missing. The 'OCDS Record' also failed to download, indicating further data completeness issues.
•Contract Template is unavailable.
•Technical Specifications are unavailable.
Fairness30/100
Fairness is severely compromised by the lack of access to critical documents and the absence of evaluation criteria. The 7-day deadline is unreasonable for preparing a comprehensive bid when essential information is missing or delayed. The reliance on email for submissions also creates potential for unequal access and transparency issues.
•Lack of full document access (missing Contract Template, Technical Specifications).
•No evaluation criteria specified, leading to opaque assessment.
Practicality50/100
The explicit statement that the ECITB does not have an e-procurement portal and requires email submissions is a significant practical drawback. The unavailability of key documents further complicates the practical aspects of preparing and submitting a bid.
•No e-procurement portal; submissions via email only.
•Key tender documents are unavailable, hindering practical bid preparation.
Data Consistency70/100
There is a minor inconsistency in the estimated value's currency (EUR vs GBP) and the 'Value Classified: Yes' flag despite a disclosed value. The most significant inconsistency is the statement that the draft contract will follow 'next week' while the submission deadline is imminent, creating a timeline conflict.
•Inconsistent currency for estimated value (EUR vs GBP).
•Contradiction between 'Value Classified: Yes' and disclosed estimated value.
Sustainability30/100
The tender does not explicitly incorporate green procurement, social clauses beyond the core service, or innovation requirements for the delivery method. While the project itself has social benefits (skills development), the tender documentation does not reflect broader sustainability considerations.
•No explicit green procurement criteria.
•No explicit social criteria beyond the core service objective.