Accommodation Based Housing Related Support Services in Rogers Court, Bedford

This tender for accommodation-based housing support services is generally well-structured with clear service descriptions and basic requirements, but it exhibits notable gaps in detailed evaluation criteria, lacks electronic submission, and does not explicitly integrate broader sustainability aspects beyond the service's inherent social nature.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV code correctly, and no disputes are reported. Mandatory exclusion grounds are mentioned, and a 40/60 price/quality evaluation split is indicated. However, the 'Liable Person' and procedure codes are missing, and the detailed specifics of mandatory exclusion grounds and evaluation criteria are not provided in the summary.

The service description, target group, location, and exclusions are very clear and unambiguous. AI-extracted requirements for eligibility and technical capability are well-documented and understandable. However, detailed performance conditions are not explicitly stated, and evaluation criteria beyond the weighting are high-level.

Most basic information, including title, reference, organization, value, duration, and location, is provided. Documents are mentioned, and requirements are defined. However, the 'Liable Person' and procedure codes are empty, and the summary lacks detailed information on mandatory exclusion grounds and comprehensive evaluation criteria.

Document access is implied, the value is disclosed, and requirements appear generic, not tailored to a specific company. However, the absence of electronic submission is a significant barrier to equal access and fairness for potential bidders. The lack of detailed evaluation criteria also reduces transparency.

The contract start date and duration are clearly specified. However, the lack of electronic submission is a major practical drawback for bidders. A direct document URL is not explicitly provided in the summary.

Most key fields are populated, and there are no reported suspensions or disputes. Dates are logical and consistent. Minor inconsistencies include empty 'Liable Person' and procedure codes, and the 'Value Classified: Yes' flag alongside a disclosed value.

The service itself is inherently social, addressing homelessness and complex needs, which is a strong social sustainability aspect. However, the tender does not explicitly integrate broader green procurement, innovation focus, or additional social clauses for the provider within the procurement process or evaluation criteria.