Legal Compliance100/100
The use of a Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) is a legally sound procurement tool, promoting continuous market access. However, the absence of explicitly stated mandatory exclusion grounds in the provided text, while typically covered by standard regulations, represents a documentation gap. The 'Restricted procedure' classification is broadly consistent with the selection phase of a DPS.
•Mandatory exclusion grounds are not explicitly detailed in the provided tender information, which should be clearly communicated to potential bidders.
Clarity40/100
The description of the services required and the application portal is clear. The explanation of the DPS renewal and estimated value is also well-articulated. However, the actual criteria for admission to the DPS are vague, lacking specific details on how 'capability' will be assessed.
•Lack of specific criteria for assessing technical capability beyond a general statement of being 'capable of providing' services.
•Absence of detailed financial requirements.
Completeness83/100
This is the most significant weakness. The tender information is severely incomplete, functioning more as a high-level notice than a comprehensive tender document. Crucial elements such as full tender documents, detailed selection criteria (financial, technical), and evaluation criteria are entirely missing.
•No tender documents are attached or referenced beyond the portal link, making it impossible to assess the full scope of requirements.
•Absence of specific financial requirements (e.g., minimum turnover, financial ratios).
Fairness80/100
The DPS model inherently promotes fairness by allowing new entrants at any time. However, the lack of detailed and transparent requirements for admission creates an uneven playing field. The requirement for a single entity to be capable of providing *all seven* highly specialized road surface treatment services is potentially overly restrictive, favoring larger, multi-service providers and potentially limiting participation from specialized SMEs.
•The requirement for a single entity to provide all seven specialized services for technical capability is highly restrictive and could be perceived as tailored towards larger, integrated companies, potentially limiting competition and SME participation.
•Lack of transparent and detailed selection criteria makes it difficult for new applicants to understand how to successfully join the DPS, potentially favoring incumbents or those with prior knowledge of the authority's expectations.
Practicality40/100
The DPS model is practical for the contracting authorities to manage ongoing needs for road surface treatments. The application process via a dedicated portal is also practical. However, the lack of detailed requirements makes it impractical for potential bidders to prepare a comprehensive and competitive application without further, currently unavailable, information.
•Bidders cannot practically prepare a robust application without access to comprehensive tender documents and detailed selection criteria.
Data Consistency100/100
The provided information is internally consistent, particularly regarding the DPS renewal, estimated value calculation, and participating authorities. The timeline and reference details are clear.
Sustainability0/100
There is no mention of any environmental, social, or innovation criteria within the provided tender information. This represents a missed opportunity to integrate broader sustainability objectives into the procurement process.
•No explicit sustainability (environmental, social) criteria are mentioned.
•No innovation focus is specified.