York College: The Provision of Snacks & Soft Drinks Products

The tender for snacks and soft drinks at York College is active but suffers from a critical lack of accessible documentation, making a comprehensive assessment of its quality and fairness challenging. Key details regarding product specifications and evaluation criteria are referenced but not provided, raising concerns about transparency and equal access to information.

The tender appears to follow an open procedure, which is generally compliant. However, the absence of specified mandatory exclusion grounds in the provided extract and the lack of full tender documents make it impossible to verify full compliance with public procurement regulations regarding supplier selection and exclusion.

The basic description is clear, but the actual requirements are vague due to the absence of the 'TR2 price schedule' and full tender documents. Suppliers cannot fully understand the scope or specific product requirements without these.

The provided information is highly incomplete. Crucial elements like the 'TR2 price schedule' (which defines product requirements), full terms and conditions, evaluation criteria, and detailed submission instructions are missing. This makes it impossible for potential bidders to prepare a comprehensive and compliant bid.

The lack of accessible tender documents, particularly the 'TR2 price schedule' and evaluation criteria, creates a significant barrier to fair competition. Without this information, potential suppliers cannot accurately assess the opportunity or prepare competitive bids, potentially favoring those with prior knowledge or existing relationships. The mention of 'specific products listed in the TR2 price schedule' without providing the schedule itself could lead to perceived tailoring if the list is highly specific and restrictive.

From a bidder's perspective, it is impractical to prepare a bid without the 'TR2 price schedule' and full tender documents. The instruction to 'access the full tender documents via MultiQuote' indicates that the provided extract is insufficient for practical bidding.

The provided data is internally consistent, but its incompleteness makes it difficult to assess consistency with the full tender. The description clearly refers to the 'TR2 price schedule' as the source of product requirements, which is then listed as a requirement itself.

No information regarding environmental, social, or innovative criteria is provided. This indicates a missed opportunity to integrate sustainability aspects into the procurement.