Comprehensive Town Council Insurance Policy

This tender for a comprehensive insurance policy is significantly hampered by critical omissions, particularly the absence of evaluation criteria and a key 'proposal schedule', severely impacting its clarity, completeness, and fairness.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV code, and shows no disputes. However, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria and explicit mandatory exclusion/eligibility grounds raises significant legal compliance concerns regarding transparency and fair competition, even for a below-threshold procedure. The missing reveal date also impacts transparency.

While the general description of the insurance policy is clear, the tender's clarity is severely compromised by the explicit lack of evaluation criteria and the absence of the 'accompanying proposal schedule' which is repeatedly referenced as central to the requirements. This makes it difficult for bidders to understand the full scope and assessment methodology.

Basic information like title, reference, organization, value, and duration are present. However, the tender is critically incomplete due to the absence of the 'accompanying proposal schedule' and the lack of specified evaluation criteria. Additionally, explicit eligibility and mandatory exclusion grounds are missing, and one listed document is an error page.

Fairness is significantly undermined by the complete absence of evaluation criteria, which prevents objective and transparent assessment of bids. The lack of electronic submission creates barriers to equal access, and the missing 'accompanying proposal schedule' prevents all bidders from having full and equal access to essential tender information.

The tender specifies the contract start date and duration, which is practical. However, the lack of electronic submission is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement. Furthermore, the absence of the 'accompanying proposal schedule' makes it highly impractical for potential bidders to prepare a comprehensive and compliant offer.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical and consistent. Minor inconsistencies include an empty 'Liable Person' field and empty codes for 'Type' and 'Procedure'. The 'Value Classified: Yes' while the value is disclosed is a minor phrasing inconsistency but does not obscure information.

The tender shows no indication of incorporating green procurement principles, social aspects, or an innovation focus. It is also not EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.