Legal Compliance100/100
The tender explicitly states it will follow the Public Contract Regulations 2015, including mandatory exclusion grounds. However, it fundamentally contradicts itself by describing a 'Dynamic Purchasing Solution (DPS)' while simultaneously stating the 'Restricted procedure'. A DPS is an open procedure, allowing new suppliers to join at any time, which is distinct from a restricted procedure. This procedural inconsistency is a significant legal compliance concern.
•Contradiction between 'Dynamic Purchasing Solution (DPS)' and 'Restricted procedure' as the procurement type, which are legally distinct procedures under PCR 2015.
Clarity40/100
While the service scope and value bands are clearly defined, the fundamental contradiction regarding the procurement procedure (DPS vs. Restricted) creates significant ambiguity. Furthermore, the stated DPS term starting in April 2022, with a submission deadline in 2027, requires clarification on whether this is an initial setup or an ongoing opportunity to join an existing DPS.
•Ambiguity regarding the actual procurement procedure (DPS vs. Restricted).
•Lack of clarity on the current status of the DPS given the stated start date of April 2022 and the current submission deadline.
Completeness83/100
The tender information provided is incomplete. Crucially, no actual tender documents are attached or accessible within the provided data, making a comprehensive assessment impossible. The absence of detailed evaluation criteria is a major omission.
•No tender documents or detailed content provided for full review.
•Missing detailed evaluation criteria for assessing bids.
Fairness60/100
The lack of clarity on the procurement procedure (DPS vs. Restricted) and the absence of evaluation criteria significantly undermine the fairness of the process. While a DPS is designed to be open, the 'restricted' label could deter potential bidders. The broad requirements ('full range of services', 'all geographic regions') could potentially limit participation from smaller, specialized suppliers, favoring larger entities.
•Lack of transparency and fairness due to missing evaluation criteria.
•Procedural confusion (DPS vs. Restricted) could unfairly disadvantage bidders.
Practicality40/100
The use of a DPS is a practical approach for procuring ongoing Soft FM services across a wide range of public sector bodies, allowing for flexibility and new entrants over time. The specified value bands also offer practical segmentation for suppliers.
Data Consistency100/100
There is a significant inconsistency between the stated 'Restricted procedure' and the 'Dynamic Purchasing Solution (DPS)' description. Additionally, the DPS term starting in April 2022, with a submission deadline in 2027, suggests the DPS is already operational, which needs explicit confirmation to avoid confusion.
•Inconsistency between the stated procurement procedure type ('Restricted') and the description of a 'Dynamic Purchasing Solution (DPS)'.
•Discrepancy between the stated DPS start date (April 2022) and the current submission deadline (May 2027) without clear explanation of the DPS's current operational status.
Sustainability0/100
The tender description and requirements do not include any explicit criteria or focus on environmental, social, or innovation aspects. This represents a missed opportunity to leverage public procurement for broader public value.
•Absence of explicit sustainability (environmental, social) criteria.
•Lack of focus on innovation.