Health insurance for employees of PSIA "Health and Social Care Centre – Sloka"

This tender for health insurance services demonstrates good legal compliance and generally clear requirements, but is significantly hampered by restricted document access and notable data inconsistencies, severely impacting fairness and completeness.

The tender clearly defines the open procedure and CPV code, and the timeline of 16 days for submission is reasonable. The mention of mandatory exclusion grounds and eligibility criteria suggests adherence to standard procurement regulations. No disputes or suspensions are reported.

The tender description and AI-extracted requirements are generally clear and well-structured. However, there is an inconsistency regarding the specification of evaluation criteria; while document summaries mention them, an automated flag indicates they are missing, which creates ambiguity for potential bidders.

Basic information, financial details, timeline, and duration are provided. However, the critical issue of 'Restricted document access' significantly impacts completeness for bidders, as they cannot fully access all necessary information to prepare a comprehensive bid. One document summary also failed.

The 'Restricted document access' is a severe impediment to fairness, preventing all potential bidders from having equal access to information. The contradiction between 'E-Procurement' being a characteristic and 'No e-submission' being an issue also raises concerns about equal access and ease of participation. While requirements appear generic and the value is disclosed, these critical access issues undermine overall fairness.

The tender specifies a contract duration and estimated value. However, the reported lack of e-submission (despite 'E-Procurement' characteristic) reduces practicality for bidders. The absence of a specific contract start date and direct document URLs (implied by restricted access) also slightly detract from practicality.

While key fields are populated and dates are logical, there are significant internal contradictions. These include the conflicting information on evaluation criteria, the discrepancy between 'E-Procurement' and 'No e-submission,' and the fundamental inconsistency of 'Restricted document access' for an 'open' tender.

The tender does not include any specific requirements or considerations related to green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also not indicated as EU-funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.