Legal Compliance100/100
The provided information lacks explicit mention of mandatory exclusion grounds, which are fundamental to public procurement directives. While the use of an e-tendering system aligns with modern procurement principles, the absence of full documentation raises concerns about overall legal robustness.
•Absence of explicit mandatory exclusion grounds in the provided extract.
Clarity40/100
The description of the required services is clear at a high level, and the instructions for using the e-tendering system are well-articulated. However, the eligibility and technical capability requirements are very generic and lack the necessary detail for bidders to fully understand expectations.
•Vague eligibility and technical capability requirements due to the absence of full tender documents.
Completeness83/100
This is the most significant weakness. The tender explicitly states 'DOCUMENTS (0 total)' and 'No document content available'. Crucial elements such as detailed technical specifications, full terms and conditions, and, most importantly, evaluation criteria are missing, rendering the tender largely incomplete.
•Absence of full tender documents and detailed technical specifications.
•Missing evaluation criteria.
Fairness60/100
The 'Open procedure' generally promotes fairness. However, the lack of detailed requirements and explicit evaluation criteria creates a significant risk of subjective assessment during the tender evaluation phase, potentially undermining the principle of equal treatment among bidders.
•Absence of detailed requirements and evaluation criteria could lead to subjective assessment.
Practicality40/100
The use of a dedicated e-tendering system with clear instructions and support is practical for submission. However, without access to the full tender documents, bidders cannot practically prepare a comprehensive, compliant, and competitive bid, making the process impractical for serious contenders.
•Bidders cannot practically prepare a comprehensive bid due to the absence of full tender documents.
Data Consistency100/100
The estimated value is presented as 480,000.00 EUR, and then as '£400,000 (or 480,000 EUR)' in the financial requirements. While the values are consistent with a specific conversion rate, explicitly stating the primary currency or the conversion rate used would enhance clarity. Other timeline data is consistent.
•Estimated value presented in both EUR and GBP without explicit clarification of the primary currency or conversion rate.
Sustainability0/100
The provided tender information contains no mention of sustainability, social, or innovation criteria. This indicates a missed opportunity to incorporate broader public value considerations into the procurement process.
•Absence of sustainability, social, or innovation criteria.