Purchase of a license for forensic multimedia file investigation software or software suite

This tender for forensic multimedia software is generally well-structured for a simplified procedure, with clear requirements and good transparency regarding access and value. However, it suffers from a notable inconsistency in evaluation criteria and lacks any sustainability considerations.

The tender demonstrates good compliance with national regulations for a simplified procedure, referencing the Public Procurement Act and providing a reasonable submission deadline. No disputes or suspensions are noted.

Requirements are generally clear and well-documented, including technical specifications and performance conditions. However, there is a minor contradiction between the stated 'relative_weighting' characteristic and the explicit 'lowest price' evaluation criterion, which introduces slight ambiguity.

Most essential information, including basic details, financial data, and deadlines, is provided. A comprehensive set of documents is attached. However, specific location information beyond the NUTS code is missing, and some key documents like evaluation criteria and the draft contract are not explicitly marked as 'Required'.

The tender offers full document access, discloses the estimated value, and utilizes e-procurement for equal access. Evaluation criteria (lowest price) are objective. The requirement for the supplier to be a manufacturer or authorized reseller is common for specialized software and does not appear to be tailored.

Electronic submission is supported, and the contract duration is clearly specified. While the contract start date is not provided, this is common for tenders. The absence of an explicit document URL is a minor concern, though implied by e-procurement.

A significant inconsistency exists between the 'Evaluation Criteria: relative_weighting' characteristic and the explicit statement that 'The bid price is the sole evaluation criterion, with the lowest price receiving the maximum score'. This contradiction reduces data consistency.

The tender explicitly lacks green procurement, social criteria, and innovation focus, as indicated by automated checks. While it is EU-funded, this does not translate into specific sustainability requirements within the tender itself.