Provision and Interpretation Service for Radiological Examinations

This tender for radiological services is well-structured with clear requirements and objective evaluation criteria, demonstrating good overall quality. Minor issues include a less precise CPV code and a data inconsistency regarding value classification.

The tender generally complies with legal requirements, utilizing the ESPD and defining a clear procedure type. Deadlines are reasonable. The CPV code 'Zooloogiateenused' (Zoological services) is broad for specific radiological diagnostics, which is a minor point for precision.

The service description is highly detailed and unambiguous, clearly outlining the scope, location, and educational component. Requirements are well-documented and understandable, and evaluation criteria (lowest price for one workday fee) are explicitly stated.

All essential information, including basic details, financial data, timeline, location, and evaluation criteria, is provided. Six documents are attached, though the XML ESPD was not processed by AI, limiting full content analysis. A minor contradiction exists with 'Value Classified: Yes' despite the estimated value being disclosed.

The tender promotes fairness through full document access, disclosed value, reasonable preparation time, and highly objective, price-based evaluation criteria. E-procurement is enabled. Requirements, while specific (e.g., teaching students), appear justified for a university clinic's mission and are not overtly tailored.

Electronic submission and e-procurement are supported, enhancing practicality. The duration is clearly specified. However, the 'Negotiation Allowed' procedure can add complexity for bidders, and the lack of an explicit contract start date (beyond duration) is a minor detail.

Most key fields are populated logically and consistently, with no detected suspensions or disputes. The primary inconsistency is the 'Value Classified: Yes' flag appearing alongside the disclosed estimated value, which is a minor system-level contradiction.

The tender does not explicitly include green procurement, social criteria (beyond the inherent educational mission of the university), or innovation focus. While the requirement to teach students has an inherent social/educational value, it is not framed as a sustainability criterion.