Quantitative Analytics Platform (SaaS)

Description du marché

Keva has arranged a public contract award procedure concerning Quantitative Analytics Platform (SaaS). The procurement was carried out in an open procedure. The official contract notice was published in Hilma-service, (www.hankintailmoitukset.fi) on March 27th 2024 and Tenders Electronic Daily (TED) on March 27th 2024. The deadline for the tenders was 9.00 hours on 29th April 2024. As a result of the procurement procedure, one tender was received in the open procedure which did not include all the mandatory annexes. The contracting entity suspended the procurement by decision dated June 10th 2024. Therefore, the tender was incompatible within the meaning of Section 40(3) of the Public Procurement Act (Act on Public Pro-curement and Concession Contracts, 1397/2016). According to Procurement Act subsection 1 of Section 40 in a direct procurement the Contracting Entity negotiates the terms and conditions of a procurement agreement with its selected suppliers without prior publication of a contract notice. According to Procurement Act point 1 of subsection 2 of Section 40 the Contracting Enti-ty may opt for direct procurement if no suitable tenders have been received in response to an open procedure as long as no essential changes are made to the terms and condi-tions of the original Call for Tenders. According to the government proposal (108/2016, pp. 133-134) direct procurement is an option if no tenders, or suitable tenders have been received in response to an open or re-stricted procedure. For example, a tender would not be suitable if it does not meet the contracting entity's needs or the subject of the procurement at all. It shall be a further condition that no essential change has occurred in the terms and conditions of the origi-nal call for tenders. For example, if the requirements for the suitability of the tenderer were lowered or waived, this would generally require a new notice. Contracting Entity received one Tender. The Tenderer fulfilled the set suitability requirements. During the review of the tenders, it was observed that the tender did not fulfill the re-quirements of the Call for tenders. The tender was not accompanied by the required annexes. As the tender did not comply with the Call for Tenders and its requirements, the contract-ing entity decided to suspend the procurement. No terms and conditions of the original Call for Tenders were changed. After suspending the procurement, The Contracting Entity received a tender and a price from the tenderer that fulfilled the requirements of the call for tenders. The tenderer from whom the direct procurement is made can meet the suitability requirements set out in the call for tenders. The contracting entity did not change the original call for tenders, including the suitability requirements.

Pouvoir adjudicateur