Request for Tender for Landscaping of campuses and community homes (Dublin)
Value
€1.0m
Deadline
15 May
15 May 2026
Value
€1.0m
Deadline
15 May
Tender for landscaping services for campuses and community homes in Dublin
Tender for landscaping services for campuses and community homes in Dublin
Bidder profile
Firms with experience in landscaping and public procurement compliance are ideal candidates for this tender.
Risks & flags
- Information asymmetry
- Compliance risks
- Timeline compression
Briefing
AI-generated analysis of the documents. Check the official notice and any amendments for current submission details.
1. At a glance
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Buyer | Avista CLG |
| Title | Request for Tender for Landscaping of campuses and community homes (Dublin) |
| CPV / category | VERIFIED PHRASES (deterministic regex extract from the documents — treat as authoritative for numerical claims) / Facilities Management & Cleaning |
| Estimated value | €1000000.00 |
| Per-year (if multi-year) | not stated |
| Procedure type | not stated |
| Lots | not stated |
| Location | not stated |
| Contract length | not stated |
| Submission deadline | 2026-05-15T13:00:00+00:00 |
| Go-live / start | not stated |
2. Scope of Work
This procurement covered the supply scope described in the tender pack for Request for Tender for Landscaping of campuses and community homes (Dublin). The contract shape pointed to operational delivery against buyer demand, documented ordering, and conformance with specification, quality, and administrative requirements set out in the RFT documents. The package indicated a formal competition route with standard Irish public-procurement controls around qualification, response formatting, and deadline compliance.
- Contract title and category indicate supply activity for Facilities Management & Cleaning under buyer workflows in Avista CLG.
- Submission package must align with the RFT structure published through the buyer's procurement channel.
- Day-to-day obligations include order fulfilment, documentation, and compliance evidence for the awarded framework or contract lot.
- Technical and commercial responses must map directly to mandatory requirements and the pricing schedule format in the tender pack.
- Evidence trail must be maintained for declarations, eligibility proofs, and any product or service specifications named in attachments.
The source material indicated that bidders had to ground claims in tender forms and supporting evidence, rather than generic company profiles. Where the verified extract provided numerical conditions, those figures were treated as the binding baseline for suitability. Where the extract did not provide a number, the requirement remained not specified at briefing stage and required direct review of the underlying attachment before pricing sign-off.
3. Background & buyer context
The buyer ran this competition to secure a structured procurement route for the stated category and keep continuity of supply under public-sector purchasing controls. The tender format suggested a compliance-led process with a defined close date and a document trail through the procurement portal. The context indicated a need for contract certainty, auditable supplier selection, and predictable service or goods availability during the contract term. No explicit incumbent detail was surfaced in the verified extract provided to this worker, so incumbent advantage had to be assessed from full attachment review and clarification responses.
4. Eligibility & selection criteria
- Turnover requirement — not specified for this tender
- Insurance
- Insurance — not specified for this tender
- Certifications — not specified for this tender
- Past experience — not specified for this tender
- Personnel — not specified for this tender
- Geographic / facility constraints — not specified for this tender
Binding numerical extract used for this section: Binding numerical extract is limited in the source pack.
5. Award criteria & scoring
The award model followed MEAT-style evaluation where published criteria and weights governed scoring after qualification. The exact weighting structure required confirmation from the pricing and quality schedules if not explicit in the extract below.
| Criterion | Weight (%) | Sub-criteria | Minimum threshold |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | not stated | not stated | not stated |
| Quality / Technical merit | not stated | not stated | not stated |
Price/quality split: Meath, Limerick North Tipperary, and Offaly to both adults and children with intellectual disability and/ or complex support needs..
6. Submission requirements
- Method statement / response document — complete the buyer template and answer each requirement in the order requested; page limits not stated in the extract.
- CVs — provide role-based CVs where requested; page count not stated.
- Pricing schedule — submit the issued pricing schedule in its required format; alternative layouts were not stated as acceptable.
- Case studies — number and value bands not stated in the extract.
- Declarations — include ESPD or equivalent declarations, tax and legal standing confirmations, and conflict disclosures where requested by the pack.
- Mandatory site visit — not stated in the extract.
- Submission portal — submit via eTenders or the named portal before the stated deadline; late submissions are typically non-compliant.
7. Key dates & process
| Milestone | Date / timing |
|---|---|
| RFT issued | not stated |
| Clarification deadline | not stated |
| Mandatory site visit | not stated |
| Tender deadline (date + time) | 2026-05-15T13:00:00+00:00 |
| Expected award | not stated |
| Contract start | not stated |
| Go-live / mobilisation | not stated |
8. Contract terms that matter
The contract term and extension mechanics were not fully stated in the extracted metadata, so bidders had to read the form of contract and schedules for binding duration language. Payment timing, service levels, and remedies for non-performance were also attachment-driven in this pack. IP, subcontracting permission, and any security instruments such as bonds or guarantees were not explicit in the verified extract supplied here. The practical implication was that commercial risk sat in the contract appendices, and bid/no-bid confidence depended on reviewing those clauses before final pricing.
9. Risks, red flags & unusuals
The main risk in this competition was information asymmetry between headline metadata and full contractual detail. Numerical gates for insurance appeared in the verified extract, but other qualification thresholds were not explicitly surfaced, so an under-scoped response could fail on compliance before scoring. Another risk was timeline compression if clarification timing and mobilisation expectations were tighter in the attachments than in the metadata view. No specific unusual legal mechanism was confirmed in the extract provided to this worker; the red-flag check therefore depended on line-by-line attachment review.
10. SME fit assessment
This tender looked most accessible to firms that already operated in the stated category and could evidence public-procurement compliance at submission stage. A credible bidder profile was a supplier with documented quality controls, tender-writing capacity, and insurance levels aligned to the verified figures where listed. Consortium or named subcontracting arrangements were not specified in the extract and needed confirmation in the RFT rules. Bid-preparation effort was typically several working days for data gathering, drafting, pricing, and internal approvals, with additional time if technical attachments were extensive. Pwin signals from this extract alone were neutral because incumbent status and prior winners were not explicitly surfaced.
11. Where to dig deeper
- Source RFT file(s): 1. RFT for Landscaping.docx, SRD-HIQA1-FIRE SITE.pdf
- eTenders CFT ID: not stated
- Clarification contact / portal: eTenders clarification portal
- Priority attachments: 1. RFT for Landscaping.docx, SRD-HIQA1-FIRE SITE.pdf
Scoring
Most Economically Advantageous Tender
Documents (53)
1. RFT for Landscaping.docx
76.1 KB · RFT / Invitation to Tender
3. RFT Service Contract (2).docx
51.6 KB · RFT / Invitation to Tender
Pricing table - Avista Clg Landscaping Requirements Overview Appendix updated.xlsx
20.3 KB · Pricing / BOQ / Schedule of Rates
1-BELGREE-COURT-HIQA-FIRE-SITE.pdf
1.1 MB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
1-WESTVIEW-CLONEE-RD-HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
763.0 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
100 LOHUNDA PARK HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
420.8 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
12 SEAVIEW AVE CLONTARF LANDSCAPE.pdf
520.8 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
123 HANSFIELD PARK HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
451.6 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
139 ROSELAWN ROAD HIQA-FIRE-SITE.pdf
512.4 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
16 LIMELAWN GREEN LANDSCAPE.pdf
336.7 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
175NAVANRD HIQA-FIRE-SITE.pdf
717.3 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
178CABRARDHIQA2022-FIRE SITE.pdf
562.7 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
18 BISHOPS ORCHARD LANDSCAPE.pdf
616.5 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
18 CHARNWOOD GDNS-LANDSCAPE.pdf
464.1 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
18-ROSELAWN-GROVE-LANDSCAPE.pdf
679.6 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
18SPRINGLAWNDR-LANDSCAPE.pdf
539.3 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
19HERBERTRD LANDSCAPE.pdf
458.9 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
2-P-GATE-RISE-HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
697.6 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
2-THE-AVENUE-LANDSCAPE.pdf
552.1 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
20 BROMPTON COURT LANDSCAPE.pdf
283.9 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
20 RUSHBROOK WAY LANDSCAPE.pdf
405.9 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
214NRD-HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
539.6 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
25-THE-GREEN-MULHUDDART-HIQA-FIRE-SITE.pdf
364.3 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
26 ASHFIELD GARDENS HIQA-FIRE-SITE.pdf
625.4 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
26 LITTLEPACE PARK HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
646.0 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
28KINVARAPKHIQA2-FIRE SITE.pdf
252.8 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
3-GLENDHU-PARK-LANDSCAPE.pdf
254.3 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
31 LITTLEPACE HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
498.8 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
37ROSSANCOURT_HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
320.3 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
4 + 5 Pinewood Court LANDSCAPE.pdf
553.0 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
4 LAVERNA WAY LANDSCAPE.pdf
576.1 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
4-GLENDHU-PARK-LANDSCAPE.pdf
259.1 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
41 CASTLEFIELD PARK HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
330.7 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
42 COOLMINE PARK HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
321.6 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
44-ALDERWOOD-HOLLYSTOWN-HIQA-FIRE-SITE.pdf
487.9 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
44-KINVARA-AVE-HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
548.4 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
45ROSSANCOURT_HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
854.8 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
48 WOODVALE AVE HIQA--FIRE G.F. (2).pdf
1.2 MB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
5 VILLA BLANCHARDSTOWN-001.pdf
499.9 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
63 HOLLYSTOWN PARK HIQA-FIRE-SITE.pdf
583.7 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
63-CLONSILLA-RD-HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
381.3 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
7 + 8 COOLMINE COURT LANDSCAPE.pdf
680.1 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
7 CHARNWOOD PARK LANDSCAPE.pdf
296.6 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
74 OLD CABRA RD HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
432.3 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
84 LAMBOURNE PARK HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
731.6 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
BLAKESTOWN-HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
1000.9 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
CHAPELFIELD-KILBRIDE-HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
879.9 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
CRS_46_CASTLEFIELD_HIQA-FIRE SITE.pdf
488.5 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
CS_AB_SITE PLAN-002.pdf
1.6 MB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
No.4-6 ASHINGTON GROVE-LANDSCAPE.pdf
533.0 KB · Drawing / Plan / Layout
28-ST.HELEN'SRD-HIQA1-FIRE SITE.pdf
885.2 KB · Other
2. Response Document (2).docx
60.6 KB · Tender Response Template
Avista Clg Landscaping Requirements Overview Appendix 4 (4).docx
45.2 KB · Appendix / Annex
Original notice text
Avista CLG invites tenders from suitably qualified and experienced contractors for the provision of landscaping and grounds maintenance services across its Dublin locations. The Services will include, but are not limited to: Grass cutting and general grounds maintenance Weed control and treatment Hedge and shrub pruning Tree maintenance and storm clearance Leaf collection and lawful disposal Removal and disposal of invasive species where required The Services will be delivered at operational sites providing services to individuals with intellectual disabilities. The successful Tenderer will be required to ensure that all personnel are appropriately trained in disability awareness and safeguarding, and that services are delivered in a respectful, person-centred and professional manner in accordance with applicable legislation and Avista CLG policies.
AI analysis updated 3 months ago
Value
€1.0m
Deadline
15 May
Buyer
Avista CLGLocation
Avista CLG campuses and community homes
Procedure
Open
eTenders ID
7889387
Ask AI
Knows this tender's documents
Example only — sign up to ask about this tender