Service d'attention au public, d'information et d'interprétation pour les visiteurs de l'espace d'interprétation du bâtiment KARST des paysages protégés de Las Tuerces et Covalagua Geoparque Las Loras et du Centre d'interprétation de Villaescusa de las Torres, Palencia années 2027-2028

✓On award criteria and weighting, the procedure is open, ordinary, without variants, and no electronic auction is used.

✓As indicated, criteria are divided into formulas and judgment of value.

✓Formulas cover: (i) price (“Oferta económica: Precio”), with a subtype criterion “50” and evaluation expressed in euros; and (ii) “Horas de mejora sin cargo para Patrimonio Natural”, with subtype criterion “5”, specifying minimum and maximum offered hours.

✓The technical criteria by judgment of value include, such as: 1.1 promotion of visits to the centre considering its specific characteristics; 1.2 guided interpretation of the centre and its surroundings; 1.3 management and development of workshops and educational activities (VEEN, Espacios Dorados, etc.); 1.4 promotion and management of educational, training and cultural workshops and activities; 2.1 explanation of service operation, development and detailed planning; 2.2 assignment of personnel, material and technical resources; 3.1 knowledge of the action area for service development and public information.

✓For each sub‑criterion, the text lists a subtype number (6, 7, 8, etc.), and minimum/maximum quantities, but the “Ponderación” field appears as 0 or with inconsistent “EUROS” text, suggesting that the actual point weighting is defined more clearly inside the full PCAP/PPT rather than in this summary.

✓As to risks and special conditions, the documentation specifies that there are special environmental execution conditions “según PCAP” to be complied with.

✓A definitive performance guarantee of 5% of the contract amount is required from the awarded bidder.

✓Subcontracting is explicitly permitted.

✓There is no EU co‑financing, reducing the risk of additional EU reporting obligations.

✓The offer validity period is unusually long, until 31/12/2029, which represents a risk for bidders as prices and costs may evolve over time; however, this is clearly stated and must be accepted.

✓The process is not an electronic auction.

❓Penalties, detailed guarantees, insurance obligations, and any specific restrictions on subcontracting are referenced but not spelled out in the extract, and are to be found in the PCAP.

✓Deadlines shown include: offer submission (10/11/2026, 14:00), pliego access (same date and time), and the separate “Presentación de recursos” deadline of 19/10/2026 at 14:00, which appears related to remedies/appeals against the contracting authority’s decisions rather than to offer submission.

❓No mandatory site visit is mentioned in this excerpt.

✓In terms of contradictions or corrections, the text largely repeats the same information from two related documents (01‑placsp‑4.pdf and 02‑placsp‑7.pdf), with minor formatting differences but no substantive contradiction regarding object, value, execution period, CPV, or procedure.

✓One apparent inconsistency is the coexistence of two different deadlines: 10/11/2026 for submitting offers and 19/10/2026 for “Presentación de recursos”, which refer to different procedural phases (tender submission versus appeals), so the applicable date for bidders’ offers is clearly 10/11/2026.

✓Another unclear element is the “Ponderación” fields: for technical criteria they show “0” and for price they show “EUROS / 0”, which, from context, are placeholders or machine‑read fields rather than the actual scoring weights; the applicable statement for weighting should be the one contained in the full PCAP and PPT referenced in the notice.

❓Where this summary and the detailed PCAP/PPT differ, the PCAP (Pliego de Cláusulas Administrativas Particulares) prevails.