[Seite 1]
| # | Receipt of Question | Question | Reference | Answer / Information | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 26.08.2026 | 10:00h | --- | Price list | The requested pricing model is token-based, where a single user registration for a module correspond to and shall be charged as 1 token. This is due to the fact that a large volume of learners but a very small number of module registrations per learner is expected. Thus, an affordable pricing model shall be agreed that can accommodate up to 40,000 individual course registrations per year, from a similar scale of unique users (likely between 20,000-35,000 distinct users annually). This assumes an average of 1-2 module enrolments per user. |
| 2 | 26.08.2026 | 10:00h | --- | Service description | To facilitate a better understanding of the Academies’ specific needs we have added some background information to the service description and kindly ask tenderers to take this into account when preparing their proposals. |
| 3 | 21.08.2026 | 22:23h | We provide a subscription-based SaaS solution, and our standard Terms and Conditions have been specifically developed to address the licensing, intellectual property, service level, data processing, AI, security, and other SaaS-specific requirements that are central to our offering. In our experience, customer procurement templates can require substantial revisions to adequately address the SaaS components of the relationship. To ensure the most efficient use of resources for both parties, would EIT RawMaterials be open to reviewing and contracting on the basis of Absorb's standard SaaS Terms and Conditions, with any customer-specific concerns identified and addressed through negotiation? | Terms and Conditions/Service Contract | No. Due to the legal framework identical contract terms must be applied to ensure comparability of the offers. The given IT- Service Agreement is standard practice in tender procedures for comparable services and widely accepted by providers. Tenderers have the opportunity to review the terms of this IT- Service Agreement and, as part of the Q&A process within the time limit for tenders, to submit reasoned proposals for alternative or supplementary provisions. EIT RawMaterials will review these and, where appropriate, implement them equally for all tenderers. |
| 4 | 21.08.2026 | 22:23h | If the use of supplier paper is not possible, we would also appreciate the ability to negotiate the Terms and Conditions at the finalist stage. Our intent is not to defer discussion of key legal or commercial concerns, but rather to ensure that any detailed contract negotiations are undertaken at the point where both parties can invest resources most effectively as our contracts team does not typically review MSAs at the RFP stage. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss the most practical path forward and remain committed to working collaboratively toward mutually acceptable terms. | Terms and Conditions/Service Contract | No. This kind of procurement procedure does not allow for negotiations. However, please note the possibility described in our answer to question #3. |
| 5 | 27.08.2026 | 15:49h | If open badges are not yet available but are on the roadmap, does this result in disqualification? When, at the latest, would open badges need to be implemented? | Service description | No. Digital badges are not a mandatory requirement and their absence will therefore not result in disqualification. They may, however, be taken into account in the overall evaluation of the tender. There is consequently no fixed deadline for their implementation. |
| 6 | 27.08.2026 | 15:49h | Do we understand correctly that the three basic criteria for a reference are multilingualism, an international focus (at least 2 countries), and at least 100,000 active users, and that at least one reference must meet two of these criteria? | Declaration of Eligibility | No. “Multilingualism” and “ international focus” are combined in one criterion which must be met as a whole. This and the other criterion which you mentioned (experience in operating learning management systems for a minimum of 100,000 learners including software hosting and maintenance services) must be met each by at least one reference. However, one reference may also cover both criteria. |
| 7 | 27.08.2026 | 15:49h | How do you define 100,000 users (using the system at the same time or over a certain period of time?) | Declaration of Eligibility | This criterion requires “learners,” who are defined as active users of the platform. Active users (= learners) are users who have taken advantage of at least one learning opportunity on the platform. This number must have been reached at least once during the term of the relevant contract. The Declaration of Eligibility form has been clarified accordingly. |
| 8 | 27.08.2026 | 15:49h | Is there a minimum number of employees required to be eligible for this tender? | Declaration of Eligibility | No. |
| 9 | 27.08.2026 | 15:49h | Who exactly must submit the profile? All individuals who would play a key role in the project? | Declaration of Eligibility | Yes. Please submit profiles for all team members who play a key role in the project both before and after the LMS is implemented. Please limit the number of profiles to a maximum of 6. The Invitation to Tender, section 6.5, has been clarified accordingly. |
| 10 | 27.08.2026 | 15:49h | Are we correct in assuming that this is exclusively an LMS for e-learning and that it is not intended to support face to face trainings or webinars? | Service description | Yes. |
| 11 | 03.09.2026 | 10:12h | In "1_EITRM-LMS_Invitation to Tender.pdf", you mention a maximum font size of 11pt with font type Arial or similar for the technical proposal. We assume you mean minimal font size. Is this correct? | Technical proposal | Yes. The wording ‘maximum font size 11, Arial or comparable’ is corrected to read ‘minimum font size 11 pt, Arial or comparable’. |
| 12 | 03.09.2026 | 10:12h | For the provision of the hosting services, the bidder uses a hyperscale hosting provider as a subcontractor. Could the contracting authority please clarify whether such hyperscale hosting providers fall within the scope of the declaration concerning reliance on third-party capacities and are therefore required to complete and sign the relevant form individually? | Reliance on Third-Party Capacities | The declaration on third parties’ capacities is required only where a tenderer relies on a third party’s economic and financial standing or technical and professional ability in order to meet an eligibility criterion. A hosting provider used solely as a subcontractor does not need to complete the declaration merely because it provides hosting infrastructure, provided that the tenderer itself meets all eligibility criteria without relying on that provider’s capacities. |
| 13 | 03.09.2026 | 10:12h | If external hyperscale hosting providers are considered third-party capacities, would the contracting authority consider an exemption for hyperscale cloud providers, given that obtaining an individually executed declaration directly from such providers may not be practically feasible? The bidder would in any event remain fully responsible for the acts and omissions of its subcontractors and would be prepared to provide an appropriate alternative declaration confirming such responsibility. | Terms of Contract | Please see the answer to question #12. Where a tenderer does not rely on a hyperscale hosting provider’s capacities to meet an eligibility criterion, no declaration on third parties’ capacities is required. The contractor remains responsible for its subcontractors and their performance under the contract. |
| 14 | 03.09.2026 | 10:12h | Are bidders permitted to propose amendments to the contractual terms? If so, at what stage of the procurement procedure and in what form should such amendment requests be submitted? | Terms of Contract | Please see the answer to question #3. |
| 15 | 03.09.2026 | 10:12h | Does the contracting authority envisage any contract negotiations prior to contract award? | Terms of Contract | Please see the answer to question #4. |
| 16 | 03.09.2026 | 10:12h | Would the contracting authority accept an availability level of 99.0% per calendar year or, alternatively, 99.0% per calendar month? From the bidder's perspective, the currently required availability of 99.8% per calendar quarter is unusually high for an LMS solution and deviates substantially from the bidder's standard SLA. | Availability | No. The availability requirement in clause 12.1 of the Terms of Contract remains unchanged. |
| 17 | 03.09.2026 | 10:12h | Would the contracting authority agree that the recurring SaaS fees are invoiced annually in advance, starting from the project kick-off / commencement of the SaaS term? | Terms of Contract (SaaS Fees / Invoicing) | No. Under clause 7.2 of the Terms of Contract, invoices shall be issued monthly for the contractually rendered services and are payable within 60 days of receipt. The tender must be priced on this basis. |
this basis.
[Seite 4]
| # | Receipt of Question | Question | Reference | Answer / Information | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18 | 03.09.2026 | 10:12h | Section 10.3 of the Contract refers to Section 2.1.3 of the Service Description with respect to response times. However, we have not been able to identify corresponding response-time provisions under that section. Could the contracting authority please clarify the intended reference? | Terms of Contract | The reference in clause 10.3 of the Terms of Contract is corrected. Clause 10.3 shall read: ‘The contractor shall respond within the response times and resolve incidents within the resolution times offered in its tender and required by the Service Description.’ The Service Description requires tenderers to state guaranteed response and resolution targets by severity level and to submit their offered SLA. |
| 19 | 03.09.2026 | 10:12h | Would the contracting authority agree to incorporate the Contractors applicable Service Level Agreement (SLA) as an integral part of the contractual documents and to provide that the applicable response times and other service levels are governed by such SLA? | Terms of Contract | Tenderers are required to submit their offered Service Level Agreement (SLA) as part of their tender. The SLA submitted by the successful tenderer will constitute part of the contract pursuant to Section 2.1.4 of the Terms of Contract. In the event of any conflict or discrepancy, the order of precedence set out in Section 2.1 applies. Accordingly, the Terms of Contract and the Service Description prevail over the tenderer’s SLA. The SLA may specify and supplement the applicable support arrangements and service levels, provided that it complies with, and does not fall below, the requirements set out in the procurement documents. |
| 20 | 03.09.2026 | 10:12h | The first sentence of Section 8.2 appears to be incomplete. We assume that the word "end" or equivalent wording may be missing. Could the contracting authority please clarify and correct the provision accordingly? | Terms of Contract | Yes. Clause 8.2 of the Terms of Contract is corrected as follows: "The Agreement shall end on 31 July 2029. It may be terminated by either party at the end of a calendar year, but for the first time effective 31 December 2027. Notice of termination must be given in writing no later than two months before the end of the relevant calendar year. The contract may be extended, subject to mutual agreement by the parties and available funding." |
| 21 | 07.09.2026 | 09:07h | Criterion C1 of the Declaration of Eligibility requires proof of references for supplies and services "delivered or performed over the last three years before the deadline for the submission of tenders". Are contracts that are still ongoing at the tender submission deadline admissible as references, provided the services evidencing the criteria were performed within the last three years? | Declaration of Eligibility | Yes. |
| 22 | 07.09.2026 | 09:07h | The Declaration of Eligibility provides fields for up to five references but states no required number. Is there a minimum number of references? | Declaration of Eligibility | Yes. Each reference criterion must be met through at least one reference. |
| 23 | 07.09.2026 | 09:07h | The Service Description defines one token as one learner enrolment in a hosted course but specifies no period of validity for an enrolment. Is a token consumed once, at the point of enrolment, or does an enrolment that remains open continue to occupy a token in subsequent contract years? | Service description | Yes, one enrollment consumes one token, the duration should not be taken into account within reason. Enrolled students should be given sufficient time to complete their training program without risk of consuming an additional token. |
| 24 | 07.09.2026 | 09:07h | Does a renewed enrolment of the same learner in the same module consume a new token? | Service description | No. A renewed enrolment of the same learner in the same module does not consume an additional token. One enrolment consumes one token. Learners should be able to access and complete the module within a reasonable period without consuming an additional token. |
| 25 | 07.09.2026 | 09:07h | Do Price List items 2-5 correspond to calendar years or to twelve-month contractual periods running from go- live? | Price list | The latter. Price list items 2-5 correspond, in terms of services provided, to platform operation. Platform operation starts with go-live of the platform. |
| 26 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Can EIT RawMaterials confirm if alternative standard licensing models-such as an Active User model offering unlimited course enrolments per user annually-would be accepted, or if a token-based model is a strict mandatory elimination criterion? | Pricing Model | A token-based model is necessary to ensure comparability of commercial offers. Other models would impair this fundamental principle and can therefore not be accepted. |
| 27 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | If token-based pricing is mandatory, can you confirm how token consumption is defined for repeat access (e.g., does re-enrolling in an updated version of a course or retaking a module consume an additional token)? | Pricing Model | Please see the answer to question #24. |
| 28 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Could you provide an estimated annual distribution breakdown for the anticipated 300,000 enrolment tokens across Years 1, 2, and 3? | Pricing Model | Yes. Please refer to the information provided on page 8 of the service description and in column B of the price list - 5,000 in 2026, 115,000 in 2027 (120,000 in total), 120,000 in 2028 (240,000 in total) and 60,000 in 2029 (300,000 in total). |
| 29 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Can you confirm the indicative budget allocated for this 3-year contract? | Pricing Model | No. |
| 30 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | What is the hard target go-live date for the LMS platform and initial course content? | Implementation & Deployment Schedule | There is no hard go-live date. The aim is to have at least a testable or Beta version of the platform enrolling learners by the end of year / before the start of 2027. The indicative number of 5,000 learners can register in 2026 stands as per the service description, however we consider this to be the maximum, and so this is optimistic. The idea is that we are looking for an off-the- shelf solution that can be quickly and easily deployed without significant implementation/customization time. |
| 31 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Is EIT RawMaterials planning a single go-live across all Academies, or will deployment be phased by Academy/partner project? | Implementation & Deployment Schedule | Single go live across academies, but this will not have a big, high-profile launch. Rather, we would like new courses to start being linked from the catalogue page on our website to the new LMS and we would like this to be smooth and natural in order to seemlessly phase out the temporary interim solution without friction. |
| 32 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | For the unified main catalogue site, does the LMS need to support real-time bi-directional API synchronisation, or is automated, scheduled one-way metadata export sufficient? | Catalogue & External API Integration | Automated, scheduled, one-way metadata export is indeed sufficient. Real-time bi-directional API sync would be interesting and would likely be evaluated as favourable, assuming this is easy to set up with our website; but this is not a requirement. |
| 33 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Will deep-linking and Single Sign-On (SSO) be required to pass users directly from the central catalogue site into specific course modules within the LMS? | Catalogue & External API Integration | No. SSO and deep-linking are not required. However, solutions that facilitate traffic tracking from the central catalogue site or advertising channels to the LMS, and thereby improve the user experience, may be of interest. |
| 34 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Can EIT RawMaterials share technical documentation or API specifications (e.g., authentication protocol, endpoint structure, rate limits) for the central third-party learner database? | Learner Database & Reporting Integration | Technical documentation and API specifications for the central learner database will not be made available during the tender procedure. Detailed technical specifications required for implementation may be provided to the successful tenderer following contract award.. Tenderers are referred to the requirements set out in Section 2.2 of the Service Description, in particular the section “Reporting and integration with third-party database”, and should describe the relevant reporting, export and REST API integration capabilities of their proposed LMS. |
| 35 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Is real-time event-driven reporting (e.g., via webhooks) required when a learner completes a course, or is scheduled batch push/pull acceptable? | Learner Database & Reporting Integration | No. Real-time event-driven reporting, including via webhooks, is not required. Scheduled batch push/pull reporting is acceptable, provided that enrolment and completion data can be made available to the central learner database with minimal manual effort (cf. Section 2.2 of the Service Description). |
effort (cf. Section 2.2 of the Service Description).
[Seite 7]
| # | Receipt of Question | Question | Reference | Answer / Information | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 36 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | For course redemption codes, does EIT RawMaterials require an external voucher generation engine, or will native LMS access code generation suffice? | Access Codes, Credentialing & Branding | Native LMS access code generation will suffice. |
| 37 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Are third-party credentialing integrations (such as Sertifier or Europass) required for Day 1 launch, or can they be implemented post-launch as a secondary phase? | Access Codes, Credentialing & Branding | Third-party credentialing integrations may be implemented post- launch as a secondary phase. The priority is to ensure a timely deployment of the LMS. |
| 38 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Has EIT RawMaterials conducted pre-tender platform demonstrations, and if so, were specific LMS architectures already evaluated? | Access Codes, Credentialing & Branding | No. |
| 39 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Our pricing is based on number of active users, not tokens, an active user can login and access as many courses as they are enrolled on, within a 12 month term, in this sense they would count as one token. We do not offer a model where an single active user could count as several tokens. Please confirm if this is acceptable or if we are disqualified? If this is acceptable please confirm anticipated number of active users for year 1,2 and 3. | Access Codes, Credentialing & Branding | Please refer to the answer to question #26. The tender must comply with the token-based pricing model. An active-user pricing model cannot be accepted. |
| 40 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Is the catalogue site already built, and can they provide its API specification? | Access Codes, Credentialing & Branding | The current catalogue site is available at: https://eitrawmaterials.eu/education-skills/our-trainings. API specifications will not be made available during the tender procedure. Please refer to the answer to question #34. |
| 41 | 07.09.2026 | 15:26h | Can EIT RawMaterials provide the REST API specification for the central learner-reporting database? | Access Codes, Credentialing & Branding | The REST API specification for the central learner-reporting database will not be made available during the tender procedure. Please refer to the answer to question #34 and #40. |
| 42 | 10.09.2026 | 15:26h | In "1.2_EITRM-LMS_Declaration of Eligibility", do we understand correctly that we shall enter "Yes" in column F if we fulfil the criteria and leave column G blank? | Declaration of Eligibility | Yes. |
| 43 | 10.09.2026 | 15:26h | "2_EITRM-LMS_Service Description_v1.1.pdf" p. 3: The ToR mention "downloadable files" and "web content". Could you specify file types? | Service Description | No exhaustive list of file types is prescribed. The LMS should support common formats, such as PDF, DOCX and PPTX, as well as web-based content, including URLs or web links. |
| 44 | 10.09.2026 | 15:26h | 2_EITRM-LMS_Service Description_v1.1.pdf" p. 4: "Email triggers can be configured per course or per course group": Could you specify what you mean by course group? A group of learners in a course (subset of users in a course) or a group of courses (aggregate of courses) | Service Description | The key requirement is robust, trigger-based email automation. Ideally, triggers should allow conditions based on pre-defined learner groups, including learners enrolled in a specific course. Groups of courses may also be relevant, for example where courses are grouped by career path or materials value chain, but this is not a strict requirement. |
| 45 | 11.09.2026 | 17:47h | Can you please provide the first name, last name and email address of all individuals that will require access to a trial portal? This will ensure that we can create an account for them and provide access credentials with our submission. | Service Description | The relevant contact details will be communicated to potential tenderers separately by way of a bidder message. |
| 46 | 11.09.2026 | 17:47h | We understand that changes can't be made to the Tender Letter, but as the T&Cs are currently being negotiated, can we add a clause to note that these are under negotiation? We can't agree to the T&Cs as-is. | Terms of Contract | No. The process for submitting proposed amendments to the given IT-Service Agreement has been specified in previous replies. Please see the answer to question #3. This process shall only take place within the tender period, i.e. all proposals regarding the contract terms must be submitted and eventual amendments - if deemed appropriate - shall be made by EIT RawMaterials before this deadline. |
RawMaterials before this deadline.