Frequently asked questions

The contract records come from Karnataka's public procurement portal (KPPP). Ward boundaries follow BBMP's 2023 final 225-ward delimitation, and the locality-to-ward schedule is parsed from BBMP's final delimitation notification of 25 September 2023. We scraped the data on 30 June 2026, covering contracts from 21 August 2023 to 1 April 2026. Every figure on this site traces back to those public records — the Data & Sources page carries the specific links.

Road, drain and asphalting works awarded by BBMP, as published on KPPP. That's the scope. Contracts from other departments, non-road civic works, and anything tendered after our scrape window are not here. Absence from this site means "outside our scope or window," not "no work happened."

Because BBMP awarded these contracts. The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) was Bengaluru's municipal body when these contracts were tendered and awarded. It has since been dissolved — the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) became operational on 2 September 2025. But the contracts, wards, and winning bids shown here all belong to the BBMP era, so we name BBMP as the awarding authority throughout.

No. These are the old BBMP 225 wards, from the final delimitation notified on 25 September 2023. Under the GBA, Bengaluru is being redrawn into 369 wards across 5 city corporations (UDD notification No. 289 BBS 2025, dated 19 November 2025). That new structure post-dates our data, so we've kept the 225 BBMP wards the contracts were actually filed under. Matching BBMP-era contracts to new-era ward boundaries would introduce errors, so we don't.

This is a one-time snapshot of the public record as it stood during the scrape window above. There are no scheduled refreshes. If we add newer data later, it will be clearly labelled as a separate snapshot — this one stays a fixed archive of its period.

610 of the 1,734 contracts in this dataset — about 35% — list no winning contractor in the public record. That doesn't necessarily mean the work wasn't awarded — it means the winner was never published in the tender record we can access. Since naming the winner is the whole point of this site, we show that gap openly rather than hide the contracts that have it.

These are contracts BBMP filed with no ward number attached. As filed, they total ₹316.6 crore. We were able to place ₹3.3 crore of that back into specific wards — 11 contracts where the title itself states the ward, and 4 where the contract names a locality that BBMP's own schedule maps to a single ward. That leaves ₹313.3 crore that we could not confidently assign to any ward, which we report as untagged rather than guess.

It depends on how a contract was placed. Contracts where BBMP stated the ward in the title are high-confidence — it's BBMP's own number. Contracts we inferred from a locality name are medium-confidence and carry a visible disclaimer telling you it's inferred, not official. Where a locality spans more than one ward, or the name is ambiguous, we deliberately leave the contract unplaced. A confident wrong answer is worse than an honest "unknown."

No. A low bid can reflect genuine competition, a padded estimate, or aggressive underbidding that later shows up as poor work or cost overruns — the record here can't tell you which. What this site gives you is the verifiable starting point: who won, at what price, against what estimate. Drawing conclusions from a single number would be exactly the kind of confident guess we refuse to make elsewhere.

Each ward card lists the road/drain/asphalting contracts filed under that ward. For each, you'll see the work, the winning contractor's name, the winning bid, and how that bid compared to the government's own estimate. The card also shows per-ward summary metrics, and separates ward-tagged contracts from untagged ones placed there, so you always know how confident each placement is.

The government sets an estimated cost for each work before bidding. The figure shows how the winning bid compared — for example, a hypothetical −24% would mean the winning bid was 24% below the government estimate. On its own this isn't proof of anything good or bad; it's just context on how the award priced against the official estimate (see the previous question).

Bengaluru locality names are heavily duplicated — the same name can appear in several wards. When the search can't be sure which ward you mean, it refuses to guess rather than send you to the wrong one. If that happens, try a different spelling, drop a pin on the map, or browse the map directly.

No. There are no accounts, no cookies, and no third-party tracking. Anything you type in the search box is matched entirely within your browser and is never transmitted or stored. An anonymous count of visits is the only figure recorded.

Complaints go to your current city corporation, not the dissolved BBMP. Call GBA's civic helpline 1533 or use the official Sahaaya 2.0 grievance platform — every ward card also shows which of the five new corporations your old ward now falls under. The How Can You Help? page walks you through it. We don't publish per-ward officer names and numbers: no current, official 225-ward officer directory exists, and publishing a wrong or stale personal number causes real harm. If GBA publishes a verified directory, it will appear here.

Please do. Write to transparency.foundation@proton.me with the tender ID or ward number and what looks wrong. Corrections matter more to us than being right the first time — if a placement, name, or figure is wrong, we want to fix it and say so.

Yes. The underlying government records are already public, and our compiled dataset and this site's content are released into the public domain — no permission or attribution needed, though a link back helps others find the originals. See the Data & Sources page for the specific sources and links.