Audits

Dated reviews of Bidlo production data. Start with the findings, then open the reports or download the evidence.

Project field presence by source

Download CSV

81,851 projects · 41 source buckets · Snapshot Oct 6, 2026, 6:10 AM CDT

24 current fields, grouped by theme, including contractor and item relationships. Each cell shows field presence within that source’s active shared projects. Presence does not establish validity or completeness.

TxDOT · Name: 100% (23,731 of 23,731 projects)

Field presence within each source, grouped by theme. Red means low presence; green means high presence. Select a cell for exact counts.
Source / projectsIdentityLocationClassificationDatesValueParticipantsItemsProcessing
NameOwnerSourceProject IDurlStateLocationCountryCountyDistrictProject TypeProject Sub-typeProject SectorBid DateProposal Published DateStart DateCreated AtProject ValueAwarded ToBiddersSubcontractorsProject ItemsItem countAI Parsed
TxDOT23,731
SAM17,363
bonfire11,177
PublicPurchase5,664
FDOT5,529
civcast4,889
AmtekPro3,392
TxSmartBuy2,973
DemandStar1,349
City of Austin1,001
Presence0%25%50%75%100%
Top 10 sources by project count. Scroll sideways for all fields; select any cell for counts.Data and methods JSONReproduce query

Project coverage

Snapshot Oct 6, 2026, 6:41 AM CDT

Each flow counts projects. Percentages are of all projects.

Edit view

Saved tabs stay in this browser. View links share the field selection.

Loading the coverage snapshot…

Biggest gaps to review

Download gap cohorts

Ranked by missing projects where stored status or item count indicates data is expected. These are review candidates; source evidence is needed to confirm a defect.

  1. PublicPurchase · Awarded To4,731 missing of 4,731 eligible (100%)

    Project status is Awarded, but no valid Awarded To relation.

  2. AmtekPro · Project Items65 missing of 1,681 eligible (3.9%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

  3. SAM · Project Items32 missing of 1,234 eligible (2.6%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

  4. TxSmartBuy · Project Items31 missing of 572 eligible (5.4%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

  5. ConstructConnect · Awarded To30 missing of 30 eligible (100%)

    Project status is Awarded, but no valid Awarded To relation.

  6. civcast · Project Items18 missing of 2,649 eligible (0.7%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

View all 14 gap cohorts and check definitions
  1. FDOT · Project Items12 missing of 197 eligible (6.1%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

  2. City of Abilene · Project Items7 missing of 34 eligible (20.6%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

  3. bonfire · Project Items5 missing of 723 eligible (0.7%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

  4. McLennan County · Project Items3 missing of 26 eligible (11.5%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

  5. VBX · Project Items2 missing of 35 eligible (5.7%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

  6. City of Austin · Project Items2 missing of 185 eligible (1.1%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

  7. dallas_co · Project Items2 missing of 39 eligible (5.1%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

  8. TxDOT · Project Items1 missing of 14,094 eligible (<0.1%)

    Positive stored Item count, but no valid linked Project Items.

Project Items is expected when a stored numeric Item count is greater than zero. Awarded To is expected when the current Project Status resolves to Awarded. Counts can be stale; source availability and lifecycle policy still need verification. Missing Bidders or Subcontractors is not classified as a defect without an applicable source requirement. Check cohorts may overlap and must not be added together.

Audit history

JSON index for agents

Each audit preserves its observation window and methods. New audits are added as separate entries so the team can refer back to earlier findings.