Open this link on a larger screen to see the verification queue.
1 works across 1 implementing agency, recommended by 1 member of parliament. No allocation figure is published per district — every rupee below is summed from the works themselves.
The people a district authority actually supervises. Vendor concentration is counted from the payment records: an agency paying almost everything to one vendor is worth a question, not an accusation.
| # | Agency | Works | Completed | Sanctioned | To verify | Avg score | Top vendor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dangs(DISTRICT COLLECTOR DANG_IDA) 1 high risk | 1 | 0 | ₹10.00 L | 1 | 77.4 | Swara Enterprises 39% of spend · 8 vendors |
Whose funds paid for this district’s works.
| Member | Works | Sanctioned | To verify |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dharmasthala Veerendra Heggade Nominated Rajya Sabha | 1 | ₹10.00 L | 1 |
Sector read from each work’s description.
| Sector | Works | Sanctioned | To verify |
|---|---|---|---|
| Community Buildings | 1 | ₹10.00 L | 1 |
Patterns across an agency’s whole book of work. None of these move any individual work’s score.
Round figures are normal and similar works legitimately cost the same. One figure covering nearly every work is what this looks for, and it means the costing is worth seeing, not that it is wrong.
Ranked by score. Cost is judged against comparable works in this district and sector, so a high cost score means unlike its neighbours — not overpriced.
| Work | Agency | Status | Sanctioned | Delay | Cost vs peers | Score | Band |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Construction of Dining Hall ₹1,000,000 against a ₹250,000 median for Community Buildings works in DANGS (300% above, 18 peer works) | Dangs(DISTRICT COLLECTOR DANG_IDA) | Recommended | ₹10.00 L | 609 d | +300% | 77.4 | HIGH |