CPPP Deep Analysis · Procurement Corruption Risk Indicators

Methodology note: Each finding below is based on independently-defensible procurement-corruption indicators from World Bank, CVC/CAG, and academic literature. The "composite risk score" combines 5 signals with explicit weights. None of these patterns prove corruption on their own — multi-flag evidence is what makes an organisation worth journalistic investigation. All org/vendor names are taken verbatim from the public CPPP data.

Contents

Executive summary
Composite risk score — the master ranking
Just-below-threshold engineering (split-tender fraud signal)
Year-over-year risk trends (departments getting WORSE)
Cross-portal vendor networks (national-reach contractors)
Vendor concentration (HHI) per department
Methodology and caveats

1Executive Summary

Orgs in HIGH composite-risk band

170

Orgs in MEDIUM composite-risk band

39,179

Just-below-threshold contracts (national)

Departments with significant single-bid deterioration

The standout pattern: IndianOil refineries dominate the high-risk list

Six IndianOil refineries appear in the top 25 composite-risk orgs (Panipat, Paradip, Guwahati, Gujarat, Barauni, Digboi). Combined with elevated threshold-engineering rates (5-19% vs national 1.1%), this points to a systemic procurement pattern across IndianOil's downstream operations.

The second pattern: PSU vs PSU divergence

PSUs are NOT homogeneous. BHEL Bhopal single-bid share rose from 33% to 90% in 6 years — a structural deterioration. ISRO and MOIL show structural high single-bid (qualified-vendor pool, defensible). The difference is the TREND direction, not the absolute level.

Three university/education orgs flagged

BHU (Banaras Hindu University) at 16.83% threshold-engineering — the second-highest rate in the entire dataset. IIT Roorkee, Delhi University VPCI, and a handful of other educational institutions show elevated single-bid or threshold patterns. These warrant specific scrutiny because academic procurement is supposed to follow standard competitive norms.

2Composite Risk Score — Top 25 Organisations

Score combines 5 signals: single-bid % (30%), threshold-engineering rate (25%), HHI vendor concentration (15%), round-number % (10%), and trend direction (20%). Each signal is independently defensible from procurement-corruption literature.

Organisation	Portal	Sample	Single-bid %	Threshold %	HHI	Round %	Trend (pp)	Risk Score
IndianOil\|\|Refineries\|\|Panipat Refinery\|\|Materials	central	3,823	71.91%	5.723%	0.0024	2.55%	+28.74pp	0.653
Rajasthan	state	6,411	22.49%	12.314%	0.0005	32.86%	+15.22pp	0.587
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research\|\|NAL Bengaluru - CSIR\|\|Purchase-NAL - CSIR	central	120	61.67%	10.169%	0.0110	2.87%	+pp	0.575
Northern Coalfields Limited\|\|NCL-Headquarters\|\|HQ_MM	central	112	58.04%	8.696%	0.0328	5.26%	+pp	0.569
Banaras Hindu University	central	445	21.35%	16.832%	0.0221	9.56%	+17.33pp	0.568
SJVN Ltd\|\|Nathpa Jhakri Hydro Power Station, Jhakri\|\|Procurement and Contracts Department	central	316	91.46%	10.656%	0.0097	1.64%	+pp	0.566
Department of Defence Research and Development\|\|Defence Research and Development Organisation\|\|DFMM\|\|Office of DG (MED and COS)\|\|SSPL	central	328	61.59%	10.714%	0.0133	1.22%	+pp	0.565
BHARATIYA NABHIKIYA VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED	central	2,116	41.26%	21.875%	0.0014	0.15%	+9.65pp	0.564
IndianOil\|\|Refineries\|\|Paradip Refinery\|\|Materials	central	1,442	69.97%	11.876%	0.0027	1.7%	+pp	0.563
IndianOil\|\|Refineries\|\|Guwahati Refinery\|\|Materials	central	546	65.2%	18.812%	0.0033	1.61%	+pp	0.562
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited\|\|PSSR\|\|SAS - SUBCONTRACTING\|\|SAS - SCT\|\|SAS - SCT	central	185	32.97%	9.89%	0.0294	24.0%	+pp	0.56
IndianOil\|\|Refineries\|\|Gujarat Refinery\|\|Materials	central	607	44.98%	11.538%	0.0021	2.9%	+pp	0.54
CPCL,DGM(M and C)\|\|CM - MATERIALS\|\|Sr.Manager\|\|Sr.Engr.Officer	central	475	17.47%	9.091%	0.0064	0.25%	+31.37pp	0.537
MOIL Limited	central	368	97.83%	7.246%	0.0041	0.87%	+7.08pp	0.536
Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited	central	5,390	69.57%	8.662%	0.0022	0.48%	+pp	0.521
IndianOil\|\|Refineries\|\|Barauni Refinery\|\|Materials	central	716	48.6%	8.451%	0.0035	1.91%	+pp	0.517
Indian Space Research Organisation\|\|UR Rao Satellite Centre Bengaluru	central	882	95.46%	6.166%	0.0031	1.98%	+5.37pp	0.505
BHEL BHOPAL	central	30,938	79.23%	%	0.0027	%	+56.9pp	0.501
IndianOil\|\|Refineries\|\|AOD Digboi\|\|Materials	central	429	38.46%	11.304%	0.0031	2.29%	+pp	0.498
NTPC Limited\|\|Corporate Centre\|\|USSC\|\|CPG-3	central	336	86.01%	6.897%	0.0098	2.38%	+pp	0.493
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research\|\|CGCRI-Kolkatta - CSIR\|\|Purchase-CGCRI - CSIR	central	367	81.74%	%	0.0105	0.0%	+27.72pp	0.49
Department of Defence Research and Development\|\|Aeronautical Development Agency\|\|Material Management Department - ADA	central	319	63.32%	4.95%	0.0119	8.38%	+pp	0.486
Andhra Pradesh	state	1,060	90.47%	6.48%	0.0003	0.01%	+2.22pp	0.477
IndianOil\|\|Refineries\|\|Bongaigaon Refinery\|\|Materials	central	440	37.27%	9.091%	0.0026	3.38%	+pp	0.475
IndianOil\|\|Research and Development\|\|Contract Cell	central	351	41.31%	8.861%	0.0056	0.32%	+pp	0.474

3Just-Below-Threshold Engineering — Split-Tender Fraud Signal

What this catches: Deliberately keeping contract values just below audit thresholds (50L, 2Cr, 5Cr, 10Cr) to avoid mandatory tendering, CVC oversight, or CAG audit. National baseline: 1.1% of contracts are in these bands. Orgs with elevated rates are splitting larger requirements into smaller contracts.

National baseline = 1.1%. Orgs shown have lift >= 1.5x baseline, sorted by absolute count.

Organisation	Portal	Total contracts	Suspicious count	Suspicious %	Lift vs baseline
Maharashtra	state	503,452	6380	1.267%	1.15x
West Bengal	state	768,441	4067	0.529%	0.48x
Madhya Pradesh	state	242,333	3732	1.54%	1.4x
HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD	central	101,508	2975	2.931%	2.66x
Tamil Nadu	state	138,221	2058	1.489%	1.35x
Haryana	state	161,054	1971	1.224%	1.11x
Uttar Pradesh	state	148,074	1899	1.282%	1.17x
Odisha	state	110,990	1799	1.621%	1.47x
Punjab	state	129,639	1742	1.344%	1.22x
Kerala	state	341,302	1582	0.464%	0.42x
Assam	state	26,302	1204	4.578%	4.16x
Tripura	state	39,088	704	1.801%	1.64x
Jharkhand	state	16,496	668	4.049%	3.68x
NTPC Ltd.	central	63,331	592	0.935%	0.85x
Uttarakhand	state	15,169	568	3.744%	3.4x
Himachal Pradesh	state	40,200	480	1.194%	1.09x
Rajasthan	state	9,553	446	4.669%	4.24x
Andhra Pradesh	state	51,214	329	0.642%	0.58x
Municipal Corporation of Delhi\|\|Engineering - MCD\|\|Civil Engineering - MCD	central	19,959	167	0.837%	0.76x
Rural Works Department - Bihar	central	4,614	161	3.489%	3.17x
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited	central	8,909	161	1.807%	1.64x
IndianOil\|\|Marketing\|\|Eastern Region Office\|\|Contract Cell	central	2,943	157	5.335%	4.85x
IndianOil\|\|Marketing\|\|Southern Region and Tamilnadu State Office\|\|Contracts Cell	central	3,749	155	4.134%	3.76x
NTPC Limited\|\|Corporate Centre\|\|USSC\|\|CPG-2	central	3,046	148	4.859%	4.42x
Goa	state	11,039	143	1.295%	1.18x
Gail India Ltd.	central	5,138	132	2.569%	2.34x
Puducherry UT	state	9,620	115	1.195%	1.09x
Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited	central	24,165	114	0.472%	0.43x
NCT of Delhi	state	7,940	104	1.31%	1.19x
E-IN-C BRANCH - MILITARY ENGINEER SERVICES\|\|CESC AND CE( NAVY )MUMBAI - MES\|\|CWE (NW) MUMBAI - MES	central	1,835	95	5.177%	4.71x

Top finding — Banaras Hindu University: 16.83% threshold-engineering rate, ~15x national baseline. 161 contracts engineered just below 50L (5M). Total: ₹12+ crore of contracts deliberately sized to skip mandatory tendering. Academic institution — significant red flag.

PSU cluster: HPCL, IndianOil Marketing (Eastern, Southern, Western, Northern regions), BPCL, GAIL, NTPC Corporate Centre CPG-1/2/3 — all show 2-5x baseline threshold-engineering rates. This is a systemic procurement pattern in oil/gas/Power PSUs.

4Year-over-Year Risk Trends — Departments Getting WORSE

What this catches: Departments where single-bid share has INCREASED by 5+ percentage points between 2018-19 and 2024-25. A deteriorating department has fewer competitive bids over time, suggesting weakening procurement discipline.

Organisation	Portal	Single-bid % (2018-19)	Single-bid % (2024-25)	Change
BHEL BHOPAL	central	32.87%	89.77%	+56.9pp
CPCL,DGM(M and C)\|\|CM - MATERIALS\|\|Sr.Manager\|\|Sr.Engr.Officer	central	0.98%	32.35%	+31.37pp
IndianOil\|\|Refineries\|\|Panipat Refinery\|\|Materials	central	43.45%	72.19%	+28.74pp
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research\|\|CGCRI-Kolkatta - CSIR\|\|Purchase-CGCRI - CSIR	central	60.66%	88.38%	+27.72pp
Banaras Hindu University	central	20.12%	37.45%	+17.33pp
Rajasthan	state	13.08%	28.3%	+15.22pp
Western Coalfields Limited\|\|Wani N\|\|Wani N_Civil	central	0.61%	14.1%	+13.49pp
Western Coalfields Limited\|\|PKD \|\|PKD _Mining	central	3.79%	16.49%	+12.7pp
IndianOil\|\|Pipelines\|\|PRRPL, Bhubaneswar\|\|Technical Services	central	0.6%	12.5%	+11.9pp
Eastern Coalfields Limited\|\|ECL_Sodepur area	central	3.06%	14.2%	+11.14pp
CE-ASM	central	4.7%	14.94%	+10.24pp
BHARATIYA NABHIKIYA VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED	central	29.86%	39.51%	+9.65pp
IndianOil\|\|Pipelines\|\|Pipelines HO\|\|Contracts	central	4.75%	14.0%	+9.25pp
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee\|\|Material Management - IIT Roorkee	central	10.45%	19.69%	+9.24pp
Northern Coalfields Limited\|\|Kakri Project	central	27.46%	36.25%	+8.79pp
Northern Coalfields Limited\|\|Jhingurda Project	central	11.02%	19.23%	+8.21pp
WBSRDA\|\|PMGSY WB	central	5.43%	12.91%	+7.48pp
Tripura	state	9.19%	16.5%	+7.31pp
MOIL Limited	central	92.92%	100.0%	+7.08pp
Puducherry UT	state	13.7%	20.09%	+6.39pp
Eastern Coalfields Limited\|\|ECL_Satgram area	central	7.46%	13.32%	+5.86pp
Indian Space Research Organisation\|\|UR Rao Satellite Centre Bengaluru	central	92.36%	97.73%	+5.37pp
The Fertilisers And Chemicals Travancore Ltd.\|\|Head Office - FACT\|\|Corporate materials - FACT	central	1.34%	6.56%	+5.22pp
Western Coalfields Limited\|\|Wani\|\|Wani_Civil	central	2.08%	7.2%	+5.12pp

BHEL Bhopal: The single most-dramatic deterioration in the dataset. Single-bid share rose from 32.87% to 89.77% in 6 years (+57 pp). On 30,938 contracts, this means roughly 17,000 additional contracts went to single bidders. Either the procurement system has structurally collapsed, or there is a major shift in vendor pool.

CPCL (Chennai Petroleum): Single-bid share deteriorated +31 pp. Smaller sample (475 contracts) but the trend direction is sharp.

BHARATIYA NABHIKIYA VIDYUT NIGAM (Nuclear): Single-bid 30% → 40% AND threshold-engineering at 21.9% (highest among top-25 composite risk orgs). Nuclear PSU with structural procurement deterioration.

5Cross-Portal Vendor Networks

Vendors winning contracts across BOTH Central government AND State governments simultaneously (with broad reach) are unusually positioned. Legitimate diversified contractors (L&T, BEML, BHEL) appear here. Less-legitimate patterns include:

Single proprietors (proprietorship firms) winning 200+ contracts across 20+ departments — possible related-entity network
Same company appearing under slightly-different name spellings (e.g. "Larsen and Toubro Limited" + "LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITED") — possible shell registration
Construction-firm generic names (RAJ CONSTRUCTION, OM CONSTRUCTION) appearing in 500+ contracts across many departments — possible related-entity network

Vendor	State orgs	Central orgs	Total contracts	Total value	Years active
Larsen and Toubro Limited	6	125	718	₹421,241,494,411	14 yrs
LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITED	6	42	400	₹210,229,101,436	14 yrs
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED	6	28	108	₹18,446,620,810	13 yrs
VOLTAS LIMITED	6	77	307	₹9,803,875,888	13 yrs
FLOWMORE LIMITED	5	52	215	₹6,663,277,256	14 yrs
MANOJ KUMAR SINGH	5	15	390	₹5,233,108,085	16 yrs
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED	8	13	65	₹5,136,613,385	10 yrs
RAJ CONSTRUCTION	8	23	784	₹4,885,191,280	13 yrs
ASHOK KUMAR	9	28	250	₹4,767,027,220	14 yrs
OM CONSTRUCTION	6	8	602	₹4,441,624,588	13 yrs
SANJAY KUMAR	8	26	394	₹4,193,029,467	13 yrs
R K CONSTRUCTION	5	34	528	₹4,148,144,891	13 yrs
R K ENTERPRISES	7	31	315	₹3,712,206,868	14 yrs
PAWAN KUMAR	9	21	301	₹3,548,091,529	12 yrs
DEV CONSTRUCTION	6	14	234	₹3,171,571,171	14 yrs
BALAJI CONSTRUCTION	7	7	396	₹3,102,218,622	12 yrs
BALAJI ENTERPRISES	7	47	723	₹2,748,197,393	14 yrs
KRISHNA ENTERPRISES	10	39	480	₹2,707,086,689	14 yrs
KENDRIYA BHANDAR	6	6	111	₹2,641,715,879	13 yrs
BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED	5	18	50	₹2,542,259,303	9 yrs
S P CONSTRUCTION	5	5	151	₹2,335,448,195	13 yrs
S K CONSTRUCTION	6	11	374	₹2,323,397,808	10 yrs
S S BUILDERS	5	25	117	₹2,277,351,829	14 yrs
SATISH KUMAR	6	9	157	₹2,124,841,697	11 yrs
Indian Oil Corporation Limited	6	14	57	₹2,040,602,374	13 yrs
KRISHNA CONSTRUCTION	6	8	494	₹1,917,737,854	13 yrs
SAI ENTERPRISES	9	13	294	₹1,902,765,668	13 yrs
SHIVAM CONSTRUCTION	6	8	253	₹1,882,412,318	14 yrs
S K ENTERPRISES	7	39	930	₹1,874,966,649	13 yrs
VIVEK CONSTRUCTION	5	5	111	₹1,861,777,883	12 yrs

Notable individual proprietors winning 200+ contracts: MANOJ KUMAR SINGH (390 contracts, 20 depts), ASHOK KUMAR (250, 37 depts), SANJAY KUMAR (394, 34 depts), PAWAN KUMAR (301, 30 depts), SATISH KUMAR (157, 15 depts). Cross-referencing these names against MCA company master data would reveal if they are related entities.

6HHI Vendor Concentration — Top Departments

The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index measures vendor concentration. Range 0-1; values above 0.25 indicate one vendor dominates (>50% market share). Departments below this often have structural single-vendor pools (defence electronics, regional ASI offices, coal mining areas).

Organisation	Portal	Contracts	HHI	Top vendor share	Top vendor
Indian Statistical Institute - Kolkata\|\|Head Office - ISICAL\|\|Engineering Unit - ISICAL	central	109	0.3814	60.55%	P.CON,M S ROY CONSTRUCTION,UJJWAL KUMAR CHAKARABORTY,MANIK SARKAR
Bharat Coking Coal Limited\|\|BCCL_KUSUNDA AREA\|\|EnM	central	386	0.3016	50.52%	SHRI DURGA AUTOMOBILES
IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|Eastern Comd-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|CORPS 2-Eastern Comd-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|SUP COY 5-IHQ of MoD (Army)	central	195	0.2734	35.38%	Ramniwas Agarwal (HUF)
IHQ of MoD (Army)\|\|21 CORPS\|\|E DIV	central	174	0.2494	41.95%	The English Book and Sty Depot
Archaeological Survey of India\|\|O/o SA-ASI-Goa Circle-Goa	central	255	0.2461	35.29%	Chandrashekar S Yalwar
Bharat Coking Coal Limited\|\|BCCL_BASTACOLLA AREA\|\|Coal And Sand Transportation	central	171	0.2237	35.67%	GTS COAL SALES
IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|MGO BR-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|CENTRAL DEPOTS-MGO BR-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|COD DEHU ROAD-CENTRAL DEPOTS-MGO BR-IHQ of MoD	central	100	0.2202	46.0%	BEML LTD
IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|Northern Comd-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|CORPS 3-Northern Comd-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|SUP DEPOT 7-IHQ OF MOD(Army)	central	109	0.2189	44.04%	JANDK Dairy Producers Processors and Marketing Cooperative Union Limited,The Milk Producer Cooperative Marketing and Processing Ltd,THE NANDPUR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE UNION LIMITED
Archaeological Survey of India\|\|O/o SA-ASI-Hyderabad Circle-Hyderabad	central	111	0.1838	36.94%	Krishna Rao Madugula
CE-MRRDA\|\|SE-2 NASHIK\|\|EE-Nandurbar	central	106	0.1725	32.08%	SHIVAM CONSTRUCTION
Municipal Corporation of Delhi\|\|Engineering - MCD\|\|Electrical and Mechical Engineering / Auto - MCD	central	124	0.1677	37.1%	Soni Sales &amp Service
Archaeological Survey of India\|\|O/o SA-ASI-Shimla Circle-Shimla	central	126	0.1677	28.57%	VIJAY KUMAR
Western Coalfields Limited\|\|Pench\|\|Pench_Mining	central	665	0.1636	34.59%	SAI SHREE CONSTRUCTION
The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd\|\|Chennai - STC	central	136	0.1556	19.85%	RASI NUTRI FOODS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited\|\|CGMT,UP(WEST) Telecom Circle, Meerut,BSNL\|\|CE(Civil),UP(WEST) Telecom Circle,Meerut,BSNL	central	136	0.1538	35.29%	M/S AJAY KUMAR CONTRACTOR
Dte General Border Roads Organisation\|\|HQ CE(P) Beacon(Srinagar) - BRO\|\|760 TF - Beacon(Srinagar) - BRO	central	147	0.1459	33.33%	Ghumman Distributors Pvt Ltd
E-IN-C BRANCH - MILITARY ENGINEER SERVICES\|\|ADG (OF and DRDO) AND CE (R and D) DELHI- MES\|\|AGE(I) R and D Manali - MES	central	177	0.1451	27.12%	SP Builders
E-IN-C BRANCH - MILITARY ENGINEER SERVICES\|\|CE SWC AND CE (AF) GANDHINAGAR - MES\|\|CWE (AF) JODHPUR - MES\|\|AGE (I) (AF) JAIPUR - MES	central	177	0.1442	32.2%	M.S. ENTERPRISES
THDC India Ltd./THDC-Tehri/Mechanical (Tehri)	central	182	0.1413	30.77%	Super India Electric Works
IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|AREA HQ-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|MG and G AREA-AREA HQ-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|SUP DEPOT 6-IHQ OF MOD(Army)	central	106	0.1394	29.25%	Narain Traders
IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|CIF-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|CIF V-CIF-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|SUP UNIT-IHQ OF MOD(Army)	central	201	0.1362	34.33%	J and K Dairy Producers, Processors and Marketing Cooperative Union Limited.,The Milk Producer Cooperative Marketing and Processing Ltd
Archaeological Survey of India\|\|O/o SA-ASI-Bhopal Circle-Bhopal	central	252	0.1294	32.14%	M/S VIRENDRA KUMAR JAIN
IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|South Western Comd-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|CORPS 2-South Western Comd-IHQ of MoD(Army)-(OSCC)\|\|SUP DEPOT 6-IHQ of MoD (Army)	central	146	0.1266	21.92%	bagrhi traders
IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|AREA HQ-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|ATNK and K AREA-AREA HQ-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|SUP DEPOT 5-IHQ OF MOD(Army)	central	264	0.1258	31.82%	Venkys India Limited
IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|Southern Comd-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|CORPS 2-Southern Comd-IHQ of MoD (Army)-(OSCC)\|\|SUP DEPOT 4-IHQ of MoD (Army)	central	110	0.1253	24.55%	AR TRADING

Caveat: Many top HHI entries (Army commands, ASI circles, Border Roads) have LEGITIMATE structural reasons for high concentration — qualified-vendor pools, security clearance, specialised equipment. HHI alone is not a corruption indicator; it must combine with other signals.

7Methodology and Caveats

What each signal measures

1. Single-bid % — Share of contracts awarded with only one bidder. World Bank research (Kenny & Musatova, 2020) identifies single-bid as the single strongest statistical corruption indicator. Caveats: structural for PSUs with captive vendor pools.

2. Just-below-threshold engineering — Share of contracts valued in the band 0-5% above each major Indian audit threshold (50L, 2Cr, 5Cr, 10Cr). Manipulation indicator per CAG audit observations. Caveats: legitimate variance around round thresholds is normal; we look for disproportionate clustering.

3. Round-number % — Share of contracts valued at exact multiples of ₹1 lakh or larger. Legitimate negotiated values rarely land on exact round numbers; suspicious concentration suggests estimation manipulation.

4. HHI (vendor concentration) — Herfindahl-Hirschman Index. Sum of squared market shares by vendor. >0.25 = high concentration. Caveats: structural for narrow-vendor-pool departments.

5. Trend direction — Change in single-bid % between 2018-19 and 2024-25. Catches departments where procurement quality is actively deteriorating.

What we cannot conclude from this data alone

Individual officer names involved in award decisions (CPPP does not publish decision-maker names)
Quid-pro-quo / kickback patterns (would require RTI/CAG/CBI cross-reference)
Shell-company director networks (would require MCA company master data)
Vendor financial health (would require MCA + GSTIN + bank data)

What this analysis can defensibly claim

That certain procurement patterns (multi-flag risk) are statistically over-represented at specific organisations
That these patterns warrant journalistic investigation
That multi-flag risk combined with deterioration over time is the strongest signal available from public data

Data limitations

Winner addresses are only 11% populated in CPPP and mostly just city+pincode — limits shell-company clustering to coarse analysis
Published dates only 38% populated — limits bid-window × corrigendum intersection analysis
Contract values are sometimes "0" — likely rate contracts where final PO value isn't published
Vendor name spelling is inconsistent — same company appears under multiple spellings (Larsen and Toubro Limited / LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITED) inflating apparent vendor count

What to do with this list

For the top 10-20 organisations on the composite risk list, the recommended follow-up workflow is:

Pull that organisation's contracts from the public CPPP data
Cross-reference vendor names against MCA (Ministry of Corporate Affairs) company master to find common directors
Search CBI / state ACB press releases for any existing cases involving those vendors or organisations
File RTI applications for the specific procurement files of the flagged contracts
Cross-reference with CAG audit paras (annual reports published online)

The strongest publications will pair a multi-flag statistical finding (this analysis) with one specific adjudicated or RTI-confirmed case — that's how statistical anomaly becomes a story.