Anatomy of a $6M No-Bid Contract

Municipal procurement processes were designed for an era when document review was expensive and time-consuming. AI-augmented citizen investigation changes that calculus. This case demonstrates what one concerned citizen can accomplish with public records and modern tools.

Body / subject: Anatomy of a $6M No-Bid Contract

Data / source: Texas Public Information Act responses

First published: date not yet reconciled · Updated Feb 9, 2026

Read this in the original

This entry provides context and source notes. Its detailed explanation remains in the original build; a separate visual breakdown has not yet been authored here.

Start with the question and coverage below.
Open the original to inspect the records, controls and evidence behind the finding.
Check the source dates and methodology before comparing figures or drawing a conclusion.

Explore the original build

What you’re looking at

A scroll-driven investigative narrative tracing how a no-bid, sole-source contract at Houston Metro escalated from $281K to $6M+ through a network of conflicts of interest, buried audit findings, and deliberate structural opacity.

The question behind it

This investigation reconstructs the full anatomy of the Evolve Houston contract at Houston Metro — from the board chair's undisclosed conflict of interest to the 47% overcharge documented in Metro's own audit, to the service failures revealed in an internal EY consulting binder. Built entirely from TPIA responses, board minutes, audit records, and IRS 990 filings.

Why it matters

Open the full visualization

Sources & method

Texas Public Information Act responses
Metro Board Minutes and Resolutions
Sole Source Audit #24-3187
EY Knowledge Resource Binder (December 2025)
Evolve Houston IRS 990 filings (2022, 2023)
Granicus Meeting Archive

Method

All claims sourced from public documents obtained through the Texas Public Information Act, IRS 990 filings, and official board minutes. No anonymous sources. No speculation.