FUL1945500 · investigation viewNo currently-active master agreement in the city’s Active Contracts dataset names this vendor. That’s common and doesn’t mean the money is untracked — large payments are often made via delivery orders under a master agreement that has since expired (the city only publishes active ones), by a joint-venture / related legal entity different from the contracting firm, or they’re a transfer, debt-service, grant, or direct disbursement with no procurement contract at all. To chase the scope, search Austin Finance Online Contracts and the Council records for “NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP” using the links below.
The City department & division that cut these checks — this is why one vendor can show up under several programs and funds (each program on the Overview is a department). Rows marked transfer / non-operating are money moved through a budget line (citywide transfers, debt service) rather than a service performed here — a balance-sheet flow, not a purchase.
Every check to this vendor (raw checkbook feed) →
City checkbook dataset (8c6z-qnmj) →
Austin Finance Online — search solicitations / contracts →
Search City Council records for “NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP” →
Reading the source-doc column below: a CT number is a contract (it links straight to the contract record). A DO (delivery order) is an internal payment reference against a master agreement — those numbers are not searchable in the solicitations portal, so to find the scope, search Austin Finance Online by vendor name (“NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP”) under Contracts, or use the Council-records search above.
Scope: checks in the current snapshot (2026-07-28) at or above the snapshot’s minimum size. For this vendor’s complete payment history, use the raw checkbook feed linked above.