Engineering Firm Video Statistics

Key takeaways

1. Channels that say they are engineers or engineering firms posted 24.1% of YouTube’s 586 most-viewed ‘civil engineering’, ‘structural engineer’ and ‘engineering firm’ videos and drew 8.2% of their views; engineers placed in the U.S. drew 2.2% (our read, Nov 2026). (Mark Studios) See details
2. Engineering firms and consultancies posted only 15 of those videos; videos of 60 seconds or less drew 58.3% of all the views in the sample. (Mark Studios) See details
3. Employers had 367,840 wage and salary civil engineers in May 2025, at a median annual wage of $100,840; BLS estimates that only 1.9% of civil engineer jobs are held by the self-employed. (BLS) See details
4. The Florida Board of Professional Engineers’ directory listed 50,842 licences on September 3, 2026; 48.7% carry an address outside Florida, and 4,236 are in Palm Beach, Broward and Martin counties (our count). (FBPE, Mark Studios) See details
5. The U.S. had 102,344 private engineering-services establishments (NAICS 541330) in 2025, 31.5% more than in 2019, while their jobs rose 19.3% (our calculation from BLS QCEW). (BLS, Mark Studios) See details
6. Governments paid 36.3% of engineering-firm receipts in 2022, and the U.S. government supplied 57% of KBR’s revenue in fiscal 2025. (Census, KBR) See details
7. NCEES reports a 62% first-time pass rate on the PE Civil: Structural exam and 66% on the FE Civil exam for January-June 2026. (NCEES) See details
8. U.S. colleges reported 116,254 engineering bachelor’s degrees in 2023-24, 26.0% more than in 2013-14; women earned 25.4% of them (our count of IPEDS data). (NCES, Mark Studios) See details

Who makes the most-viewed engineering videos on YouTube?

Channels that say they are engineers or engineering firms drew 8.2% of the views of the most-viewed 'civil engineering', 'structural engineer' and 'engineering firm' videos on YouTube on November 6, 2026, from 24.1% of the videos (our count). We read YouTube's own view-sorted search results, the top 200 for each of the three searches, through the YouTube Data API, with no country filter. The three lists held 586 unique videos from 349 channels (our count). We sorted every channel by hand from its own title, description and video text. An engineer here is any channel whose own text says its owner is an engineer, uses an engineer title (Er., Engr.) or credential, or is an engineering firm or consultancy, anywhere in the world; 57 channels qualified. We did not check any of them against a licence register.

On a stricter reading, counting only channels whose description itself says engineer or firm (not just the channel name, a title prefix or a video title), 6.2% of the views remain (our count). One channel moves the total a lot: a single 30-second short from an India-based civil engineer held 26.6% of all engineer-channel views. The top channel in the whole sample was a faceless house-design channel; leaving it out, engineers drew 9.3% of the remaining views (our calculation). The median engineer-channel video had 70,936 views, against 207,699.5 for the whole sample, and the median engineer channel had 27,700 subscribers, against 469,000 for media, entertainment and music channels (our count).

Most of the views went to people who explain engineering without saying they practise it. Explainer creators with no stated credential drew the largest share, and one of them alone drew 9.9% of all views (our count). Nine faceless clips that name no maker drew almost a fifth of the views; the most-viewed, a 34-second epoxy-floor clip, had 108,086,006 views. Construction channels posted few videos but one 17-second formwork short gave them a large share. Of the 407 videos whose title says 'engineer' or 'engineering', 285 came from channels that do not state they are engineers (our count). The 10 most-viewed channels held 54.6% of all views, and none of them was an engineer channel (our count). 18 videos had 10 million views or more.

How many U.S. engineers and engineering firms appear in YouTube's top engineering results?

Engineer channels placed in the United States by their own text or by their country setting drew 2.2% of the views of the 586 videos on November 6, 2026, from 66 videos and 17 channels (our count). Only 5 engineer channels named a U.S. place in their own text, and their 6 videos drew 0.1% of views (our count). India-set engineer channels drew 3.6%, more than U.S.-placed engineers (our count). Channels whose country setting is India drew 35.7% of all views, and U.S.-set channels 30.0% (our count).

9 of the 57 engineer channels stated a licence or chartered title in their own text: P.E., licensed Professional Engineer, Australia's CPEng or the UK's Chartered Engineer (our count). 6 of them are U.S.-placed and state P.E. or licensed Professional Engineer; together they drew 0.9% of views. Engineering firms and consultancies, as opposed to individual engineers, posted 15 of the videos from 12 channels, 4 of them U.S. firms, and drew 0.1% of the views (our count). 0 engineer channels tied themselves to Florida; the only Florida-based channels in the sample were two local TV news stations, in Tampa Bay and Orlando (our count).

What does each engineering search return?

The three searches return different worlds. Only 13 videos appeared in two or more of the three lists (our count).

• 'Structural engineer': engineer channels posted 43.0% of the 200 videos but drew 6.6% of the views, while faceless compilations drew 45.2% (our count).
• 'Civil engineering': engineer channels drew 9.5% of the views; explainers drew 28.1% and coaching and school channels, mostly Indian exam coaching, 16.1% (our count).
• 'Engineering firm': media and news channels drew 48.6% of the views and brands 18.5%; engineer and engineering-firm channels drew 3.3% (our count). Only 61 of the 199 videos had 'engineering firm', 'engineering company' or 'engineering consultancy' in the title, and 8 were Indian university admission 'firm list' updates. The median video in this list had 10,576 views, against 1,031,962.5 for 'civil engineering'.

How long and how new are the most-viewed engineering videos?

Videos of 60 seconds or less were 30.0% of the 586 videos on November 6, 2026 and drew 58.3% of their views (our count). The median short video had 617,825.5 views; the median longer video had 117,098.5. Engineers post fewer shorts: 19.1% of engineer-channel videos ran 60 seconds or less, against 38.5% for explainers and 77.8% for faceless compilations. Videos with #shorts in the title drew 30.2% of the views. At the other end, videos longer than 20 minutes (lectures, exam marathons and documentaries) were 20.0% of the sample (our count).

The list is recent. 40.8% of the videos were published in 2025 or 2026, 153 of them in 2026. Videos from 2024 or later drew 78.5% of the views (our count).

Which engineering topics do the most-viewed videos cover?

Concrete and structure basics lead by count: 61 videos (10.4%) were about concrete, rebar, columns, beams, footings or foundations by title (our count). Bridges and failures are fewer but draw well. 11 videos had 'bridge' in the title and drew 4.9% of the views. 17 videos had 'collapse' or 'fail' in the title and drew 5.5% of views; 5 of them were about the World Trade Center on 9/11, none from an engineer channel (our count).

• Drones and inspection: 0 titles mentioned drones and only 3 videos mentioned them anywhere in the text; 4 titles mentioned inspection (our count).
• Careers: 48 videos had career, job, salary, interview or 'day in the life' wording in the title, 15 of them from engineer channels. 6 of the 7 'day in the life' videos came from engineers. 25 titles put salary or earnings up front (our count).
• Exams: 1 title named the U.S. FE, PE or SE exams, against 15 titles about Indian engineering exams such as GATE, SSC JE and JEE (our count).

None of the 586 videos carried YouTube's altered or synthetic content flag in the API, although one channel with 5 videos in the sample states in its description that all its videos are AI-generated (our count). 7 videos were marked made for kids.

How active are engineering firms and associations on YouTube?

The official channels of ASCE, NCEES, NSPE, ACEC and seven large engineering firms posted 596 videos in the year to November 6, 2026, with a median of 127.5 views each (our count from the YouTube Data API). 0 of these eleven channels had a video in the 586 most-viewed search results. The seven firms posted 238 videos, with a median of 228.5 views; 17.6% ran 60 seconds or less. ACEC, the trade association of engineering firms, posted 272 of the 358 videos from the four bodies (our count). Each channel was found from a link on the organisation's own website, except Kimley-Horn's, which we found by handle and checked against its description.

Subscriber counts are rounded by YouTube and view counts include ad views. The search sample is YouTube's own ranking on one day, not a count of all engineering videos.

How many civil, mechanical and electrical engineers are there in the U.S., and what do they earn?

U.S. employers counted 367,840 wage-and-salary civil engineers (SOC 17-2051) in May 2025 (BLS OEWS). Their mean annual wage was $108,670 (BLS OEWS) and the median was $100,840 (BLS OEWS). The lowest-paid tenth earned less than $68,240 (BLS OEWS) and the highest-paid tenth more than $163,220 (BLS OEWS). BLS does not publish structural engineers as a separate occupation; they are counted inside civil engineers. These figures come from the OEWS employer survey, so they leave out self-employed engineers and partners who draw no wage, and BLS says OEWS estimates are not built for year-over-year comparison.

The 17-2000 group counts every engineering occupation, including industrial, aerospace and other engineers that are not civil, mechanical or electrical. Software developers are a different occupation group and are not in it.

Why do different BLS surveys give different engineer counts?

Counting every class of worker, BLS's Employment Projections program put civil engineers at 380.6 thousand jobs in 2025 (BLS Employment Projections), and the whole engineers group at 1,835.7 thousand (BLS Employment Projections). The household survey (CPS) counted 525 thousand employed people whose main job was civil engineer in 2025 (BLS CPS Table 11). The counts differ because each survey counts a different thing: payroll jobs (OEWS), all jobs including the self-employed (Employment Projections), and people who name the occupation as their main job (CPS). BLS notes that its 2025 CPS averages cover 11 months, because October 2025 data were not collected during the federal shutdown.

Women were 21.8% of employed civil engineers in 2025 (BLS CPS Table 11) and 11.2% of employed mechanical engineers (BLS CPS Table 11), against 47.1% of all employed people (BLS CPS Table 11). The shares come from a household sample and carry sampling error.

Who employs civil engineers, and how many are self-employed?

BLS estimates that 1.9 percent of civil engineer jobs were self-employed in 2025 (BLS Employment Projections), and 1.3 percent of jobs across the engineers group (BLS Employment Projections). The Occupational Outlook Handbook puts 51% of civil engineer jobs in engineering services firms, 11 percent in state government and 10 percent in local government, in each case excluding education and hospitals (BLS Occupational Outlook Handbook). Mechanical engineers are spread more widely: 20% of their jobs were in architectural, engineering, and related services, with the rest mostly in manufacturing and research (BLS Occupational Outlook Handbook).

The OEWS industry estimates count the payroll of engineering firms directly. Establishments in NAICS 541330 Engineering services employed 1,202,060 wage-and-salary workers in May 2025 (BLS OEWS), of them 377,740 in engineering occupations (BLS OEWS), 192,850 civil engineers (BLS OEWS) and 33,230 civil engineering technologists and technicians (BLS OEWS). Engineers are a minority of an engineering firm's staff; technicians, drafters, surveyors, managers and office staff make up much of the rest.

Will there be more engineering jobs over the next decade?

BLS projects civil engineer employment to grow 6.4 percent from 2025 to 2035 (BLS Employment Projections), against 3.5 percent for all occupations (BLS Employment Projections). It projects 11.2 percent growth for mechanical engineers (BLS Employment Projections), 9.9 percent for electrical engineers (BLS Employment Projections) and 8.5 percent for the engineers group as a whole (BLS Employment Projections). BLS expects about 22.7 thousand openings a year for civil engineers (BLS Employment Projections), most of them to replace engineers who change occupations or retire rather than new positions. The Handbook ties civil engineering demand to upgrading bridges, roads, water systems and other infrastructure, and notes that public projects depend on federal, state and local funding.

How many civil engineers work in Florida and its southeast metros?

Florida employers counted 23,750 wage-and-salary civil engineers in May 2025 (BLS OEWS), at a median annual wage of $98,570 (BLS OEWS). Florida's location quotient for civil engineers was 1.01, so they made up about the same share of jobs there as nationally (BLS OEWS). Florida also counted 10,740 mechanical engineers (BLS OEWS).

The Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach metro area (Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties) counted 6,850 civil engineers (BLS OEWS) and 240 environmental engineers (BLS OEWS). The Port St. Lucie metro area (St. Lucie and Martin counties) counted 240 civil engineers (BLS OEWS); BLS published no environmental-engineer estimate there. BLS publishes the 17-2000 engineers group only for the nation, not for states or metros. Small metro estimates carry wide sampling error.

How many engineering firms are there in the U.S.?

The United States averaged 102,344 private engineering-services establishments in 2025, with 1,202,400 jobs and average annual pay of $128,450 (BLS QCEW). Census's NAICS manual defines industry 541330 Engineering services as establishments primarily engaged in applying physical laws and principles of engineering in the design, development, and utilization of machines, materials, instruments, structures, processes, and systems (NAICS 2022 manual). In 2019 the same count was 77,802 establishments and 1,008,116 jobs (BLS QCEW). So establishments rose 31.5% and jobs 19.3% over six years, and the average establishment shrank from 13.0 to 11.7 jobs (our calculation). QCEW counts establishments with workers covered by unemployment insurance, so it leaves out owners with no employees.

Census counts differ by method and year. The 2022 Economic Census counted 64,121 employer establishments (Census Economic Census) owned by 47,367 employer firms (Census Economic Census), and County Business Patterns counted 63,233 employer establishments in 2023 (Census CBP). Census and BLS use different business registers and reference periods, so their establishment counts are not interchangeable.

How big are engineering firms?

Most engineering firms are small. Of the firms that operated all of 2022, 20,861 had fewer than 5 employees and 298 had 500 employees or more (Census Economic Census). County Business Patterns counted 33,565 engineering-services establishments with fewer than 5 employees in 2023 (Census CBP)., or 53.1% of all employer establishments that year (our calculation).

Many engineers work with no employees at all. Census counted 89,254 nonemployer engineering-services businesses in 2024 (Census Nonemployer Statistics), up from 87,884 in 2023 (Census Nonemployer Statistics). Nonemployer businesses are mostly sole proprietors with receipts of $1,000 or more; the 2023 count sits beside the 2023 County Business Patterns count of employer establishments above. That is 1.39 nonemployer businesses for every employer establishment in 2023 (our calculation).

What do engineering firms earn, and from what work?

U.S. employer engineering-services establishments had receipts of 304,267,132 thousand dollars in 2022 (Census Economic Census). By product line, engineering consulting services were 22.4 percent of receipts (Census Economic Census), engineering for commercial, public and institutional buildings 13.2 percent (Census Economic Census) and engineering for transportation projects 11.7 percent (Census Economic Census), of which highway and roadway projects alone were 6.7 percent (Census Economic Census). Sub-lines sit inside their parent line, so the shares do not add up.

By class of customer, governmental bodies (federal, state and local) accounted for 36.3 percent of engineering-firm receipts in 2022 (Census Economic Census), and other engineering firms for 11.3 percent (Census Economic Census). The distribution comes from establishments that answered the class-of-customer inquiry.

Census's Annual Integrated Economic Survey reports advertising only for the wider group NAICS 5413 Architectural, engineering, and related services. Employer firms in that group spent 1,709,473 thousand dollars on purchased advertising and promotional services in 2024 (Census AIES), a figure that leaves out in-house marketing staff and includes architecture, surveying, testing and drafting firms.

How many engineering firms are in Florida and in Palm Beach, Broward and Martin counties?

Florida averaged 7,587 private engineering-services establishments in 2025, with 78,432 jobs and average annual pay of $114,779 (BLS QCEW). In 2019 Florida's engineering firms averaged 59,049 jobs (BLS QCEW). Florida's engineering-firm jobs rose 32.8% from 2019 to 2025, faster than the 19.3% national rise (our calculation). County Business Patterns counted 5,260 Florida employer establishments in 2023 (Census CBP), and Census counted 7,905 Florida nonemployer engineering businesses in 2024 (Census Nonemployer Statistics).

All three counties' figures are published, not suppressed. Together the three counties held 13.6% of Florida's engineering-firm jobs in 2025, 10,675 of 78,432 (our calculation). QCEW jobs are 2025 annual averages for private firms; County Business Patterns counts employer establishments in mid-March 2023; nonemployer counts are businesses without paid staff.

How many professional engineers are licensed in Florida?

The Florida Board of Professional Engineers' public directory dated September 3, 2026 lists 50,842 professional engineer licences (our count), and 46,938 of them are Current and Active (our count). Another 3,049 are Delinquent (our count). The board is administered by the Florida Engineers Management Corporation (FEMC) under contract with the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, and the directory is FEMC's own download; Florida does not license engineers by discipline, so the list has no civil, structural or mechanical field.

FEMC's own rounded figure agrees: it says licensed professional engineers in Florida doubled from 25,000 in 1998 to nearly 50,000 (FEMC 2024-25 annual report) (FEMC). In the 2024-25 renewal year FEMC renewed 41,603 PE licences (FEMC) and assisted 42,130 engineers through renewal as of June 30, 2025 (FEMC).

DBPR's wider count covers every licence the board oversees, not only PEs: 71,567 active and 72,172 active plus inactive in fiscal year 2023-24 (DBPR annual report). That line combines professional engineers with other board licences, and DBPR does not split it.

The board keeps two smaller lists. Its engineer intern file holds 29,819 records (our count), and 612 engineers are on its voluntary Structural Engineering Recognition Program list (our count). In fiscal year 2024-25 FEMC also issued 575 certifications of special inspectors of threshold buildings (FEMC).

How many Florida-licensed engineers have an address outside Florida?

Almost half: 48.7% of the Florida PE licences in the September 2026 directory carry a mailing address outside Florida (our calculation). 26,089 carry a Florida address (our count). Texas is the largest out-of-state group, with 2,391 licences (our count). Out-of-state engineers who design projects in Florida must hold a Florida licence to seal those plans, so the register counts the market for Florida work, not the people who live there.

The pattern is not unique to Florida. In Connecticut's open licence file, 73.6% of the 13,084 active PE licences carry an address outside Connecticut (our calculation). In Colorado's file, 49.7% of 33,355 active PE licences have a mailing address outside Colorado (our calculation).

How many licensed engineers are in Palm Beach, Broward and Martin counties?

Palm Beach, Broward and Martin counties together hold 4,236 Florida PE licences by mailing address in the September 2026 directory (our count), or 16.2% of all Florida-address licences (our calculation). The county is the one on the licensee's address of record, which may be a home or an office.

Of the Palm Beach County licences, 1,846 are Current and Active (our count). The full county table, including active counts, is in our public CSV.

How fast is Florida's engineer register growing?

2,923 licences in the September 2026 directory were first issued in 2025, more than in any earlier year still on the list (our count), and 46.3% of all listed licences were first issued in 2016 or later (our calculation). These are surviving licences only: lapsed and null or void licences drop out of the directory.

FEMC received 4,502 licensure applications in fiscal year 2025-26, approved 4,202 and denied 108 (FEMC 2025-26 annual report). A year earlier it received 4,217 (FEMC). The average time to issue a licence fell from 82.52 days in 2024-25 (FEMC) to 65.78 days in 2025-26 (FEMC).

In the first quarter of fiscal year 2026-27 (July to September 2026), FEMC issued 908 PE licences (FEMC quarterly report) and received 808 professional engineer and endorsement applications (FEMC). It also received 79 complaints, 62 against licensees and 17 against unlicensed people or firms (FEMC).

How many Florida candidates pass the FE and PE exams?

About half. Of the NCEES PE exam results FEMC counted from July 2025 to June 2026, 1,331 were passes and 1,212 were fails (FEMC 2025-26 annual report). On the FE exam the split was 1,978 passes and 1,987 fails (FEMC). A year earlier the PE figures were 1,143 passes and 962 fails (FEMC), and the FE figures 1,796 passes and 1,686 fails (FEMC). FEMC notes that candidates register with NCEES directly, so these are the results it receives, and they mix first-time and repeat takers.

What are the national PE and FE exam pass rates by discipline?

NCEES, the exam body that writes and scores both exams, reports first-time PE pass rates from 60% to 73% in the main civil, mechanical, electrical and environmental disciplines for January to June 2026, across all its member boards (NCEES). Repeat takers pass far less often.

On the FE exam, NCEES counted 6,247 first-time FE Civil takers from EAC/ABET-accredited programs within 12 months of graduation in January to June 2026, the largest discipline (NCEES). Their pass rates by exam:

How many engineering firms hold a state licence?

Connecticut's open licence file lists 1,045 active professional engineering firm credentials (our count). Florida's engineering business registry (certificates of authorization under Fla. Stat. 471.023) has no public download: FBPE releases business records only on a public records request, so we do not report a Florida firm count.

Where a state records the exam discipline, civil dominates. Among Colorado PE records that name a specialty, 56.0% name Civil (our calculation), though most Colorado records name none.

What does it take to become a professional engineer in Florida?

A four-year degree, two national exams, four or more years of experience and a state laws test. Under the 2026 Florida Statutes, a candidate must graduate from a board-approved engineering science or engineering technology curriculum of 4 years or more (s. 471.013). The board then certifies applicants who are at least 18 and have at least 4 years of active engineering experience after an engineering science degree, or 6 years after an engineering technology degree (s. 471.015(2)). Each applicant may take the FE or the PE exam three times before the board can require extra coursework or a review course (s. 471.013(1)(e)). Every applicant must also pass the board's multiple-choice Laws and Rules examination with a score of 90% or more (R. 61G15-20.0016, F.A.C.).

Engineers licensed elsewhere get credit for time in practice. After 10 years of holding a licence in another state, Florida treats the applicant as having passed the FE exam; after 15 years, as having passed both exams (s. 471.015(5)). The statute caps the initial licence fee and the biennial renewal fee at $125 each; the board sets the actual fees by rule (s. 471.011).

The rules are made by the Board of Professional Engineers, which has 11 members: 9 licensed engineers and 2 laypersons (s. 471.007). Unlike most Florida boards, its administrative, investigative and prosecutorial work is done by a nonprofit, the Florida Engineers Management Corporation (FEMC), which has a seven-member board of directors, five of them appointed by the engineers' board (s. 471.038).

Who can practise engineering in Florida without a licence?

Several groups, within limits. Florida's "industrial exemption" covers regular full-time employees of a business not engaged in engineering as such, when their work is limited to the design or fabrication of manufactured products and servicing them (s. 471.003(2)(c)). A public officer of a state, county or city unit is exempt only on projects with a total estimated cost of $10,000 or less (s. 471.003(2)(b)). Licensed electrical, plumbing, air-conditioning and mechanical contractors may design systems they install when the system is valued at $125,000 or less and stays under size limits such as 600 amperes on a home (s. 471.003(2)(h)).

Other large states draw similar lines. Texas's exemption covers a private company's own staff working on its non-public buildings or on products it makes, and a person who falsely claims to be a licensed engineer loses it until the 10th anniversary of that claim (Tex. Occ. Code 1001.057). Texas also exempts public works of $8,000 or less involving electrical or mechanical engineering, and other public works of $20,000 or less (Tex. Occ. Code 1001.053). California's industrial exemption excludes manufacturing, utility, research and other industrial corporations from its engineers act, except for the provisions on civil engineers and civil engineering (Bus. & Prof. Code 6747).

How do Florida, Texas, California and New York compare on PE licensing?

All four ask for years of supervised experience, but the counts and the renewal rules differ. NCEES's 2026 Model Law, the template many states draw on, asks for a specific record of four years of progressive engineering experience after a qualifying degree (NCEES Model Law). The table sets each state's own text side by side.

California adds its own exam content: since 1988, its civil engineer exam must include separate tests of seismic principles and engineering surveying (Bus. & Prof. Code 6755.1). The California row above reflects the Act's text only; board rules can add to it.

What continuing education do Florida engineers need?

eighteen hours every two-year renewal under the board's rule, with no carryover of hours into the next cycle (R. 61G15-22.001, F.A.C.). The statute fixes the mix: one hour on ch. 471 and board rules, one on professional ethics and four hours in the licensee's area of practice, with the rest on any engineering topic (s. 471.017(3)). Hours may be earned at webinars and in-house courses, and up to 4 hours by serving on a committee of a recognised engineering society. Engineers who design work covered by the Florida Building Code must also complete at least a one (1) hour advanced course on each new edition of the Code (R. 61G15-22.001(3)).

Writing counts. Each published peer-reviewed paper or book in the licensee's area of practice equals 10 continuing education hours, and each other published paper or article equals 5 (R. 61G15-22.004). NCEES's Continuing Professional Competency Guidelines set a benchmark of 15 PDHs (professional development hours) a year (NCEES CPC Guidelines), and where a state allows carryover, at most 15 PDHs may move into the next period (NCEES CPC Guidelines).

How are engineering firms authorised, and how are documents sealed?

In Florida a firm needs a licensed engineer as its qualifying agent, and the firm-level qualification itself shall not require payment of a fee under the statute (s. 471.011(4)). If a firm's only qualifying agent leaves, the agent must tell FEMC within 24 hours and the firm must be requalified within 60 days, or stop practising (s. 471.023(4)). New York issues engineering business entities a certificate of authorization for three years, with an application fee of $125.00 including the first certificate and a $75.00 triennial renewal (Education Law 7210).

All final drawings, specifications, plans and reports filed for public record in Florida must be signed, dated and sealed, on paper or electronically. Wet, embossed and digital seals must be at least 1-7/8 inches across (R. 61G15-23.002). An engineer whose licence is revoked or suspended must surrender the seal within 30 days (s. 471.025(2)). Florida also runs a free Structural Engineering Recognition Program, created in 2022, for PEs who passed NCEES's 16-hour PE Structural exam; recognised engineers may say so in marketing and advertising (s. 471.055).

What are the FE and PE exams like?

Both are computer-based exams written by NCEES, the exam body, and given at Pearson test centers. The FE exam has 110 questions in a 6-hour appointment, 5 hours and 20 minutes of it exam time (NCEES), and NCEES charges a $225 exam fee (NCEES). The PE Civil exam, meant for engineers with at least four years of post-college experience, has 80 questions in a 9-hour appointment and an exam fee of $400 (NCEES); PE Mechanical and PE Electrical and Computer: Power use the same 80-question, 9-hour format.

The PE Structural exam is split into sections. Each breadth section has 55 questions (45 scored) in a 6-hour appointment, and each depth section from April 2026 has 60 questions (40 scored) in a 6.5-hour appointment (NCEES). NCEES charges $350 for each breadth and depth section (NCEES). State boards may add their own application fees on top of NCEES's.

How do Florida and federal agencies pick an engineering firm?

On qualifications first, price second. Florida's Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA) requires an agency to hold discussions with, and lets it require public presentations by, no fewer than three firms (s. 287.055(4)(a)). It then ranks no fewer than three firms in order of preference and may consider compensation only during negotiations, starting with the top-ranked firm (s. 287.055(4)(b)). The CCNA applies to projects whose basic construction cost exceeds the CATEGORY FIVE threshold of $325,000, or studies with fees above CATEGORY TWO, $35,000 (s. 287.017). A continuing contract may cover individual projects of up to $7.5 million in estimated construction cost, adjusted for inflation each July since 2025 (s. 287.055(2)(g)).

Federal agencies follow the Brooks Act, which requires discussions with at least 3 firms and a ranking of at least three (40 U.S.C. 1103). Under FAR 36.602-3, the evaluation board also recommends at least three firms in order of preference (FAR 36.602-3). The government estimates that Standard Form 330, the federal A-E qualifications form, takes 29 hours to complete (SF 330), and its Section F asks for 10 projects when the agency does not set a number (SF 330). For public works design, the fee may not exceed 6 percent of estimated construction cost (FAR 15.404-4).

How often must highway bridges be inspected?

Every 24 months as the default, under the National Bridge Inspection Standards that FHWA revised in 2022 (23 CFR 650.311). Bridges rated serious or worse must be inspected every 12 months at most (23 CFR 650.311(a)(1)(ii)), while bridges in satisfactory or better condition may go up to 48 months (23 CFR 650.311(a)(1)(iii)). Under the more rigorous risk method, a panel that must include at least two professional engineers sorts bridges into intervals of up to 12, 24, 48 or 72 months (23 CFR 650.311(a)(2)). Underwater inspections are due every 60 months by default (23 CFR 650.311(b)). A new or rehabilitated bridge needs its first inspection within 3 months of opening to traffic, and the rule allows special equipment, including advanced technologies listed in FHWA's Bridge Inspector's Reference Manual (23 CFR 650.313).

The people are regulated too. A team leader must be a registered professional engineer with 6 months of bridge inspection experience, or have 5 years of bridge inspection experience, or meet one of two degree-plus-experience paths (23 CFR 650.309(b)). Program managers and team leaders must complete 18 hours of FHWA-approved refresher training every 60 months (23 CFR 650.309). The standards name no drone or video method, so footage supports an inspection rather than replacing the qualified inspector.

What rules apply to drone footage of engineering projects?

The FAA's Part 107 small drone rules. A drone may not fly higher than 400 feet above ground level unless it stays within 400 feet of a structure, such as a bridge or tower under inspection (14 CFR 107.51). A remote pilot must be at least 16 years old and pass an aeronautical knowledge test (14 CFR 107.61), and may fly only if that test or recurrent training was completed within the previous 24 calendar months (14 CFR 107.65).

How much does government spend on the construction engineers design?

U.S. public construction spending ran at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of $546.8 billion in September 2026 (U.S. Census Bureau). The Census Bureau's Value of Construction Put in Place survey counts construction work done by or for federal, state and local governments in the month. It measures the size of the work, not engineering fees. September figures are preliminary and will be revised.

For the full year 2025, the Census Bureau's first annual estimate of public construction was $516.8 billion, 3.6% above 2024 (U.S. Census Bureau). In the first nine months of 2026, public construction came to $409,281 million before seasonal adjustment, against $404,754 million in the same months of 2025 (U.S. Census Bureau).

Highways are the largest public category. Public highway construction ran at an annual rate of $149.2 billion in September 2026 (U.S. Census Bureau) and totalled $141.9 billion in 2025, 0.9% below 2024 (U.S. Census Bureau). From January to September 2026, public highway and street work came to $113,568 million, against $110,600 million a year earlier (U.S. Census Bureau).

Public sewage and waste disposal construction grew 14.1% in 2025 and water supply 7.0%, while public power construction fell 6.7% (Census Bureau, February 27, 2026 release). Public highway and street spending in September 2026 was 3.5% above September 2025, and conservation and development 13.9% above.

How big is power construction, public and private?

Power construction, private and public combined, ran at an annual rate of $191,650 million in September 2026, 11.1% above a year earlier (U.S. Census Bureau). Most of it is private: private power construction was $171,658 million at an annual rate, up 12.1% (U.S. Census Bureau). For the full year 2025, the Census Bureau's first estimate of all power construction was $158,253 million (U.S. Census Bureau).

How many U.S. bridges are in poor condition?

The Federal Highway Administration's National Bridge Inventory counted 41,148 highway bridges in poor condition in 2026, out of 624,939 bridges (FHWA National Bridge Inventory). The 2026 table uses data as of August 4, 2026, and covers the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 268,737 bridges were rated good and 315,054 fair (FHWA). Good, fair and poor are FHWA's bridge condition classes.

Ten years earlier, the 2016 inventory counted 48,559 poor bridges out of 614,387 (FHWA National Bridge Inventory, 2016). Poor bridges in 2026 covered 217,000,522 square feet of deck, out of 4,548,152,281 square feet on all inventoried bridges (FHWA). On the National Highway System, 147,243 bridges were inventoried in 2026 and 4,144 were poor (FHWA).

Florida had 13,162 highway bridges in the 2026 inventory, 367 of them in poor condition (FHWA National Bridge Inventory).

The American Society of Civil Engineers, an association of civil engineers that campaigns for infrastructure investment, describes the bridge stock in its 2025 Report Card as more than 623,000 bridges, 6.8% of them poor, 49.1% fair and 44.1% good (ASCE 2025 Report Card). ASCE puts bridge rehabilitation needs at $191 billion (ASCE).

How much did the 2021 infrastructure law provide for highways, bridges and water?

The Federal Highway Administration states that the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58) provides approximately $350 billion for federal highway programs over fiscal years 2022 through 2026 (FHWA, archived page). Most of it is apportioned to states by formula; the rest goes through competitive grants. These are authorized amounts, not money spent. FHWA's Bipartisan Infrastructure Law pages returned an access error to scripts in November 2026, so the figures here come from Internet Archive copies captured in February 2025.

The law's Bridge Formula Program received $5.500 billion in each fiscal year from 2022 to 2026 (FHWA, archived fact sheet). FHWA splits it 75% by each state's share of the cost of replacing its poor bridges and 25% by its share of the cost of rehabilitating fair bridges (FHWA). Each state must set aside 15% of its share for off-system bridges, those on public roads that are not Federal-aid highways (FHWA).

When the bill passed in November 2021, the White House fact sheet described these headline amounts (White House fact sheet, archived):

• $110 billion in additional funding for roads, bridges and major projects.
• $55 billion for clean drinking water, including lead service line removal (White House).
• More than $65 billion for clean energy transmission and the power grid (White House).
• Over $50 billion to protect against droughts, heat, floods and wildfires (White House).
• $17 billion for ports and waterways and $25 billion for airports (White House).

The same fact sheet said 45,000 bridges were in poor condition in 2021 (White House). The 2026 National Bridge Inventory count is 41,148.

What grade did ASCE give U.S. infrastructure in 2025?

ASCE's 2025 Report Card for America's Infrastructure gave an overall grade of C, up from C- in the 2021 edition, with almost half of its 18 categories improving (ASCE 2025 Report Card). ASCE is a membership association of civil engineers and advocates more infrastructure spending, so its grades and gap estimates are an advocacy body's assessment, not government statistics.

The 2025 category grades ranged from a B for ports to a D for stormwater and transit (ASCE). The water and road categories that municipal and transportation engineers work on graded low: roads D+, drinking water C-, wastewater D+ and stormwater D (ASCE). ASCE says 39% of major roads are in poor or mediocre condition, down from 43% in 2020 (ASCE), and that U.S. sewers include nearly 17,500 wastewater treatment plants (ASCE).

How big is ASCE's infrastructure investment gap?

ASCE's 2025 Report Card puts the ten-year gap at $3.7 trillion for 2024 through 2033 (ASCE 2025 Report Card). ASCE estimates needs of $9.1 trillion for all 18 categories to reach a state of good repair (ASCE) and forecasts $5.4 trillion of public and private investment if Congress keeps recent funding levels. Its category table sums to a gap of $3,689 billion (ASCE). These are ASCE's own estimates, built partly on its 2024 Bridging the Gap economic study.

ASCE's Report Card home page, read in November 2026, prints a different figure: a $3.6 trillion investment gap over the next ten years (ASCE Report Card home page). The page does not say whether that is an update or a rounding. The history of ASCE's gap figure across editions is traced in the myths section below.

How big is the engineering and design services industry by revenue?

The ACEC Research Institute estimates that the U.S. engineering and design services industry earned $459 billion in revenue in 2024, 5.3% more than in 2023, and expected growth to slow to 2.3% in 2025 (ACEC Research Institute). The study was carried out by Rockport Analytics for the research arm of the American Council of Engineering Companies, a trade association of engineering firms that lobbies for infrastructure funding. It uses ACEC's own industry definition, not a single NAICS code.

The same study counts 1.7 million direct jobs in the industry in 2024 (ACEC Research Institute). It ranks Florida third among states for the industry's total economic value added, at $41 billion, behind Texas ($96 billion) and California ($94 billion) (ACEC Research Institute).

How many engineering degrees do U.S. colleges award each year?

U.S. colleges reported 116,254 bachelor's degrees in engineering in 2023-24, the newest (provisional) year of NCES's IPEDS completions data (our count). Engineering bachelor's degrees grew 26.0% from 2013-14 (our calculation), but they fell 8.3% from the 2018-19 level (our calculation). Across all award levels, from certificates to doctorates, colleges reported 195,308 engineering completions at 1,152 institutions (our count). These counts sum NCES's own institution-level data files for the whole CIP 14 engineering family, first majors only, in the 50 states and DC. The family also covers computer, aerospace and chemical engineering. It leaves out engineering technology degrees.

NCES's own Digest tables give the same picture for earlier years. They show 92,162 engineering bachelor's degrees in 2013-14 (NCES Digest table 318.30) and 123,017 in 2021-22 (NCES Digest table 318.30). Our 2013-14 count from the raw files is 92,246, within 0.1% of the Digest figure. NCES's long-run table uses a wider group: engineering plus engineering technologies, mechanic and repair technologies and construction trades. On that basis bachelor's degrees rose from 108,976 in 2013-14 (NCES Digest table 325.45) to 145,041 in 2020-21 (NCES Digest table 325.45).

Graduate degrees grew too. Colleges reported 54,608 engineering master's degrees and 11,730 research doctorates in 2023-24 (our count). The Digest counted 42,372 engineering master's degrees in 2013-14 (NCES Digest) and 42,997 in 2021-22 (NCES Digest), with 12,075 doctor's degrees in 2021-22 (NCES Digest). A degree is not a licence. The professional engineer licence also takes the NCEES exams and supervised experience, which are covered in the licensing section.

How many civil, mechanical and electrical engineering degrees are awarded?

U.S. colleges reported 13,496 civil engineering bachelor's degrees in 2023-24, at 289 institutions (our count). That is the whole CIP 14.08 civil series: general, geotechnical, structural, transportation and water resources engineering. Civil bachelor's degrees grew just 3.9% from 2013-14 while all engineering grew 26.0% (our calculation), so civil's share of engineering bachelor's degrees fell to 11.6% (our calculation). Civil engineering master's degrees fell 10.5% over the same decade (our calculation).

The Digest columns count one detailed code each. The last column sums the whole series from the raw IPEDS files, so it is a little wider. Civil engineering, general, is code 14.0801, defined as design of structural, load-bearing, transportation, water resource and material control systems (NCES CIP 2020). Structural engineering has its own code, 14.0803 (NCES CIP 2020), but only 338 awards of any level were reported under it in 2023-24 (our count). Most structural engineers graduate with a general civil degree. CIP 2020 also added 14.4701 Electrical and Computer Engineering (NCES CIP 2020), so some electrical programmes changed codes after 2020. That makes the electrical trend less clean than the civil and mechanical ones. The 2021-22 Digest also counted 4,100 general civil engineering master's degrees (NCES Digest).

What share of engineering degrees go to women?

Women earned 25.4% of U.S. engineering bachelor's degrees in 2023-24, up from 19.8% in 2013-14 (our calculation from IPEDS). In civil engineering the share was higher, 27.6% (our calculation). Women earned 17.2% of mechanical engineering bachelor's degrees (our calculation) and 16.2% of electrical engineering bachelor's degrees (our calculation).

The NCES Digest shows the same rise: women earned 18,259 engineering bachelor's degrees in 2013-14 (NCES Digest) and 31,100 in 2021-22 (NCES Digest), including 3,933 general civil engineering degrees (NCES Digest). On NCES's wider engineering-and-technologies basis, the women's share of bachelor's degrees went from 18.4 percent in 2013-14 (NCES Digest table 325.45) to 23.0 percent in 2020-21 (NCES Digest table 325.45). The National Science Board's Indicators report says that from 2012 to 2021 the women's share of engineering awards rose by 6 percentage points or less at every award level (NSF NCSES).

How many engineering graduate degrees go to international students?

About half. Nonresident students earned 50.8% of U.S. engineering master's degrees in 2023-24, against 7.2% of bachelor's degrees (our calculation from IPEDS). NSF's NCSES reports that temporary visa holders earned 60% of U.S. engineering doctorates in 2021 (NSF NCSES).

How many engineering degrees do Florida colleges award?

Florida colleges reported 5,802 engineering bachelor's degrees in 2023-24 at 24 institutions, up 38.4% from 2013-14 (our count from IPEDS). That is 5.0% of the U.S. total (our calculation). Women earned 25.1% of them (our calculation). Florida awarded 757 civil engineering bachelor's degrees in 2023-24, against 655 in 2013-14 (our count), and women earned 28.4% of them (our calculation). Mechanical engineering is larger in Florida, with 1,516 bachelor's degrees, against 747 in electrical engineering (our count).

Two public universities dominate. The University of Central Florida and the University of Florida together awarded 40.7% of the state's engineering bachelor's degrees (our calculation). The University of Central Florida also led in civil engineering with 145 bachelor's degrees, ahead of Florida International University with 118 (our count). The institution-level file lists every Florida college by code.

How many engineering programmes are accredited?

ABET, the accreditor for engineering, engineering technology, computing and applied science programmes, says it accredits 4,863 programmes at 950 colleges and universities in 42 countries (ABET). The count covers all four of its commissions worldwide, not only U.S. engineering degrees, and ABET prints no as-of date. ABET says over 200,000 students graduate from ABET-accredited programmes each year (ABET). Its reviews rely on more than 2,200 volunteers from academia, government and industry (ABET). ABET is an accreditor owned by member professional societies and does not sell to engineering firms.

Does the U.S. award fewer engineering degrees than other countries?

As a share of degrees, yes. NSF's NCSES reports that engineering made up 8% of first university degrees in the United States in 2020, against 9% in the United Kingdom (NSF NCSES). In China engineering made up 33% of first university degrees (NSF NCSES). NCSES notes that China's figure counts computer science as engineering, so the gap is wider than like for like. The figures come from data countries report to the OECD.

Engineering graduates also borrow the least. Among 2015-16 bachelor's graduates who took out federal student loans, engineering graduates had the lowest median amount borrowed of any major field, $27,000 (NSF NCSES).

How big are the publicly traded engineering firms, by staff and backlog?

The largest, AECOM, employed about 51,000 people at the end of fiscal 2025, about 18,000 of them in the United States (AECOM 10-K), and repeats Engineering News-Record's 2025 Design Survey, which ranked it the largest general architectural and engineering design firm in the world by 2024 design revenue (AECOM 10-K). None of the listed firms below counts its engineers or its licensed professional engineers separately in its annual report; each gives one headcount and one backlog for all disciplines together. The figures come from each company's own Form 10-K (Stantec: Form 40-F) filed with the SEC.

Staff counts cover every discipline. Jacobs' figure includes about 1,800 contingent workers (Jacobs 10-K); KBR's excludes about 9,000 people in its unconsolidated joint ventures (KBR 10-K); Fluor's 22,995 splits into 17,122 salaried staff, 4,602 craft and hourly workers and 1,271 agency staff (Fluor 10-K); Stantec's splits into about 13,200 in the United States, 9,400 in Canada and 11,400 elsewhere (Stantec AIF). Parsons gives no single total in its human-capital text but says over 10,600 employees hold degrees and over 3,600 hold advanced degrees and professional credentials (Parsons 10-K). Stantec's backlog is in Canadian dollars. NV5 was acquired in 2025 and has filed no 10-K since its fiscal 2024 report.

How many staff at a listed engineering firm hold a professional licence?

At Bowman Consulting, licensed professionals were about 35% of the workforce at December 31, 2025 (Bowman 10-K). It is the only firm in this group that puts a number on its licensed staff, and it counts licensed engineers, surveyors and other licence holders together. Willdan lists licensed electrical, mechanical, structural, geotechnical and civil engineers, land surveyors, building officials and inspectors among its staff without a count (Willdan 10-K). AECOM lists civil engineering, structural engineering, mechanical, geotechnical and electrical engineering among its technical skills (AECOM 10-K), and Fluor names piping, mechanical, electrical, control systems, civil, structural and architectural engineering (Fluor 10-K); neither gives revenue or headcount by discipline.

How much of a listed engineering firm's revenue comes from government?

It ranges from about 8% (U.S. federal) at Jacobs to 57% (U.S. government) at KBR in fiscal 2025. In fiscal 2025, governments of all kinds paid 50% of AECOM's $16,139.6 million revenue: $1,107.3 million (7%) from the U.S. federal government, $3,916.9 million (24%) from U.S. state and local governments and $3,019.6 million (19%) from non-U.S. governments; in fiscal 2023 the government share was 43% (AECOM 10-K). Each company measures its own client mix, so the rows below are not on one definition.

Within Tetra Tech's federal work, the Department of Defense paid 11.6% of revenue in fiscal 2025 and USAID 10.6%, down from 13.0% a year earlier (Tetra Tech 10-K). Bowman says it does not expect public work to become a majority of its revenue; about 73% of its 2025 revenue came from repeat customers that also paid it in 2024 (Bowman 10-K). Willdan's top 10 customers paid 50.7% of its fiscal 2025 contract revenue (Willdan 10-K), and clients in California paid 43.5%, New York 19.0% and Nevada 11.8% (Willdan 10-K).

Which engineering segments are the biggest, and which grew in 2025?

Jacobs' Infrastructure & Advanced Facilities segment earned $10,764,206 thousand from external customers in fiscal 2025, out of $12,029,783 thousand for the whole company, against $10,323,255 thousand in fiscal 2024 (Jacobs 10-K). Parsons' Critical Infrastructure segment grew 14.6% to $3,143,448 thousand in 2025 while its Federal Solutions revenue fell 20% (Parsons 10-K). Parsons also reports an overall contract win rate of 61% in fiscal 2025, down from 72% in 2024, and a re-compete win rate of 99.6% (Parsons 10-K); it is the company's own measure. Bowman ranked 72nd on ENR's Top 500 Design Firms list in 2025, up from 144th in 2021, the year it listed (Bowman 10-K).

What do engineering firms spend on advertising and on keeping staff?

Only two of the ten firms report an advertising figure, and both are small. Bowman Consulting spent $0.3 million on advertising in both 2025 and 2024 (Bowman 10-K), and NV5 Global spent $3,302 thousand in fiscal 2024, up from $2,767 thousand in 2023 and $1,977 thousand in 2022 (NV5 10-K). AECOM, Jacobs, Tetra Tech, KBR, Fluor, Parsons and Willdan give no advertising figure in these filings. On retention, Jacobs reported a voluntary employee turnover rate of 8.2% for fiscal 2025 (Jacobs 10-K), the only turnover rate in this group. For its talent pipeline Jacobs sponsored the 2025 International Science and Engineering Fair, which draws students from more than 300 affiliated science fairs (Jacobs 10-K).

Which listed engineering firms name drones, reality capture or digital twins as services?

Bowman, NV5, Tetra Tech and Parsons do, in their latest annual reports, without giving revenue for those services. Bowman lists drone inspection of transmission lines, high-altitude aerial orthoimaging, laser scanning and LiDAR imaging, and reality capture among its geospatial services (Bowman 10-K), and expects AI, generative design, 3-D building information modeling and interactive digital twins to improve design accuracy and shorten project timelines (Bowman 10-K). NV5 offered 3D laser scanning and unmanned aerial vehicle LiDAR mapping, used among other things for surveys of project progress (NV5 10-K). Tetra Tech applies AI-enabled software to condition assessments, digital twins, integration of satellite and drone imagery (Tetra Tech 10-K) and sells digital twin solutions for water and wastewater systems (Tetra Tech 10-K). Parsons says its infrastructure customers want AI, model-based systems engineering and digital twins (Parsons 10-K).

How often do annual reports filed with the SEC mention professional engineers, drones or digital twins?

Our count of SEC EDGAR full-text search results found 71 Form 10-Ks filed in 2025 containing the phrase "professional engineers", against 20 in 2001 and a peak of 150 in 2013 (our count). Most of these filings are not from engineering firms: oil and gas producers, drillers, refiners and royalty trusts filed 1,166 of the 1,968 matches over 2001-2025, many of them describing the independent petroleum engineers who estimate their reserves, while companies classed under engineering, architectural and surveying services filed 25 (our count). In all, 525 companies used the phrase (our count). The narrower "licensed professional engineers" appeared in only 80 annual reports in 25 years, none of them from a company in the engineering services codes (our count).

• "Engineering services": 352 filings in 2025, down from a peak of 531 in 2011 (our count). 2,421 different companies used it over 2001-2025; firms in the engineering services codes filed only 258 of the 10,579 matches and software companies 1,106; Jacobs and Fluor used it every year (our count).
• "Drone" or "drones" together with "inspection": 70 filings in 2025, against a peak of 77 in 2023 and 39 in all of 2001-2015 (our count). Companies in the engineering services codes filed 8 of the 465 matches, all from the inspection firm Mistras Group; Bowman Consulting's 10-Ks matched 4 times (2022-2025) and NV5's 3 times (2018-2020), under other industry codes (our count).
• "Digital twin" or "digital twins": 40 filings in 2025, against a peak of 48 in 2023; no 10-K filed before 2017 matched (our count). 75 companies used it, mostly software makers; Tetra Tech used it in 6 annual reports (2020-2025), Jacobs in 5 and Parsons in 4 (our count).

These are counts of annual reports returned by EDGAR full-text search for each filing year (filing year 2025 mostly means fiscal 2024 reports), with amendments excluded; a passing mention counts the same as a business description, and "drone" with "inspection" also matches military drones. They are not counts of companies doing the work. Private engineering firms and foreign filers such as Stantec file no 10-K. Industry codes are each filer's own SIC code on EDGAR. The yearly counts and the filer list are in our CSV files (edgar-engineering-10k-counts.csv and edgar-engineering-10k-filers.csv).

How busy are U.S. engineering firms in 2026?

Busy. In the ACEC Research Institute's Q3 2026 survey, executives gave their own firm's financial performance a net rating of +79 (ACEC Research Institute) and the engineering industry a net rating of +76 (ACEC Research Institute). The median backlog was 12 months (ACEC Research Institute). The survey had 591 completed responses from executives at ACEC member firms, fielded July 28 to August 10, 2026 (ACEC Research Institute). ACEC is an association that sells membership to engineering firms, and the sample covers its members only.

The outlook is less sure. The same executives rated the U.S. economy 12 months ahead at -8 (ACEC Research Institute) and put the chance of a recession in the next six months at 41 percent (ACEC Research Institute). Data centers (+83) and water/wastewater were the strongest markets (ACEC Research Institute).

Deltek's 47th Clarity Architecture & Engineering study, released May 12, 2026, surveyed 896 A&E firms in the U.S. and Canada (Deltek). Those firms forecast 9.5% net revenue growth for 2026 (Deltek). Operating profit fell to 16.7% and utilization to just under 60% (Deltek), down from a 10-year high of 21.4% in the 2025 edition (Deltek). Deltek sells accounting, ERP and proposal software to these firms, and its study combines architects with engineers.

How do engineering firms win work, and how often?

The median A&E firm in Deltek's 2025 Clarity study won 50% of the work it pursued (Deltek). The study said firms sent 38% fewer proposals while the value of awarded work grew 52% year over year (Deltek). The 2025 edition surveyed nearly 700 firms in the U.S. and Canada. Deltek is a software seller, and its press release gives no field dates.

Referrals still matter most at the start of a search. In Hinge Research Institute's 2013 study of buyers of architecture, engineering and construction services, 62% of buyers turned first to friends or colleagues (Hinge Research Institute) and about 5% used online search (Hinge Research Institute). Hinge sells marketing services to AEC firms, and the figures are more than ten years old. Its newer editions are sold, and their public pages print no comparable number. The same figures appear on our construction video statistics page.

What does LinkedIn say about video in B2B buying?

In 2025, LinkedIn's B2B Institute said nearly two-thirds of B2B buyers say social video helps shape their buying decisions (LinkedIn B2B Institute). It also says buyers pay attention to an ad for just 3.7 seconds (LinkedIn B2B Institute), and that video-led campaigns are 3.2x more likely to report increased market share than non-video campaigns (LinkedIn B2B Institute). Vendors known across the whole buying group from the start were 20x more likely to be bought than those known only through expert recommendation (LinkedIn B2B Institute).

These are LinkedIn's figures about advertising on its own platform, and LinkedIn sells that advertising. They cover all B2B categories, not engineering. The page names its method (a WARC analysis of 1,000 B2B Cannes Lions entries and a lab-based neuro study with MediaScience) but gives no field dates and no buyer-survey sample size.

Do public owners hold shortlist interviews by video?

Some do. Shortlisted engineering consultants now often present to state DOTs over video calls. Nebraska DOT held its November 5, 2024 shortlist interviews for a complete-streets policy contract over WebEx, with a 15-minute prepared presentation followed by 10 minutes of questions (Nebraska DOT). Its January 28, 2026 interviews for a rail-crossing study allowed up to a 20-minute WebEx presentation (Nebraska DOT). In both, firms could share their screen. For the 2026 interviews NDOT also asked firms to describe how they would gather public input, giving digital tools and visualizations as examples.

Maryland's State Highway Administration scheduled oral presentations for consultant contract BCS 2024-10 in the week of June 16-20, 2025, on the MS Teams virtual platform (MDOT SHA). Each presentation ran 1 hour with no time set aside for questions, and the materials were to be a PowerPoint presentation (MDOT SHA). In Florida, the Turnpike Enterprise required shortlisted firms for its $10 million traffic-and-revenue general engineering consultant contract to submit a written technical proposal and present orally (FDOT Florida's Turnpike). The presentations were set for March 13, 2024 (FDOT Florida's Turnpike).

Each of these is one owner and one solicitation, not a national rule. The federal rules for selecting A-E firms (the Brooks Act and FAR 36.6) are covered in the rules section of this page.

How many public owners fly drones for engineering work?

In AASHTO's 2019 survey, 36 of 50 state departments of transportation (72 percent) were funding centers or programs to operate drones (AASHTO). That was up from 20 of 44 in the 2018 survey (AASHTO). Those 36 DOTs reported 279 FAA-certified drone pilots on staff, about eight per state (AASHTO). AASHTO is the association of state DOTs, the main public clients of transportation engineering firms. The survey counts DOTs' own drone programmes, not drone work done by consultants, and it is an old baseline.

How fast are engineering firms adopting AI?

AI use among A&E firms in Deltek's Clarity study rose from 53% to 70% in the 2026 edition (Deltek). In the 2025 edition, 53% of firms used AI tools, and Deltek listed proposal development among the uses (Deltek). Only 38% of 2026 respondents reported a measurable positive business impact from AI (Deltek). 93% reported a cyber attack attempt in the past three years (Deltek), and 42% believed they could lose market share within two years without significant digital transformation (Deltek).

Autodesk's 2025 State of Design & Make report, which surveyed and interviewed 5,594 leaders in architecture, engineering, construction, manufacturing and media, found that just 69% of business leaders said AI will enhance their industry (Autodesk). It also found that 58% of professionals saw a lack of skilled talent as a barrier to growth (Autodesk). Autodesk sells design and engineering software, and these figures cover all of its industries, not engineering alone.

What are engineering firms paying, and how hard is hiring?

The average base salary for civil engineers was $152,000 in ASCE's 2026 salary report (ASCE). Average entry-level pay stayed just above $77,000 (ASCE). Engineers with a P.E. license had a median income nearly $49,000 higher than those with no licenses or certifications (ASCE). Structural engineers had the lowest median of any line of business, at $130,000 (ASCE). At organizations with 1-10 employees the median salary was $129,000 (ASCE), and 95.6% of employers offered health insurance (ASCE).

ASCE gives two sample sizes for the same survey. Its article says 2,444 members were surveyed (ASCE), and its salary research page says data came from 2,133 members in early 2026 (ASCE). Either way, the survey covers ASCE members only, and ASCE is an association that sells membership and the full report. Government pay figures for civil engineers are in the workforce section of this page.

Firms are still hiring. In the ACEC survey, 88% of firms had at least one open position (ACEC Research Institute) and 65 percent expected to hire more over the next 12 months (ACEC Research Institute). In Deltek's 2025 study, 59% of respondents named the availability of qualified candidates as their top hiring challenge (Deltek). The 2026 study found staff growth of only 1.2% (Deltek) and employee turnover of 13.8% (Deltek).

The PE license sits at the centre of hiring. In ACEC's Q3 2026 survey, 96% of member firms have positions that require a professional engineer license (ACEC Research Institute), and 91 percent actively encourage unlicensed engineers to get one (ACEC Research Institute). 93% said passing the Fundamentals of Engineering exam is at least somewhat important for entry-level engineers (ACEC Research Institute).

What do the popular engineering numbers really say?

Four numbers that engineering pages repeat rest on narrower sources than the repeats suggest: an infrastructure "gap" whose size, scope and meaning change between editions of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Report Card; engineer-shortage figures that began with a magazine count of Chinese graduates and now rest on one-year flow estimates; a count of daily trips over bad bridges that is carried from one report to the next; and a video vendor's 2009 client tests. Each claim below gives the claim as repeated, where it came from, what the original measured, and what to use instead. Earlier editions were read in Internet Archive captures. ASCE and the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) are membership associations that lobby for infrastructure spending; the American Road & Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA) is a road and bridge builders' trade association.

"ASCE says America has a $X trillion infrastructure investment gap"

The claim as repeated. The figure changes with the year of the repeat, and repeats often swap the need for the gap. A March 2021 wire story, as printed by BusinessWorld, headlined ASCE's gap as "US faces $2.59T in infrastructure needs" (BusinessWorld). Webuild, an infrastructure contractor, wrote in April 2025 that the U.S. "should invest $9.1 trillion" over the next ten years (Webuild), which is ASCE's total need, not the additional amount. ASCE's own Report Card home page, read in November 2026, says the country still faces a $3.6 trillion investment gap over the next ten years (ASCE), which differs from the $3.7 trillion its 2025 report prints.

Where it came from. Each edition of the Report Card headlines a different measure.

The gap figures are built on ASCE's economic studies. The 2016 Failure to Act update, prepared by Economic Development Research Group, covered five systems (surface transportation, water and wastewater, electricity, airports, and inland waterways and ports): total 2016-2025 needs of $3,320 billion and a funding gap of $1,440 billion in constant 2015 dollars (ASCE/EDR Group, 2016 capture) (ASCE/EDR Group, 2016 capture). The Maritime Executive reported that number in 2016 as America falling "$1.44 trillion short" on infrastructure, without the five-system scope (The Maritime Executive). The 2021 Failure to Act study, by the consultancy EBP using the University of Maryland's LIFT economic model, put the five-system 2020-2029 gap at $2,626 billion in 2019 dollars (ASCE/EBP). The 2021 Report Card took surface transportation, electricity, airports and ports from that study, added dams, levees, waste, parks and schools from other sources, and used a smaller water figure, so its all-category gap came out slightly below the five-system study gap. The 2021 edition also restated the 2017 gap as $2.1 trillion, though the 2017 report printed $2.0 trillion. For 2025, ASCE's Bridging the Gap study covered 11 of the 18 categories and estimated $2.9 trillion of additional investment (ASCE); in a scenario where federal funding returns to earlier levels, ASCE puts the gap at $4.4 trillion (ASCE).

What the original measured. The gap is ASCE's estimate of what reaching a "state of good repair" would cost, minus the investment it expects from public and private sources, over ten years. Needs come from agencies, associations and consultants per category, with different base years and price bases, and the categories, horizon and model change between editions. A gap of one edition is therefore not comparable with the need of another, and none of the figures is an audited spending shortfall.

What to use instead. Name the edition, the measure and the period: "ASCE's 2025 Report Card estimates $9.1 trillion of needs and $5.4 trillion of anticipated investment for 2024-2033, a gap of $3.7 trillion." Actual public construction spending and federal funding, from Census and FHWA, are in the demand section of this page.

"China graduates 600,000 engineers a year to America's 70,000" and "the U.S. is short 18,000 engineers a year"

The claim as repeated. In 2005 and 2006 congressional hearings and news articles cited 600,000, 350,000 and 70,000 as the yearly engineering graduates of China, India and the U.S., figures printed in the National Academies' October 2005 report Rising Above the Gathering Storm (Inside Higher Ed). The current form is ACEC's: its Engineering Inc. blog wrote in January 2026 that the United States "faces an annual shortage of 18,000 engineers" (ACEC Engineering Inc.). ASCE's Civil Engineering magazine quoted ASCE's 2022 president that the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) "projects a need for about 25,000 new civil engineers each year", a figure he noted is based on replacing workers (ASCE Civil Engineering). For chips, the Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA, the chipmakers' trade group) and Oxford Economics projected in 2023 a shortfall of 67,000 technicians, computer scientists and engineers by 2030, out of 115,000 new semiconductor jobs (Plant Services) (Plant Services).

Where it came from. According to Inside Higher Ed, the study director said the 600,000 was "one line" in the report, and it "was taken for the original report from Fortune magazine" (600,000; 600,000 in Inside Higher Ed's wording) (Inside Higher Ed). A December 2005 Duke University study by Gary Gereffi, Vivek Wadhwa and students found that the "roughly 70,000" U.S. figure set against China's 600,000 compared four-year U.S. degrees with Chinese and Indian totals that included three-year and diploma programmes (Duke). Counting like with like for 2004, Duke found 137,437 U.S. bachelor's degrees in engineering, computer science and IT, against 351,537 in China (Duke) (Duke); the Chinese total including sub-baccalaureate degrees was 644,106, close to the headline 600,000 (Duke). Even the U.S. engineering-only count varied by counter: the National Center for Education Statistics reported 63,558 bachelor's degrees and the American Society for Engineering Education 72,893 (Duke). In February 2006 the National Academies revised the line to "about 350,000 engineers, computer scientists and information technologists with 4-year degrees" in China, compared with 140,000 in the U.S. (Inside Higher Ed) (Inside Higher Ed). The report itself was not read here: nap.edu excludes this research agent in its robots.txt.

The 18,000 comes from the ACEC Research Institute's 2025 study The Workforce of the Future: about 184,000 engineers left the workforce in 2022 through retirements and separations, "creating an estimated annual gap of 18,000 engineers overall and more than 8,400 in core civil, mechanical, and electrical disciplines" (ACEC Research Institute) (ACEC Research Institute).

What the original measured. The ACEC estimate takes BLS rates of 4.7 percent of the workforce retiring and 6.4 percent leaving the occupation each year (ACEC Research Institute), so outflows include people who move to other jobs. Inflows count only new graduates available for work, 166,223 in 2022 (graduates minus international students plus H-1B visa holders) (ACEC Research Institute), and leave out anyone moving into engineering from another occupation. It is a one-year (2022) flow estimate by an association of engineering firms, not a vacancy count. The 25,000 is BLS's projected yearly openings, most of which replace leavers; openings are not unfilled jobs. The SIA figure is a projection of new jobs at risk of going unfilled in one industry; SIA's own site excludes AI agents in robots.txt, so the report was read through trade-press coverage only.

What to use instead. For graduates, NCES completions by field and year, in the education section of this page. For labour demand, BLS's projected openings and employment change for civil, mechanical and electrical engineers, in the workforce section, described as openings. The ACEC estimate can be cited as "the ACEC Research Institute estimated a net gap of about 18,000 engineers in 2022, counting graduates in and retirements plus occupational exits out."

"178 million trips a day cross structurally deficient bridges"

The claim as repeated. ASCE's 2021 Report Card said 46,154 bridges were structurally deficient and that "178 million trips are taken across these structurally deficient bridges every day" (ASCE). The number still circulates in bridge and drone-inspection marketing.

Where it came from. The count comes from ARTBA's annual analysis of the Federal Highway Administration's National Bridge Inventory, which sums the average daily traffic on each deficient bridge. ARTBA's 2019 report, on the 2018 inventory, said Americans cross the 47,052 structurally deficient bridges "178 million times a day" (ARTBA); its April 2020 release, on the 2019 inventory, gave more than 46,000 bridges and again 178 million crossings (ARTBA). ASCE's 2021 chapter cites ARTBA's 2020 report for the trips while taking its bridge count from the 2020 inventory. Earlier ASCE editions printed other counts: "Over two hundred million trips are taken daily" across deficient bridges in the 102 largest metropolitan regions in 2013 (ASCE, 2013 capture), when "deficient" also covered functionally obsolete bridges, and 188 million trips a day across structurally deficient bridges in 2016 (ASCE).

What the original measured. Vehicle crossings (average daily traffic summed over bridges), not distinct trips or people, on bridges rated poor in one inventory year. The term changed in 2018, when federal rules tied "structurally deficient" to a poor condition rating. The 2025 Report Card puts the current figure at more than 168 million trips a day across poor bridges in 2024 (ASCE), out of over 4.9 billion daily motor vehicle trips across all 623,218 bridges (ASCE), or 3.4% of daily trips (ASCE).

What to use instead. The newest figure with its year and term: "about 168 million daily crossings of bridges in poor condition in 2024, 3.4% of all bridge trips, per ASCE's 2025 Report Card." Bridge counts by condition from the National Bridge Inventory are in the demand section of this page.

"Video on a landing page lifts conversions 80%"

The claim as repeated. VEC, a video editing company, wrote in April 2026 that landing page video increases conversions "by 80% or more" and that "the 80% conversion lift statistic comes from EyeView Digital's widely-cited study" (VEC). We found no engineering-marketing page that repeats the 80% figure. AEC statistics roundups print other video numbers without sources: Gitnux, a statistics site that says it uses AI search agents, lists "Video case studies converted 49% better than text-only for engineering leads" with no source attached to the item (Gitnux), and we found no original for it.

Where it came from. EyeView Digital, a vendor that made and tested the videos, wrote on its blog on December 4, 2008 that viewers of its video on eToro's site were 20% more likely to download the product (EyeView, 2009 capture), and on February 10, 2009 that viewers of its UMOO videos were 80% more likely to become depositing users (EyeView, 2010 capture). In November 2009 it quoted a TutorVista manager saying one test boosted conversion "by over 80 percent" (EyeView, 2009 capture); its case study gave 86 percent for that test (EyeView, 2010 capture). Its 2010 white paper said "in some cases" the boost was over 80% (EyeView, 2010 capture), and reported the eToro test, earlier told as 20%, as almost 32 percent (EyeView, 2010 capture). By August 2010 Unbounce, a landing-page software seller, wrote that "a study by eyeviewdigital.com" shows video can increase conversion by 80% (Unbounce, 2010 capture), dropping "in some cases".

What the original measured. A few clients of one vendor, comparing people who chose to watch with people who did not, plus single A/B tests with no visitor counts published. None involved engineering firms.

What to use instead. Unbounce's own August 2021 analysis of about 35,000 customer landing pages in each of three periods found video had a "minimal or negative" effect on conversion overall (Unbounce) (Unbounce). A firm's own A/B test is the only number that applies to its own site.

Every popular claim our research pages trace, 766 in all, is on one page: popular video statistics, fact-checked.

How we built this page

We started from the questions people search for about engineering firm video statistics and looked for the organization that actually produced each answer. Every figure on this page sits in an evidence ledger with its source, the exact table or paragraph it came from, the measurement period, the population measured, and the date we checked it. This edition holds 544 figures from 45 publishers.

On November 6, 2026, each sourced figure on this page was re-fetched with the fetch cache cleared and matched against the recorded wording: BLS occupation wage estimates (through the BLS data API), Employment Projections, the Occupational Outlook Handbook and the Current Population Survey (bls.gov pages through Internet Archive copies, because bls.gov refuses automated requests), the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages; Census County Business Patterns, Nonemployer Statistics, the 2022 Economic Census and the Annual Integrated Economic Survey (through the Census data API), the 2022 NAICS Manual and Census construction spending releases; FHWA’s National Bridge Inventory and infrastructure law pages; NCES, NSF and ABET figures; Florida’s engineering statutes and board rules, the Texas, California and New York engineering acts, Florida’s Consultants’ Competitive Negotiation Act, the Brooks Act, the Federal Acquisition Regulation, the National Bridge Inspection Standards and the FAA’s drone rules; NCEES’s exam pages and Model Law; Florida DBPR’s and FEMC’s annual reports; the 10-K and 40-F filings of AECOM, Jacobs, Tetra Tech, KBR, Fluor, Parsons, NV5, Bowman, Willdan and Stantec; ACEC’s, ASCE’s, Deltek’s, LinkedIn’s, AASHTO’s, Autodesk’s and Hinge’s own reports; state transportation agencies’ selection notices; and the pages behind each popular claim. Where a site refuses automated requests we read an Internet Archive copy. Our licence counts come from the Florida Board of Professional Engineers’ public directory and lists and the Connecticut and Colorado open licence data, our graduate counts from the IPEDS completions files, our 10-K phrase counts from EDGAR full-text search, and our YouTube figures from the YouTube Data API. We left out ASEE’s, the National Academies’, the Semiconductor Industry Association’s and ABC’s reports (robots rules), Zweig Group’s, PSMJ’s and SMPS’s win-rate data (paid or behind forms), DroneDeploy’s reality capture report (no readable text), USAspending totals (not checkable by our verifier), and Florida’s register of engineering firms (released only on request).

We only cite the producer: government agencies, regulators, company filings and official posts, and the survey owner's own report. We do not cite statistics roundups, Statista-style aggregators, or salary sites without a public method. We did not bypass paywalls or sign-up forms; where a full report was gated, we used only the figures its publisher states publicly.

Figures marked "our calculation" are arithmetic on the cited numbers, and anyone can reproduce them:

This edition contains no Mark Studios customer data.

Limitations

• Our YouTube read follows YouTube’s ranking. The 586 videos are what YouTube’s search returned for ‘civil engineering’, ‘structural engineer’ and ‘engineering firm’ (the top 200 results of each, sorted by views, with no country filter) on November 6, 2026. It is not a census of engineering video, view counts are lifetime snapshots, and we sorted 349 channels by hand from their public text. We counted a channel as an engineer only when its own text said so; one large explainer channel whose founder’s credential is not stated is not counted.
• Job and firm counts count different things. BLS’s payroll survey leaves out the self-employed, the household survey counts more people than the payroll survey, and OEWS is not built for year-to-year comparison. QCEW, County Business Patterns and the Economic Census count employer establishments at different times; nonemployer counts cover businesses with no paid staff. BLS does not count structural engineers apart from civil engineers.
• Licence counts count paperwork. Nearly half of Florida’s engineer licences belong to engineers with addresses outside the state, and an engineer licensed in several states is counted in each. DBPR’s board totals mix professional engineers with the board’s other licence types.
• Company and association figures are self-reported. Deltek, Autodesk and Hinge sell to engineering firms; ACEC, ASCE and AASHTO are membership bodies, NCEES is the exam body and ABET the accreditor, and ASCE’s Report Card argues for more infrastructure spending. We give each survey’s sample and dates where the publisher states them.
• 2023-24 graduate counts are provisional. Our counts use first majors only, and electrical engineering gained a new program code in 2020, so its trend is less clean than civil or mechanical.

How to cite this page

For a single figure, cite the original publisher named next to it, and link here if the verification trail is useful to your readers. Each figure has its own anchor, so you can link straight to it, for example https://www.markstudios.com/research/engineering-firm-video-statistics#DRV-203. To cite the page as a whole:

Mark Studios. "Engineering Firm Video Statistics." Last verified Nov 6, 2026. https://www.markstudios.com/research/engineering-firm-video-statistics

@misc{markstudios_engineering_firm_video_statistics_2026,
  author = {{Mark Studios}},
  title = {{Engineering Firm Video Statistics}},
  year = {2026},
  month = nov,
  url = {https://www.markstudios.com/research/engineering-firm-video-statistics},
  note = {Last verified 2026-11-06}
}

Our calculations and the evidence table are free to reuse with attribution and a link to this page. Each underlying figure remains the claim of its original publisher, and some publishers ask for a link when their figures are reused.

Sources

Download the evidence table (CSV)

1. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017205101 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
2. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017205104 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
3. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017205113 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
4. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017205111 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
5. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017205115 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
6. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017214101 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
7. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017214113 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
8. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017207101 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
9. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017207113 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
10. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017208101 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
11. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017200001 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
12. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000000000017200013 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
13. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table 1.2 Occupational projections, 2025–35, and worker characteristics, 2025 (2026-09). Accessed 2026-11-06.
14. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey, Table 11. Employed persons by detailed occupation, sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (2026-01). Accessed 2026-11-06.
15. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Civil Engineers: Occupational Outlook Handbook (2026-09). Accessed 2026-11-06.
16. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Mechanical Engineers: Occupational Outlook Handbook (2026-09). Accessed 2026-11-06.
17. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000054133000000001 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
18. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000054133017200001 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
19. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000054133017205101 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
20. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUN000000054133017302201 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
21. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUS120000000000017205101 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
22. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUS120000000000017205113 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
23. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUS120000000000017205117 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
24. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUS120000000000017214101 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
25. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUM003310000000017205101 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
26. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUM003310000000017208101 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
27. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUM003894000000017205101 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
28. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUM003310000000017205113 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
29. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, OEWS series OEUM003894000000017205113 (BLS Public Data API v2) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
30. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, QCEW Open Data: 2025 annual averages, industry 541330 (CSV) (2026-09). Accessed 2026-11-06.
31. U.S. Census Bureau, North American Industry Classification System, United States, 2022 (manual) (2022). Accessed 2026-11-06.
32. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, QCEW Open Data: 2019 annual averages, industry 541330 (CSV) (2020-09). Accessed 2026-11-06.
33. U.S. Census Bureau, Economic Census: Selected Sectors: Summary Statistics for the U.S., States, and Selected Geographies: 2022 (Census Data API, ecnbasic) (2025). Accessed 2026-11-06.
34. U.S. Census Bureau, Economic Census: Selected Sectors: Employment Size of Firms for the U.S.: 2022 (Census Data API, ecnsize) (2025). Accessed 2026-11-06.
35. U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns: 2023 (Census Data API, cbp) (2025-06). Accessed 2026-11-06.
36. U.S. Census Bureau, Nonemployer Statistics: 2024 (Census Data API, nonemp) (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
37. U.S. Census Bureau, Nonemployer Statistics: 2023 (Census Data API, nonemp) (2025). Accessed 2026-11-06.
38. U.S. Census Bureau, Economic Census: Selected Sectors: Products by Industry for the U.S.: 2022 (Census Data API, ecnnapcsind) (2025). Accessed 2026-11-06.
39. U.S. Census Bureau, Economic Census: Selected Sectors: Class of Customer by Industry for the U.S.: 2022 (Census Data API, ecnclcust) (2025). Accessed 2026-11-06.
40. U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Integrated Economic Survey: Selected Sectors: Detailed Operating Expenses for Employer Firms in the U.S.: 2024 (Census Data API, aiesexp02) (2026-06-30). Accessed 2026-11-06.
41. U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns: 2023 (Census Data API, cbp) (2025-06). Accessed 2026-11-06.
42. U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns: 2023 (Census Data API, cbp) (2025-06). Accessed 2026-11-06.
43. Florida Engineers Management Corporation (FEMC), for the Florida Board of Professional Engineers, FEMC 2024-2025 Annual Report (2025-09-01). Accessed 2026-11-06.
44. Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR), DBPR Annual Report FY 2023-24 (2024-10-01). Accessed 2026-11-06.
45. Florida Engineers Management Corporation (FEMC), for the Florida Board of Professional Engineers, FEMC 2025-2026 Annual Report (2026-09-01). Accessed 2026-11-06.
46. Florida Engineers Management Corporation (FEMC), for the Florida Board of Professional Engineers, 2026-27 Florida Engineers Management Corporation 1st Quarter Report (2026-10-15). Accessed 2026-11-06.
47. NCEES (National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying), exam body, PE Exam | NCEES (2026-07-01). Accessed 2026-11-06.
48. NCEES (National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying), exam body, FE Exam | NCEES (2026-07-01). Accessed 2026-11-06.
49. Florida Legislature (Online Sunshine, Florida Statutes), The 2026 Florida Statutes, Chapter 471 Engineering (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
50. Cornell LII (Florida Administrative Code text, Board of Professional Engineers rules), Fla. Admin. Code Ann. R. 61G15-20.0016 - Laws and Rules Examination (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
51. Texas Legislature (Texas Constitution and Statutes, Occupations Code), Occupations Code Chapter 1001. Engineers (Texas Engineering Practice Act) (2025-11-19). Accessed 2026-11-06.
52. California Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists (Professional Engineers Act text), Professional Engineers Act (Business and Professions Code §§ 6700-6799), 2026 edition (2026-01-01). Accessed 2026-11-06.
53. NCEES (National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying; exam body), Model Law (2026) (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
54. New York State Education Department, Office of the Professions (Education Law text), Education Law Article 145, Engineering, Land Surveying and Geology (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
55. Cornell LII (Florida Administrative Code text, Board of Professional Engineers rules), Fla. Admin. Code Ann. R. 61G15-22.001 - Continuing Education Requirements (2024-11-12). Accessed 2026-11-06.
56. Cornell LII (Florida Administrative Code text, Board of Professional Engineers rules), Fla. Admin. Code Ann. R. 61G15-22.004 - Conversion of Education Units to Continuing Education Hours (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
57. NCEES (National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying; exam body), Continuing Professional Competency Guidelines (2026) (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
58. Cornell LII (Florida Administrative Code text, Board of Professional Engineers rules), Fla. Admin. Code Ann. R. 61G15-23.002 - Seals Acceptable to the Board (2020-11-16). Accessed 2026-11-06.
59. NCEES (National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying; exam body), PE Civil | NCEES (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
60. NCEES (National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying; exam body), PE Structural | NCEES (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
61. Florida Legislature (Online Sunshine, Florida Statutes), The 2026 Florida Statutes, s. 287.055 Acquisition of professional architectural, engineering, landscape architectural, or surveying and mapping services (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
62. Florida Legislature (Online Sunshine, Florida Statutes), The 2026 Florida Statutes, s. 287.017 Purchasing categories, threshold amounts (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
63. Cornell LII (U.S. Code text), 40 U.S. Code § 1103 - Selection procedure (2002). Accessed 2026-11-06.
64. U.S. General Services Administration (Acquisition.gov, Federal Acquisition Regulation), FAR Subpart 36.6 Architect-Engineer Services (2026-03-13). Accessed 2026-11-06.
65. U.S. General Services Administration (Standard Form 330), Standard Form 330 (Rev. 7/2021), Architect-Engineer Qualifications (2021-07). Accessed 2026-11-06.
66. U.S. General Services Administration (Acquisition.gov, Federal Acquisition Regulation), FAR 15.404-4 Profit (2026-03-13). Accessed 2026-11-06.
67. Federal Highway Administration (eCFR, 23 CFR 650 subpart C), 23 CFR Part 650 Subpart C - National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) (2022-05-06). Accessed 2026-11-06.
68. Federal Aviation Administration (eCFR, 14 CFR Part 107), 14 CFR Part 107 - Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (2016-06-28). Accessed 2026-11-06.
69. U.S. Census Bureau, Monthly Construction Spending, September 2026 (Release Number CB26-176) (2026-11-02). Accessed 2026-11-06.
70. U.S. Census Bureau, Monthly Construction Spending, December 2025 (Release Number CB26-30) (2026-02-27). Accessed 2026-11-06.
71. Federal Highway Administration (U.S. DOT), Bridge Condition by Highway System 2026 (National Bridge Inventory bridge tables) (2026-09-02). Accessed 2026-11-06.
72. Federal Highway Administration (U.S. DOT), Highway Bridge Condition by Highway System 2016 (National Bridge Inventory bridge tables) (2019-05-23). Accessed 2026-11-06.
73. ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers, a membership association that advocates for infrastructure investment), 2025 Report Card for America's Infrastructure: Executive Summary (2025-03-25). Accessed 2026-11-06.
74. Federal Highway Administration (U.S. DOT), Bipartisan Infrastructure Law: Funding (2025-02-03). Accessed 2026-11-06.
75. Federal Highway Administration (U.S. DOT), Bridge Formula Program (BFP) fact sheet, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (2025-02-03). Accessed 2026-11-06.
76. The White House (Biden administration, archived site), Fact Sheet: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal (2021-11-06). Accessed 2026-11-06.
77. ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers, a membership association that advocates for infrastructure investment), 2025 Infrastructure Report Card (home page) (2026-10-22). Accessed 2026-11-06.
78. ACEC Research Institute (American Council of Engineering Companies, a trade association of engineering firms), study by Rockport Analytics, New ACEC Research Shows Engineering and Design Services Industry Contributed $685 Billion to U.S. GDP in 2024 Despite Economic Headwinds (2025-10-08). Accessed 2026-11-06.
79. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Digest of Education Statistics 2015, Table 318.30. Bachelor's, master's, and doctor's degrees conferred by postsecondary institutions, by sex of student and discipline division: 2013-14 (2015-09). Accessed 2026-11-06.
80. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Digest of Education Statistics 2023, Table 318.30. Bachelor's, master's, and doctor's degrees conferred by postsecondary institutions, by sex of student and field of study: Academic year 2021-22 (2023-12). Accessed 2026-11-06.
81. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Digest of Education Statistics 2022, Table 325.45. Degrees in engineering and engineering technologies conferred by postsecondary institutions, by level of degree and sex of student: Selected academic years, 1949-50 through 2020-21 (2022-09). Accessed 2026-11-06.
82. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), CIP 2020 Detail for CIP Code 14.0801 (2020). Accessed 2026-11-06.
83. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), CIP 2020 Detail for CIP Code 14.0803 (2020). Accessed 2026-11-06.
84. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), CIP 2020 Detail for CIP Code 14.4701 (2020). Accessed 2026-11-06.
85. National Science Board / NSF National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES), Higher Education in Science and Engineering (Science and Engineering Indicators 2024, NSB-2023-32) (2023-11-16). Accessed 2026-11-06.
86. ABET (the accreditor of engineering, engineering technology, computing and applied science programs), About ABET (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
87. ABET (the accreditor of engineering, engineering technology, computing and applied science programs), Accreditation (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
88. National Science Board / NSF National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES), Higher Education in Science and Engineering (Science and Engineering Indicators 2024, NSB-2023-32) (2023-11-16). Accessed 2026-11-06.
89. AECOM (SEC Form 10-K), AECOM Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2025 (2025-11-19). Accessed 2026-11-06.
90. Jacobs Solutions Inc. (SEC Form 10-K), Jacobs Solutions Inc. Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 26, 2025 (2025-11-20). Accessed 2026-11-06.
91. KBR, Inc. (SEC Form 10-K), KBR, Inc. Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 2, 2026 (2026-02-26). Accessed 2026-11-06.
92. Stantec Inc. (SEC Form 40-F), Stantec Inc. Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2025 (Exhibit 99.1 to Form 40-F) (2026-02-25). Accessed 2026-11-06.
93. Stantec Inc. (SEC Form 40-F), Stantec Inc. Management's Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2025 (Exhibit 99.2 to Form 40-F) (2026-02-25). Accessed 2026-11-06.
94. Tetra Tech, Inc. (SEC Form 10-K), Tetra Tech, Inc. Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 28, 2025 (2025-11-20). Accessed 2026-11-06.
95. Fluor Corporation (SEC Form 10-K), Fluor Corporation Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025 (2026-02-17). Accessed 2026-11-06.
96. Parsons Corporation (SEC Form 10-K), Parsons Corporation Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025 (2026-02-11). Accessed 2026-11-06.
97. NV5 Global, Inc. (SEC Form 10-K), NV5 Global, Inc. Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 28, 2024 (2025-02-21). Accessed 2026-11-06.
98. Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (SEC Form 10-K), Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025 (2026-03-05). Accessed 2026-11-06.
99. Willdan Group, Inc. (SEC Form 10-K), Willdan Group, Inc. Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 2, 2026 (2026-02-27). Accessed 2026-11-06.
100. ACEC Research Institute (association), Engineering firms remain resilient amid growing economic uncertainty, new ACEC Research Institute study finds (2026-08-27). Accessed 2026-11-06.
101. Deltek, Inc. (seller of A&E software), The Latest Deltek Clarity Industry Studies Highlight AI Challenges, Talent Strain, and Delivery Capacity Pressures for Project-Based Businesses (2026-05-12). Accessed 2026-11-06.
102. Deltek, Inc. (seller of A&E software), What the 46th Annual Deltek Clarity A&E Study Reveals About the Architecture and Engineering Industry (2025-05-13). Accessed 2026-11-06.
103. Hinge Research Institute, How Buyers Buy Architecture/Engineering/Construction Services (2013). Accessed 2026-11-06.
104. LinkedIn (B2B Institute, LinkedIn Marketing Solutions), Winning the B2B buying group with video | LinkedIn B2B Institute (2025). Accessed 2026-11-06.
105. Nebraska Department of Transportation, Short-List Consultant Interview Schedule RFQ-2424 Complete Streets Policy Implementation (2024). Accessed 2026-11-06.
106. Nebraska Department of Transportation, Short-List Consultant Interview Schedule RFQ-2519: Grand Island Rail Crossing Study (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
107. Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration, Contract No: BCS 2024-10 - Addendum No. 1, Consultant Technical Proposal Questions and Clarification (2025). Accessed 2026-11-06.
108. Florida Department of Transportation (Florida's Turnpike Enterprise), Ad Number 24808 General Engineering Consultant Services Traffic and Revenue, Industry Forum Presentation (2023-11-17). Accessed 2026-11-06.
109. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (association of state DOTs), AASHTO Survey Finds Drone Use Exploding Among State DOTs (2019-05-24). Accessed 2026-11-06.
110. Autodesk, Inc. (seller of design and engineering software), Autodesk Report: AI, Talent in Focus for 2025 (2025-04-16). Accessed 2026-11-06.
111. American Society of Civil Engineers (association), Civil engineering salaries continue to rise as industry evolves (2026-10-08). Accessed 2026-11-06.
112. American Society of Civil Engineers (association), Salary and Workforce Research | ASCE (2026). Accessed 2026-11-06.
113. Deltek, Inc. (seller of A&E software), Deltek Clarity Architecture & Engineering Industry Study (2026-05-12). Accessed 2026-11-06.
114. BusinessWorld (newspaper, Philippines), US faces $2.59T in infrastructure needs - report (2021-03-03). Accessed 2026-11-06.
115. Webuild (infrastructure contractor; We Build Value magazine), ASCE: U.S. Infrastructure Needs $9 Trillion in Investment (2025-04-09). Accessed 2026-11-06.
116. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE; membership association of civil engineers that lobbies for infrastructure funding), ASCE's 2025 Infrastructure Report Card (home page) (undated (read 2026-11-06)). Accessed 2026-11-06.
117. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE; membership association of civil engineers that lobbies for infrastructure funding), 2009 Report Card for America's Infrastructure (home page) (2009-01-28). Accessed 2026-11-06.
118. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE; membership association of civil engineers that lobbies for infrastructure funding), 2013 Report Card for America's Infrastructure (home page) (2013-03-19). Accessed 2026-11-06.
119. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE; membership association of civil engineers that lobbies for infrastructure funding), 2013 Report Card for America's Infrastructure: Executive Summary (2013-03-19). Accessed 2026-11-06.
120. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE; membership association of civil engineers that lobbies for infrastructure funding), 2017 Infrastructure Report Card (full report PDF) (2017-03-09). Accessed 2026-11-06.
121. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE; membership association of civil engineers that lobbies for infrastructure funding), 2021 Report Card for America's Infrastructure (full report PDF) (2021-03-03). Accessed 2026-11-06.
122. American Society of Civil Engineers (report prepared by Economic Development Research Group, Inc.), Failure to Act: Closing the Infrastructure Investment Gap for America's Economic Future (2016) (2016-05-10). Accessed 2026-11-06.
123. The Maritime Executive (trade news), America's $1.44 Trillion Infrastructure Gap (2016-05-10). Accessed 2026-11-06.
124. American Society of Civil Engineers (report prepared by EBP), Failure to Act: Economic Impacts of Status Quo Investment Across Infrastructure Systems (2021) (2021-01). Accessed 2026-11-06.
125. Inside Higher Ed (higher-education news), The Disappearing Chinese Engineers (2006-06-12). Accessed 2026-11-06.
126. ACEC Engineering Inc. (association magazine blog), 5 Numbers That Explain America's Engineering Shortage (2026-01-14). Accessed 2026-11-06.
127. ASCE Civil Engineering magazine (association), Why U.S. civil engineering firms face a labor shortage (2023-05). Accessed 2026-11-06.
128. Plant Services (trade magazine), Report: Semiconductor industry faces a shortfall of 67,000 workers by 2030 (2023-08-15). Accessed 2026-11-06.
129. Duke University Master of Engineering Management Program (Gereffi, Wadhwa et al.), Framing the Engineering Outsourcing Debate: Placing the United States on a Level Playing Field with China and India (December 12, 2005) (2005-12-12). Accessed 2026-11-06.
130. ACEC Research Institute (research arm of the American Council of Engineering Companies, a membership association of engineering firms), Firm of the Future: The Workforce of the Future (2025-10). Accessed 2026-11-06.
131. ACEC Research Institute (Joe Bates presentation, hosted by ACEC Indiana), Engineering workforce presentation, ACEC Indiana Annual Conference 2026 (2026-05-20). Accessed 2026-11-06.
132. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE; membership association of civil engineers that lobbies for infrastructure funding), 2021 Report Card: Bridges (2021-03-03). Accessed 2026-11-06.
133. American Road & Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA; road and bridge builders' trade association), 2019 Bridge Report (2019-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
134. American Road & Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA; road and bridge builders' trade association), 230,000 U.S. Bridges Need Repair, New Analysis of Federal Data Finds (2020-04-13). Accessed 2026-11-06.
135. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE; membership association of civil engineers that lobbies for infrastructure funding), 2025 Report Card for America's Infrastructure (full report PDF) (2025-03-25). Accessed 2026-11-06.
136. Video Editing Company (VEC; sells video editing), Landing Page Video: Boost Conversions by 80% or More (2026-04-10). Accessed 2026-11-06.
137. Gitnux (statistics roundup site; AI-assisted research per its methodology note), Marketing in the Aec Industry Statistics (2026-02-13). Accessed 2026-11-06.
138. EyeView Digital (video production and testing vendor; sold the videos it tested), EyeView - The new "Conversion" game (2008-12-04). Accessed 2026-11-06.
139. EyeView Digital (video production and testing vendor; sold the videos it tested), UMOO - a prime beef example of EyeView's success (2009-02-10). Accessed 2026-11-06.
140. EyeView Digital (video production and testing vendor; sold the videos it tested), Another video conversion success story (2009-11-10). Accessed 2026-11-06.
141. EyeView Digital (video production and testing vendor; sold the videos it tested), Case study: TutorVista (2009). Accessed 2026-11-06.
142. EyeView Digital (video production and testing vendor; sold the videos it tested), Making Video Accountable (EyeView white paper) (2010). Accessed 2026-11-06.
143. Unbounce (landing-page software seller), The benefits of using video on landing pages (2010-08). Accessed 2026-11-06.
144. Unbounce (landing-page software seller; analysis of its own customers' pages), Video on landing pages means more conversions, right? Wrong. Here's why (2021-08-26). Accessed 2026-11-06.

Update policy and change log

We re-verify every figure quarterly and when a major source publishes a new edition. The next scheduled review is February 2027. Corrections go to contact@markstudios.com.

• Nov 6, 2026: First published with 544 figures from 45 publishers, each checked against its original source.