Lead Data Analysis

Back to Leads
35 Data Health
Field Completeness 60%
9 fields below 50% fill rate
Geocoding 35%
298 leads missing coordinates
Project Values 51%
225 missing values
Date Formats 58%
80 unparseable dates
Data Consistency 0%
1 duplicates, 58 format issues
Standardization 0%
29 state + 3 country variations
458
Total Leads
0
Synced
458
Unsynced

Lead Age & Retention Analysis

Data spans from 1970-01-21 to 2026-01-05

If we remove leads older than...

CutoffDateRemainingRemoved% Kept
1 month ago2026-01-1012446 3%
3 months ago2025-11-10283175 62%
6 months ago2025-08-1041048 90%
1 year ago2025-02-1043721 95%
18 months ago2024-08-1043721 95%
2 years ago2024-02-1043721 95%
3 years ago2023-02-1043721 95%
4 years ago2022-02-1043721 95%
5 years ago2021-02-1043721 95%

Leads by Month

01
04
05
08
09
10
11
12
01

Last 24 months shown

Data Quality Issues

0 Invalid Lat/Lng
0 Empty Strings
0 Missing Global ID
1 Duplicate Names

Field Completeness

FieldFilledEmptyFill Rate
architect name11447
2%
zip code23435
5%
strategic score28430
6%
internal notes65393
14%
end date133325
29%
latitude160298
35%
longitude160298
35%
formatted address160298
35%
start date190268
41%
value233225
51%
project status285173
62%
source313145
68%
company name36989
81%
city41048
90%
state41147
90%
location41840
91%
project subcategory43127
94%
description43622
95%
project category43721
95%
project name4580
100%
country4580
100%
data source4580
100%

Content Size Stats

Related Websites

Avg size: 5 B

Max size: 89 B

5 leads > 5KB

Search Terms

Avg size: 6 B

Max size: 123 B

17 leads > 2KB

Description

Avg length: 188 chars

Max length: 1,271 chars

0 leads > 5KB

Large Related Websites (5)

Value Distributions

Project Category

  • Commercial 177
  • Education Facilities 59
  • Residential 40
  • Industrial Infrastructure 33
  • Healthcare 27
  • (null) 21
  • Government & Civic 19
  • Cultural 13
  • Districts 12
  • Transportation 9

Project Status

  • (null) 173
  • Planning 58
  • planned 47
  • planning 32
  • Pre-Design 30
  • announced 26
  • Under Construction 14
  • approved 13
  • proposed 9
  • under construction 7

State

  • (null) 47
  • TX 41
  • PA 21
  • Michigan 14
  • IL 14
  • NC 13
  • FL 13
  • California 13
  • SC 12
  • Florida 12

Country

  • USA 304
  • US 89
  • United States 37
  • IN 6
  • India 4
  • DE 2
  • CA 2
  • United States of America 1
  • TR 1
  • TC 1
  • Switzerland 1
  • SE 1
  • PY 1
  • New Zealand 1
  • LV 1
  • IT 1
  • GB 1
  • FR 1
  • CN 1
  • BE 1

Geo Resolution

  • (null) 270
  • city 157
  • state 14
  • street 12
  • country 5

Data Source

  • Web Data Extraction Pipe 287
  • llm_extraction 122
  • AEC Leads Import 28
  • usaspending_sam_correlation 21

Duplicate Project Names (1)

Project NameCount
The Ridges Development Project2

Character Counts by Field

FieldMinAvgMaxLongest Values
project name1241154Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians: Cooki... (154)A Long Term Lease, Station Construction ... (154)Architechtural & Engineering Design Serv... (104)
company name326124City of Fayetteville, Fayetteville Metro... (124)North Idaho Health Care Holdings LLC; Ko... (121)Whittier Regional Vocational Technical S... (96)
city41041South Central Connecticut Planning Regio... (41)Western Connecticut Planning Region (35)Joint Base Myer‑Henderson Hall (30)
state2520District of Columbia (20)Himachal Pradesh (16)British Columbia (16)
project category81433Telecommunications Infrastructure (33)Telecommunications Infrastructure (33)Telecommunications Infrastructure (33)
project status31050Under construction / Expansion announced... (50)Grant awarded / Project in development (38)feasibility study completed, planning (37)

Format Issues

Project Value Quality

Coverage

233 / 458 leads have values

(51% coverage)

Percentiles

25th: $100

Median: $1.5M

75th: $35.0M

95th: $480.0M

Data Issues

0 implausible (>$100B)

94 tiny (<$1K)

Range: $1 - $95.0B

Top 10 Highest Values (potential outliers)

Geocoding Quality

Coverage

35%

160 / 458 geocoded

Avg Confidence

43%

Missing Geocodes

294 leads

Have address but no coordinates

By Resolution

  • city 157
  • state 14
  • street 12
  • country 5

By Confidence

  • High (80-100%) 1
  • Medium (50-79%) 77
  • Low (20-49%) 82

Date Field Quality

Start Date

190 filled

110 parseable

80 free-text

End Date

133 filled

95 parseable

38 free-text

Free-text Date Formats (20 unique)
FormatCount
Not specified12
Q2 202411
Spring 20263
Q2 20253
mid-20252
2025-122
summer 20251
null1
late 20261
implementation in planning1
end of 20271
early 2030s1
early 20261
Within the next three years1
Unknown1
Undisclosed1
Summer 2027 (vertical construction)1
September 20231
Q2 20261
Q1 20261

Square Feet Field Quality

Filled

113

out of 458

Parseable (numeric)

87

Unparseable

26

Unparseable Square Feet Values
ValueCount
unknown18
Not specified2
±1,014,000 SF1
~100,000 SF1
~100,000 GSF1
from 65,000 to 95,0001
approximately 232,0001
approximately 230,0001

Strategic Score Distribution

80-100 (Hot)
5
60-79 (Warm)
22
40-59 (Moderate)
1

Data Quality by Source

SourceCountGeocodedHas ValueHas ScoreAvg Score
Web Data Extraction Pipe28755.7%42.9%0%-
llm_extraction1220%67.2%0%-
AEC Leads Import280%39.3%100%72.2
usaspending_sam_correlation210%81%0%-

Status Normalization Opportunities

Shows how raw status values could be normalized

Raw ValueNormalizedCount
PlanningIn Design/Planning58
plannedIn Design/Planning47
planningIn Design/Planning32
Pre-DesignIn Design/Planning30
announcedOther26
Under ConstructionUnder Construction14
approvedOther13
proposedOther9
under constructionUnder Construction7
On HoldOn Hold5
biddingBidding3
PlannedIn Design/Planning3
under developmentOther2
in designIn Design/Planning2
Under developmentOther2
BidBidding2
ApprovedOther2
AnnouncedOther2
under studyOther1
under renovationOther1
under planningIn Design/Planning1
under contractOther1
under construction/planningUnder Construction1
tender (planned)In Design/Planning1
seeking approval / proposedOther1
planning stagesIn Design/Planning1
planned (early site permit submitted)In Design/Planning1
newOther1
funding securedOther1
feasibility study completed, planningIn Design/Planning1

State Naming Variants

States with inconsistent naming (e.g., "Michigan" vs "MI")

Texas 51 leads

TX (41)Texas (10)

Florida 25 leads

FL (13)Florida (12)

California 24 leads

California (13)CA (11)

Pennsylvania 23 leads

PA (21)Pennsylvania (2)

North Carolina 19 leads

NC (13)North Carolina (6)

Michigan 17 leads

Michigan (14)MI (3)

Illinois 17 leads

IL (14)Illinois (3)

Colorado 17 leads

Colorado (9)CO (8)

New Jersey 15 leads

New Jersey (9)NJ (6)

Maryland 13 leads

Maryland (9)MD (4)

Tennessee 13 leads

TN (7)Tennessee (6)

Virginia 12 leads

VA (7)Virginia (5)

Arizona 11 leads

AZ (9)Arizona (2)

Massachusetts 11 leads

MA (7)Massachusetts (4)

New York 10 leads

New York (6)NY (4)

New Mexico 9 leads

New Mexico (8)NM (1)

Ohio 9 leads

Ohio (7)OH (2)

Indiana 9 leads

IN (7)Indiana (2)

Missouri 8 leads

MO (6)Missouri (2)

Georgia 7 leads

GA (5)Georgia (2)

Washington 6 leads

WA (5)Washington (1)

Oregon 5 leads

Oregon (4)OR (1)

Connecticut 5 leads

Connecticut (3)CT (2)

Nebraska 4 leads

NE (3)Nebraska (1)

Minnesota 3 leads

Minnesota (2)MN (1)

Louisiana 3 leads

LA (2)Louisiana (1)

Kansas 3 leads

KS (2)Kansas (1)

Alabama 3 leads

AL (2)Alabama (1)

Hawaii 2 leads

Hawaii (1)HI (1)

Country Naming Variants

Countries with inconsistent naming (e.g., "USA" vs "United States")

United States 431 leads

USA (304)US (89)United States (37)United States of America (1)

Lead Creation Trends (Last 30 Days)

11-05
11-10
11-11
11-19
12-05
12-07
12-08
12-09
12-10
12-11
12-12
12-13
12-14
12-15
12-16
12-17
12-18
12-19
12-21
12-22
12-23
12-24
12-25
12-26
12-28
12-30
12-31
01-02
01-04
01-05