The bidding marketMassachusetts

Who builds Massachusetts public work

978 general contractors bid on 1,962 Massachusetts public jobs in this record. Wins are spread thin — the ten busiest winners take 14% of them — but dollars pool at the top, and distance matters: GCs win 26% of competitive bids within 10 miles of home, against 15% at 50–100 miles.

Snapshot · as of Jun 29, 2026
8,711 records
Massachusetts public bid lists, mostly 2020–2026
2 sources · method

Home-court edge

+10pts

26% win rate within 10 mi of home vs 15% at 50–100 mi

GC firms bidding

978

204 of them bid 10+ times

GC bidders per job

median · vs 11 plan holders

Top 10 winners' share of $

31%

vs 14% of wins · $9.5B awarded

Out-of-state GCs

11%

of bids · 11% of wins, 17% of $

01 · Concentration

Wins are spread thin. Dollars are not.

562 different firms won at least one job. By count, no one dominates (HHI 49 on a 0–10,000 scale). By dollars the field narrows: the big contracts go to a short list of heavy-civil and building GCs.

Ten firms hold 14% of wins but 31% of dollars

Cumulative share of decided jobs, and of awarded dollars, held by the top N winners (each measure ranked on its own).

Share of dollars
Share of wins

number of firms, largest first

n = 1,877 decided jobs · 1,772 with an award amountSource: MA public bid results

▸ Show the numbers

Top N firms	Share of wins	Share of dollars
1	1.8%	4.4%
3	5.3%	11.9%
5	8.6%	18.1%
10	14.0%	30.6%
20	22.3%	48.7%
50	38.3%	72.2%
100	56.7%	87.7%

The biggest checks go to heavy-civil and building GCs

Awarded dollars, top ten firms (winning bid amounts; joint ventures split evenly), with the number of jobs won.

Walsh Construction
$414M5 wins
Fontaine Brothers
$387M8 wins
JF White Contracting Co.
$331M10 wins
The Middlesex Companies
$308M3 wins
Northern Construction
$283M28 wins
CTA Construction Managers
$246M6 wins
Methuen Construction Co.
$226M7 wins
Daniel O'Connell's Sons
$221M11 wins
D. W. White Construction
$220M9 wins
MIG Corporation
$212M17 wins

Together these ten hold 31% of the $9.5B awarded; the next 90 firms hold another 57%.

$9.5B awarded across 1,772 jobsSource: MA public bid resultsCSV

▸ Show the numbers

Firm	Home office	Wins	Awarded
Walsh Construction	Norwood, MA	5	$414M
Fontaine Brothers	Springfield, MA	8	$387M
JF White Contracting Co.	Framingham, MA	10	$331M
The Middlesex Companies	Littleton, MA	3	$308M
Northern Construction	Palmer, MA	28	$283M
CTA Construction Managers	Waltham, MA	6	$246M
Methuen Construction Co.	Plaistow, NH	7	$226M
Daniel O'Connell's Sons	Holyoke, MA	11	$221M
D. W. White Construction	Acushnet, MA	9	$220M
MIG Corporation	Acton, MA	17	$212M

Northern Construction bid 275 times — more than any other GC

GC bids, top ten firms. Volume and winning are different skills: only some of the busiest bidders also top the wins list.

Northern Construction
275
E.T.& L. Corp.
194
New England Infrastructure
142
N. Granese & Sons
133
Revoli Construction Co.
120
WES Construction Corp.
111
Baltazar Contractors
108
Aqua Line Utility
106
MIG Corporation
94
GVW Inc.
90

8,711 GC bids by 978 firmsSource: MA public bid results

▸ Show the numbers

Firm	Home office	GC bids	Wins
Northern Construction	Palmer, MA	275	28
E.T.& L. Corp.	Stow, MA	194	18
New England Infrastructure	Hudson, MA	142	8
N. Granese & Sons	Salem, MA	133	35
Revoli Construction Co.	Franklin, MA	120	8
WES Construction Corp.	Halifax, MA	111	11
Baltazar Contractors	Ludlow, MA	108	16
Aqua Line Utility	Weymouth, MA	106	33
MIG Corporation	Acton, MA	94	17
GVW Inc.	Lynn, MA	90	10

N. Granese & Sons won the most jobs: 35

Jobs won, top ten firms. Several of the most frequent winners are municipal water, sewer and utility specialists.

N. Granese & Sons
35
Aqua Line Utility
33
National Water Main Cleaning Co.
32
Robert B. Our Company
31
C. Naughton Corp.
31
Northern Construction
28
MAS Building & Bridge
19
J.H. Maxymillian Inc.
19
SumCo Eco-Contracting
19
E.T.& L. Corp.
18

1,877 decided jobs · 562 different winnersSource: MA public bid results

▸ Show the numbers

Firm	Home office	Wins	GC bids
N. Granese & Sons	Salem, MA	35	133
Aqua Line Utility	Weymouth, MA	33	106
National Water Main Cleaning Co.	Canton, MA	32	59
Robert B. Our Company	Harwich, MA	31	76
C. Naughton Corp.	Bridgewater, MA	31	65
Northern Construction	Palmer, MA	28	275
MAS Building & Bridge	Norfolk, MA	19	73
J.H. Maxymillian Inc.	Pittsfield, MA	19	51
SumCo Eco-Contracting	Wakefield, MA	19	76
E.T.& L. Corp.	Stow, MA	18	194

Specialist owners and niches are concentrated; town work is wide open

Share of each market's wins (or awarded dollars) held by its five biggest winners. Hover a row for field size, HHI and the most frequent winners.

By owner

top-5 share

Federal1553%
Massport2452%
MBTA1945%
MWRA1644%
DCR4137%
MassDOT20830%
Water & sewer districts4728%
Housing authorities9520%
Other public bodies10619%
Schools & colleges11316%
Cities & towns1,18912%

By type of work

top-5 share

Marine & waterfront5951%
Earth retention & slopes1250%
Dams & spillways2544%
Bridges & culverts26225%
Water, sewer & drainage48521%
Roofs, HVAC & envelope6620%
Schools & public buildings27815%
Roads & sidewalks19214%
Parks & fields17414%

All public work: 9%Small number after each name = decided jobs. Fewer jobs mechanically means higher shares.

Markets with 10+ decided jobs · owner types from owner names, work types from title keywordsSource: MA public bid resultsCSV

▸ Show the numbers

Market	Group	Decided jobs	Firms that won	Bidders/job	Top-5 wins	Top-5 $	HHI wins	HHI $
Federal	Owner	15	12	3.1	53%	99%	933	7,917
Massport	Owner	24	16	3.6	52%	93%	842	3,300
MBTA	Owner	19	16	3.5	45%	88%	706	2,424
MWRA	Owner	16	14	3.4	44%	95%	859	4,293
DCR	Owner	41	30	5.7	37%	48%	458	627
MassDOT	Owner	208	62	5.6	30%	40%	323	477
Water & sewer districts	Owner	47	37	3.9	28%	52%	355	738
Housing authorities	Owner	95	70	4.7	20%	66%	209	1,205
Other public bodies	Owner	106	82	3.9	19%	49%	167	639
Schools & colleges	Owner	113	88	4.0	16%	80%	155	3,044
Cities & towns	Owner	1,189	414	4.4	12%	21%	64	184
Marine & waterfront	Type of work	59	32	4.5	51%	71%	869	2,199
Earth retention & slopes	Type of work	12	11	5.1	50%	86%	972	2,657
Dams & spillways	Type of work	25	19	5.7	44%	65%	784	1,234
Bridges & culverts	Type of work	262	94	5.2	25%	48%	255	633
Water, sewer & drainage	Type of work	485	171	4.6	21%	44%	168	642
Roofs, HVAC & envelope	Type of work	66	52	3.7	20%	60%	234	1,726
Schools & public buildings	Type of work	278	165	4.2	15%	54%	115	849
Roads & sidewalks	Type of work	192	106	4.8	14%	36%	138	451
Parks & fields	Type of work	174	117	4.3	14%	35%	124	384

02 · Home court

Contractors win more often close to home

Bidding farther away doesn’t just mean more rivals — the field is about the same size at every distance. What changes is the result: near home, GCs beat the odds; past 50 miles they fall below them. Shorter trucking, familiar owners and local suppliers are the usual explanations — the data can’t separate them.

Within 10 miles of home, GCs win 26% of competitive bids — +5 pts over par

Win rate on jobs with a known winner and 2+ GC bidders, by straight-line distance from the bidder's home office to the job. The ink tick is par: the rate expected by luck alone given the number of bidders.

Actual win rate
Par (1 ÷ bidders)
All distances (20%), dashed

Miles from home office; small numbers are bids per band. The 100+ mile band is a small sample (grey).

n = 7,416 competitive bids by Massachusetts-based GCsSource: MA public bid results; Census GazetteerCSV

▸ Show the numbers

Distance	Bids	Win rate	Par	Edge	Median bidders
< 10 mi	1,316	25.5%	20.1%	+5.5 pts	6
10–25 mi	2,619	19.7%	19.1%	+0.6 pts	6
25–50 mi	2,474	18.0%	18.5%	−0.4 pts	7
50–100 mi	946	15.4%	19.8%	−4.4 pts	6
100+ mi	61	19.7%	26.2%	−6.5 pts	4

Half of all bids land within 23 miles of the home office

Distance from home office to job, all GC bids by Massachusetts-based firms. Winning bids sit closer: median 20 mi.

GC bids per 10-mile band
Band holding the median

miles from home office

n = 7,777 located bids · 90% within 58 miSource: MA public bid results; Census Gazetteer

▸ Show the numbers

Miles from home	Bids	Share
0–10	1,401	18.0%
10–20	1,932	24.8%
20–30	1,540	19.8%
30–40	1,116	14.3%
40–50	719	9.2%
50–60	383	4.9%
60–70	253	3.3%
70–80	177	2.3%
80–90	131	1.7%
90–100	60	0.8%
100+	65	0.8%

How far the busiest firms travel to bid

The 24 Massachusetts-based GCs with the most located bids, sorted by median distance to the job. Wide bars mean a firm works both near and far.

020406080+

Robert B. Our CompanyHarwich14
Commonwealth Construction & UtilitiesWatertown16
N. Granese & SonsSalem18
Ludlow Construction Co.Ludlow20
GVW Inc.Lynn20
RJV Construction Corp.Westwood21
National Water Main Cleaning Co.Canton21
C. Naughton Corp.Bridgewater22
JF White Contracting Co.Framingham22
Albanese D & S Inc.Dracut24
D'Allessandro CorporationWest Bridgewater24
SumCo Eco-ContractingWakefield27
Aqua Line UtilityWeymouth29
Baltazar ContractorsLudlow29
WES Construction Corp.Halifax29
MIG CorporationActon30
Construction DynamicsClinton30
MAS Building & BridgeNorfolk30
Revoli Construction Co.Franklin31
Joseph P. Cardillo & SonSalisbury Beach33
E.T.& L. Corp.Stow35
NEL CorporationMiddleton38
New England InfrastructureHudson41
Northern ConstructionPalmer52

all-bid median 23 mimedianmiddle half of bids

Firms with 40+ located bids · 7,777 bids overallSource: MA public bid results; Census Gazetteer

▸ Show the numbers

Firm	Home	Located bids	Median mi	25th pct	75th pct
Robert B. Our Company	Harwich	76	14	7	30
Commonwealth Construction & Utilities	Watertown	68	16	6	24
N. Granese & Sons	Salem	133	18	12	25
Ludlow Construction Co.	Ludlow	89	20	11	39
GVW Inc.	Lynn	90	20	12	34
RJV Construction Corp.	Westwood	67	21	13	39
National Water Main Cleaning Co.	Canton	59	21	13	33
C. Naughton Corp.	Bridgewater	65	22	19	32
JF White Contracting Co.	Framingham	61	22	19	31
Albanese D & S Inc.	Dracut	87	24	14	33
D'Allessandro Corporation	West Bridgewater	68	24	21	29
SumCo Eco-Contracting	Wakefield	76	27	18	40
Aqua Line Utility	Weymouth	106	29	18	38
Baltazar Contractors	Ludlow	108	29	13	46
WES Construction Corp.	Halifax	111	29	24	40
MIG Corporation	Acton	94	30	21	55
Construction Dynamics	Clinton	73	30	17	40
MAS Building & Bridge	Norfolk	73	30	22	43
Revoli Construction Co.	Franklin	120	31	21	41
Joseph P. Cardillo & Son	Salisbury Beach	84	33	26	42
E.T.& L. Corp.	Stow	194	35	18	59
NEL Corporation	Middleton	72	38	17	48
New England Infrastructure	Hudson	142	41	23	61
Northern Construction	Palmer	275	52	29	70

03 · Rivalries

The same names meet again and again

319 pairs of GCs have met on at least ten of the same bid lists. The map below draws the 79 most active firms; clusters form around owner type and geography — heavy-civil bridge bidders in one knot, Boston-area utility contractors in another.

The most frequent match-up has happened 126 times

Firms with 25+ GC bids, joined when they met on 10+ bid lists. Head-to-head counts only meetings where exactly one of the two won.

Boston & North Shore
Central & Western MA
South Shore & Cape
Out of state

Highlight a firm

Circle size = GC bids · line width = times the pair met · hover or click a firm to isolate its rivals.

79 firms · 264 pairs drawnSource: MA public bid resultsCSV

▸ Show the numbers

Firm A	Firm B	Meetings	Head-to-head (A–B)
E.T.& L. Corp.	Northern Construction	126	10–12
New England Infrastructure	Northern Construction	114	7–8
E.T.& L. Corp.	New England Infrastructure	91	7–7
MIG Corporation	Northern Construction	62	10–8
Baltazar Contractors	Ludlow Construction Co.	61	10–6
MIG Corporation	New England Infrastructure	51	8–5
MAS Building & Bridge	Northern Construction	48	12–1
E.T.& L. Corp.	MIG Corporation	46	4–8
N. Granese & Sons	Revoli Construction Co.	44	10–5
Joseph P. Cardillo & Son	N. Granese & Sons	40	4–7
Clayton D. Davenport Trucking	Northern Construction	39	7–0
E.T.& L. Corp.	MAS Building & Bridge	38	3–8
MAS Building & Bridge	MIG Corporation	38	11–7
J.H. Maxymillian Inc.	Northern Construction	37	13–2
MAS Building & Bridge	New England Infrastructure	37	8–4
Baltazar Contractors	E.T.& L. Corp.	37	4–3
Baltazar Contractors	Morais Contractor	37	7–5
Commonwealth Construction & Utilities	Joseph P. Cardillo & Son	36	4–3
A.J. Virgilio Construction	Northern Construction	35	9–0
Northern Construction	S&R Corporation	34	3–2
Caracas Construction Corp.	Ludlow Construction Co.	34	7–3
Joseph P. Cardillo & Son	Revoli Construction Co.	33	4–2
Ludlow Construction Co.	Morais Contractor	33	3–3
Insituform Technologies	National Water Main Cleaning Co.	32	10–16
Green Mountain Pipeline Services	National Water Main Cleaning Co.	32	3–20

Most frequent match-ups

1E.T.& L. Corp. & Northern Construction126×10–12
2New England Infrastructure & Northern Construction114×7–8
3E.T.& L. Corp. & New England Infrastructure91×7–7
4MIG Corporation & Northern Construction62×10–8
5Baltazar Contractors & Ludlow Construction61×10–6
6MIG Corporation & New England Infrastructure51×8–5
7MAS Building & Bridge & Northern Construction48×12–1
8E.T.& L. Corp. & MIG Corporation46×4–8
9N. Granese & Sons & Revoli Construction44×10–5
10Joseph P. Cardillo & Son & N. Granese & Sons40×4–7

How to read this

126× = the pair appeared on 126 of the same GC bid lists.
10–12 = head-to-head: of the meetings where exactly one of them won, the first firm won 10 and the second 12. Most meetings are won by someone else.
Frequent rivals usually share a niche and a region: the clusters follow geography as much as the type of work.

04 · Directory

Look up a contractor

Every firm with 10+ GC bids in the record. Win rates appear only as bands, shrunk toward the 20% market average so a short lucky streak can’t read as a record; dollars only where a firm has enough wins that no single contract shows through.

204 general contractors, by the numbers

Search by firm, town, niche or owner type. Click a column to sort; win-rate bands are shown for reference, not ranked.

204 of 204 rows

General contractors with 10 or more GC bids on Massachusetts public work
						Win rate
Northern Construction	Palmer	275	28	$283M	$5.8M	10–15%	52	Bridges, Roads	E.T.& L. Corp. (126×)
E.T.& L. Corp.	Stow	194	18	$104M	$4.1M	5–10%	35	Bridges, Roads	Northern Construction (126×)
New England Infrastructure	Hudson	142	8	$29M	$2.9M	5–10%	41	Bridges, Dams	Northern Construction (114×)
N. Granese & Sons	Salem	133	35	$75.1M	$1.4M	20–25%	18	Water & sewer, Roads	Revoli Construction (44×)
Revoli Construction Co.	Franklin	120	8	$22.1M	$2.2M	5–10%	31	Water & sewer, Bridges	N. Granese & Sons (44×)
WES Construction Corp.	Halifax	111	11	$154M	$10M	10–15%	29	Water & sewer, Parks	Waterline Industries (23×)
Baltazar Contractors	Ludlow	108	16	$74.5M	$1.6M	10–15%	29	Water & sewer, Roads	Ludlow Construction (61×)
Aqua Line Utility	Weymouth	106	33	$88.6M	$790K	25–30%	29	Water & sewer, Bridges	N. Granese & Sons (30×)
MIG Corporation	Acton	94	17	$212M	$6.4M	15–20%	30	Bridges, Marine	Northern Construction (62×)
GVW Inc.	Lynn	90	10	$47.2M	$1.8M	10–15%	20	Buildings, Roofs & HVAC	MOCC / M O'Connor Contracting (25×)
Ludlow Construction Co.	Ludlow	89	11	$71.3M	$5.6M	10–15%	20	Water & sewer, Roads	Baltazar Contractors (61×)
Albanese D & S Inc.	Dracut	87	5	$10.7M	$2.8M	5–10%	24	Water & sewer, Roads	RJV Construction (30×)
Joseph P. Cardillo & Son	Salisbury Beach	84	11	$15.8M	$770K	10–15%	33	Water & sewer	N. Granese & Sons (40×)
SumCo Eco-Contracting	Wakefield	76	19	$66.2M	$730K	20–25%	27	Dams, Bridges	R. Bates & Sons (24×)
Robert B. Our Company	Harwich	76	31	$204M	$3.6M	35–40%	14	Water & sewer, Marine	CC Construction (27×)

Page 1 / 14

204 firms with 10+ GC bids · 195 with a win-rate bandSource: MA public bid resultsCSV

05 · Plan holders

Most plan holders never bid

A typical job draws 11 plan holders and 4 GC bids. Of all 35,849 plan-holder and prospective-bidder listings on these jobs — subs and suppliers included — 16% turned into a GC bid.

Even among GCs, only 25% of plan pulls become a bid

Listings by firms that bid as a GC somewhere in the record, on jobs whose bid results are known.

1Took out plans or listed as a prospective bidder23,066
2Submitted a GC bid5,72325%
3Won the job1,1635%

Plan holders / job: 11
GC bids / job: 4
GC withdrawals: 509

n = 23,066 GC plan-holder / prospective listingsSource: MA public bid results

▸ Show the numbers

Step	Listings	Share of step 1
Took out plans / listed as prospective	23,066	100%
Submitted a GC bid	5,723	24.8%
Won the job	1,163	5.0%

MassDOT plan holders are the most serious

Share of GC plan-holder listings that became a bid, by owner type. MassDOT requires bidders to be prequalified, so its plan holders are mostly real contenders.

MassDOT2,051
56%
Federal81
30%
Housing authorities677
26%
DCR798
23%
Other public bodies1,342
23%
Schools & colleges1,416
23%
Water & sewer districts650
22%
Cities & towns15,061
22%
MBTA276
19%
MWRA345
18%
Massport354
18%

Owner types with 50+ listingsSource: MA public bid results

▸ Show the numbers

Owner	Listings	Became a bid
MassDOT	2,051	55.6%
Federal	81	29.6%
Housing authorities	677	25.6%
DCR	798	23.3%
Other public bodies	1,342	23.2%
Schools & colleges	1,416	22.6%
Water & sewer districts	650	21.8%
Cities & towns	15,061	21.5%
MBTA	276	19.2%
MWRA	345	17.7%
Massport	354	17.5%

Where these numbers come from

Method, sources & caveats

We read the general-contractor bid lists published with 1,962 Massachusetts public projects — 95,588 participant listings across 8,405 company records — and counted only what the lists show: who bid as a GC, who came in low, who was awarded the job.

Concentration. Top-N share is the fraction of a market’s wins (or dollars) held by its N biggest winners. HHI sums the squared percentage shares of every winner (0–10,000; the 2023 federal merger guidelines call a market above 1,800 highly concentrated). With few jobs in a market, both measures run high by construction.

Spot a firm that has been split or merged wrongly? Tell us and we’ll fix the name key on the next rebuild.

Massachusetts public work only: public project records (projects the source marks as privately owned are excluded), pulled 2026-06-24 to 2026-06-29. Coverage is heaviest in 2021–22, so nothing here is a year-over-year trend.
A 'bid' is a firm listed as a general-contractor bidder, apparent low or awarded GC on a project's published bid list. Plan holders and prospective bidders are not bids. 1,170 branch records were merged into 978 firms by stripping branch/office tails and legal suffixes; a few distinct firms may still share or split a key.
The winner is the awarded GC where an award is recorded, otherwise the apparent low bidder. 15 projects list more than one winner (joint ventures or split awards): each winner is credited with the win and an equal share of the contract dollars.
Win rates use only competitive decisions — projects with a known winner and at least two GC bidders (266 one-bidder projects are excluded because they would inflate rates). Firm rates are shrunk toward the 20% base rate with 10 pseudo-decisions, shown only as 5-point bands, and only for firms with at least 10 competitive decisions.
Awarded dollars are the winning bid amounts (JV-split). A firm's total is shown only with 3+ wins (three significant figures) and its median award only with 5+ wins, rounded to two significant figures, so no single contract can be read off the table.
Par is the win rate a bidder would get by chance: the average of 1 ÷ (number of GC bidders) over the same bids. The home-court edge compares actual win rates near and far from home; because par barely changes with distance, the gap is not an artefact of field size.
Win-rate bands describe results in this record only. They are not a measure of a firm's quality, capacity or pricing, and firms bid for many reasons besides winning (relationships, market testing, prequalification).
Distance is measured from the city of the GC office on the bid list (its most common office) to the project location, straight-line. Home offices outside Massachusetts are excluded from distance figures.
Work niches come from keywords in project titles (a project can sit in more than one niche); owner types from the owner's name. Titles themselves are not published.
The directory lists firms with at least 10 GC bids; the network draws firms with at least 25 bids and pairs that met on at least 10 bid lists. Head-to-head records count only meetings where exactly one of the two won.

Groups with fewer than 10 records are suppressed so no single project or firm can be singled out.

Data as of: Jun 29, 2026
Generated: Sep 11, 2026
Records: 8,711
Refresh: Frozen snapshot · rebuilt when the leads database is re-pulled

Massachusetts public bid results and project recordsPublic recordFirm-level counts derived from published bid lists. No project rows, titles, per-project bids or contacts are republished.
U.S. Census Bureau Gazetteer — Massachusetts towns & places (2024)Public domainTown and village internal points, used to place each GC's home office.

Published by Earth Support Corp as a public resource. Regional statistics for planning and curiosity. They are not an engineering report, a bid recommendation or a statement about any particular site, firm or project. Spot an error? Tell us and we will correct it. Full method: methodology.