Start with public project records, then qualify the project—not the other way around. Use TDLR to find construction-project signals, cross-check the exact location in Austin’s permit search, and confirm the cleaning buyer, scope, and timing before treating a record as a sales opportunity.
1. Decide what a worthwhile project looks like.
A useful shortlist starts with your own operating limits: travel radius, crew availability, project type, and work you can actually perform. A large project is not automatically a better prospect if the schedule, equipment, or site requirements do not fit your business.
For a focused first pass, you might choose commercial interior renovations and tenant fit-outs within your service area. BroomBrief’s Austin pilot uses an initial research focus around 1,000–20,000 registered square feet. That is our research filter, not a recommended bid size or a measure of cleanable area.
2. Search TDLR for project signals.
The official TDLR TABS search includes city, county, location address, project status, registration-date, and estimated-completion filters. Start with your market and a manageable registration or planned-completion window. Review individual records for commercial interior work that fits your scope.
TABS is a construction-project registration system within Texas’s accessibility program—not a cleaning bid board. TDLR’s program overview explains that Registered Accessibility Specialists perform accessibility plan reviews or inspections and can update project information. A listed RAS is not, by that role alone, the person buying cleaning.
A narrow search is a research starting point, not a complete census. Do not interpret a missing record as proof that no work exists.
3. Save evidence that you can revisit.
For every candidate, keep the project name and ID, official URL, exact address and suite, scope as described, registered area, planned dates, and the date you checked the source. Keep the filing’s wording separate from your interpretation. Save changes as changes rather than silently overwriting your earlier note.
Source fact
“The record describes an interior renovation and lists a planned completion date.”
Your inference
“This may create a final-cleaning need, but the purchaser and availability are unknown.”
Dates in a filing are not confirmation of work happening today. A project’s registered area also does not establish the floor, glass, fixture, or other quantities your cleaning quote needs.
4. Cross-check the exact location in Austin’s permit system.
The City of Austin’s Austin Build + Connect page links to Public Search for permits and case history; the City says this search does not require registration. Its AB+C manual explains public search and permit-status navigation.
Search the exact address, check the suite and description, and compare the case you find with your original project. Similar names or a shared building address are not enough to establish a match. A permit status is evidence about that permit—not proof that cleaning is available, that occupancy has begun, or that a particular company controls the cleaning purchase.
If the address or scope conflicts, keep the discrepancy in your notes and pause qualification. Do not merge two records simply to make the opportunity look more complete.
5. Turn the shortlist into a next-action list.
Before quoting or making a sales claim, verify the actual project stage, the cleaning purchaser, whether the work is still open, and the relevant scope. Use a public business routing channel to ask who handles construction-cleaning procurement; avoid treating every owner, architect, or accessibility contact as a buyer.
Give each candidate one next action and a review date: confirm the exact suite, identify the purchaser, ask about vendor onboarding, or archive because it is outside your service range. “Needs buyer verification” is a useful status. “Ready to bid” is not useful unless you have the evidence to support it.
Use the construction-cleaning qualification checklist to decide what is missing before spending time on a quote.
Are public records the same as post-construction cleaning leads?
Not necessarily. People use “leads” to describe very different products: a public project record, a business contact, an invited bid, or a buyer who has asked for a quote. Ask which one you are getting. None of the first three automatically establishes the fourth.
BroomBrief’s pilot is a researched project watchlist: selected source-linked facts, context, and next-step questions. It is not a warm introduction, an exclusive opportunity, or a promise of work. The sources remain public; the intended value is a more organized research workflow.
Try the workflow on a dated example.
Open the sample brief, follow its original source, and list what you would still need to verify. The sample is not a current inventory of cleaning jobs.
Read the sample PDFThe source descriptions above were reviewed October 22, 2026. The workflow and qualification recommendations are BroomBrief’s editorial guidance, not government instructions or verification of an individual project. BroomBrief is not affiliated with or endorsed by TDLR or the City of Austin.