ICF International, Inc. Q1 FY2026 earnings call

• John Wasson noted the first quarter was a solid start, with well-executed client work, successful strategic initiatives, maintaining healthy win rates, book-to-bill ratios, and building business development pipeline. Federal government revenues showed sequential increase, international government revenues had strong year-on-year growth, and there was timing shift in revenues from commercial and international clients. New business included modifications, and strong margin performance was achieved while investing in long-term growth areas. - Anne Cho discussed business review, with commercial energy having strong underlying demand, state and local portfolio revenues stable with disaster management and recovery services as a driver, international portfolio growing nicely with strong sales, and federal business stabilized with expected consecutive revenue growth. - Barry M. Broadus provided financial performance details, noting first quarter results reflect solid execution, margins remain strong, contract awards resulted in book-to-bill above one, and discussed strategies for margin improvement, capital allocation, and financial results including revenue, margins, EBITDA, taxes, and balance sheet.

First quarter revenues were led by commercial, state and local, and international government clients, accounting for over 58% of total first quarter revenues. Federal government clients saw an 8.6% sequential increase in revenues. International government clients had a 17% year-on-year increase in revenues. Total revenue in the first quarter was $437.5 million, a decline of 10.3% compared to 2025. Federal government revenues grew 8.6% sequentially to $182.3 million. Subcontractor and other direct costs were $102.7 million, representing 23.5% of total revenues. Gross margin rose 10 basis points to 38.1%. Adjusted EBITDA totaled $48.9 million with an adjusted EBITDA margin of 11.2%. Net income in the first quarter was $20.5 million, or $1.12 per diluted share. Non-GAAP EPS was $1.50. Backlog stood at $3.4 billion at quarter end, approximately 51% of which is funded, and business development pipeline remains at $8.5 billion.

• Reiterated expectation of return to revenue and EPS growth in 2026, with revenues expected to range from $1.89 billion to $1.96 billion (3% growth at midpoint), GAAP EPS from $5.95 to $6.25, and non-GAAP EPS from $6.95 to $7.25 (5% growth at midpoint). - Full-year tax rate expectation remains at approximately 20.5%, with second quarter rate estimated around 23% and significant reduction in third quarter. - Anticipates capital expenditures to total $24 million to $26 million. - Now expects year-end fully diluted share count to be 18.3 million shares compared to prior expectation of 18.5 million shares. - Continues to expect operating cash flow of $135.15 billion for the full year.

Q: Good afternoon, and thanks for taking my question. I believe in the prepared remarks you talked about the advisory business for commercial energy growing mid-teens year over year in the quarter. I am wondering if you could help give us some additional color on where you are seeing the most activity today as it relates to the data center opportunity, how those conversations are evolving, and what exactly, as it relates to your skills and capabilities, is giving you an edge to continue to win business in that area. Thanks. And then one additional follow-up. High level, in terms of some of the investments that you are making today in the ERP system and other technology, I am wondering if you could help frame how much of those investments today are offsetting some of the benefits from recent cost optimization efforts, and how we should be thinking about the cadence of maybe more substantial gross or operating margin expansion over the coming quarters and years?

A: Sure. When I mentioned the advisory side and that growth, it is important to point out the work we are doing expanding our client portfolio. A couple of years ago, we acquired a firm called CMY, which added engineering capabilities. We have been able to expand our client set in that area, providing those engineering skills to utilities, for instance, that are trying to build out capacity to support data centers in their area. Our power modeling team has been benefiting from a resurgence of work from renewable developers across a suite of technologies — not just wind, but solar, storage, etc. — and then increased demand from data center developers as well. Yes. This is Barry M. Broadus. From an overall perspective, we have had a program for the last few years where we are modernizing our ERP systems, and that is driving efficiencies. We do this in a balanced way whereby we are receiving benefits — becoming more efficient and able to process and work faster internally. In addition to ERP systems, we are also implementing AI in many of our back-office processes, which is continuing to drive additional efficiencies. We have the ability to deliver more margin, but we are using dollars we save to invest in long-term growth initiatives in the areas that John Wasson and Anne Cho mentioned as part of their opening comments. We do this in a balanced way, and I do not see it detracting from our ability to continue to improve margins as we move forward.

Q: Hey, everyone. Thanks for taking our questions here. To start on the commercial energy business, it grew 2%, but I think you shared it would have grown 8% if we were to add back the $8 million in project work that got pushed out. At the start of the year, you shared you were expecting at least 10% organic growth for the year in this business. Do you still expect that, and what are you seeing in your backlog that is really supporting it? And then also, can you comment on how the residential and utility energy piece of the business performed versus more of the commercial and industrial energy piece?

A: I will start off. We remain confident in 10% growth for our commercial energy business. We have a strong backlog and a strong pipeline. Those markets are growing high single digits, and we have been benefiting from plus-ups and takeaways that increased our growth rate above the market average. We remain confident that we will continue to do that. In terms of residential versus industrial and commercial, we are the market leader in residential energy efficiency programs. We have about 35% market share and think we can continue to expand that. We are also placing significantly on the commercial building side, where we have about 15% to 20% market share. I do not have an update beyond what we discussed on the last call in terms of the share of residential versus commercial. One more thing to underline what John Wasson mentioned about the long-term growth trajectory: upstream of these programs we run, we also provide regulatory and consulting support to utilities, which gives us a good sense of the programs coming down the pike. That is another indicator supporting strong sales for both recompetes and wins on the program side. Historically, in our commercial energy business, we typically recognize roughly 47% of our annual revenues in the first half. The back half is when we typically hit certain milestones with regard to energy incentives, which creates a natural uptick in the back half versus the front half.

Q: Got it. I appreciate the color. I think I will ask about the federal business next. There was something that caught my ear in the prepared remarks — capturing more of the federal opportunities aligned with the administration's priorities. Could you expand upon that more? From an operating standpoint, what does it mean to pivot in that direction? Are there any recent successes you could point to, or is it still early?

A: There is definitely a different way of selling in this environment in the federal space — more focus on showing what we can do. We come in with prototypes and good ideas that we can demonstrate, and where we can demonstrate the ability to take a client to a relatively quick win. That is an example of pivoting in capture and business development. In terms of new opportunities, we have been successful winning in new areas and offices at agencies where we have worked before — for instance, the Department of State, Department of Labor, and Department of Defense. We recently won a large BPA with the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency, and that is one where we incorporate AI-driven components to modernize very complex operational processes, with human oversight and deep expertise. Those are the kinds of places where our skills resonate. I would also add the administration wants work to be outcome-based or fixed-price, and the vast majority of our work is in that category. We are in the single digits now on cost-plus, and that has been declining. There is a real focus on AI-first. We have our ICF fathom AI platform, which allows us to do rapid prototyping and other work for federal agencies. We also have a real capability around waste, fraud, and abuse at CMS that came to us with the Semantic Bits acquisition. It is a material part of our technology business and our HHS work, and that is an area where there is a lot of focus and we are seeing a lot of opportunity.

Q: Thank you. I was hoping you could give us a sketch of what your M&A could look like given the pressures in the federal space. The valuation in your own stock and the group largely has declined. How do you think about multiples and leverage in this context? How engaged and active do you expect to be? Also, from a commercial energy perspective, I understand some work was pushed to the right. What kind of growth cadence do you expect this year, and how quickly will the year-over-year or sequential growth resume? And you talked about a resurgence of renewables — could you give us more context around that in a little more detail?

A: As you know, M&A has been a key part of our strategy over the last 20 years as a public company. There have been three or four times where we have levered up and then, within a year or 18 months, paid down the debt. It has been quite successful for us in terms of both organic and inorganic growth. It remains a priority for us. Generally, we are focused on opportunities in our key growth areas. Right now, energy is first among equals, and the primary focus on the M&A front is on the commercial energy side. We would look for opportunities aligned with our core energy business — bringing us additional geographies, scale, capabilities, and clients. We will also look at adjacencies with more of an engineering focus. Anne Cho mentioned CMY, which brought grid engineering and large-load capabilities; that is an adjacency where there could be real synergies for us. At a high level, we want any acquisition to be accretive in the first year, with strategic and cultural fit, and we would need to see material revenue synergies to achieve those goals. On multiples, the energy arena for our current business retains premium multiples, so we need the right fit with the right synergies to meet our criteria. On leverage, historically when we have levered up, we have gone to about 3.0x to 3.5x — maybe 3.75x at the peak with Semantic Bits and ITG before that. I do not see us going higher than that. We want something we could pay down quickly with our strong cash flow — within a year or 18 months. On the commercial energy cadence, you could expect mid- to upper-single digits as we move into the next quarter or so, and then it will go beyond that and continue to ramp up as we move throughout the second half. The fourth quarter continues to be the strongest growth period as many energy incentives are realized during that time. On the resurgence of renewables, there is renewed interest, and “all of the above” is really more of a thing. Hyperscalers have made commitments to provide renewable energy to support their data centers, creating opportunities for us to support the analysis. That can include stakeholder engagement and crisis communication, as well as siting and interconnection analysis. With developers, we are doing siting analysis, expanding renewable facilities, looking at brownfields repurposing with an eye on potential renewables, and gas procurement strategies are still in there. Understanding interconnection applications and speed to power is really important. Battery storage is much more in the forefront now, and that has always been part of our work, but it is now of much greater interest to our clients.

Q: Great, thank you. From a housekeeping perspective, can you expand on what resulted in the later timing of some revenue in both the commercial energy and international markets? And in the federal space, you mentioned you submitted $400,000,000 worth of bids in the first quarter. Can you give us more flavor around the type of work you are predominantly bidding on?

A: In terms of the shift of revenue to the right, it was a confluence of events on a handful of projects where we did not ramp up the work quite as quickly as expected, both for ICF International, Inc. and our subcontractors. These are all fixed-price contracts; it is all in backlog, and it all has to be recognized in 2026, but we have to meet certain milestones to book the revenue and that was pushed out a bit. Our fees are performance-related when we meet specific energy production goals, and those were pushed out. It was just a confluence of events that pushed to the right for a handful of projects. There are no underlying challenges or problems with the projects. On federal bids, within HHS, CMS remains an area where we are seeing opportunity, and that was a key part of those figures. We are bidding more opportunities on the technology front at the Department of Defense. We have won several IDIQ contracts in the last year or 18 months, and we are seeing more opportunity for the types of skills we have. The Department of Homeland Security is also an area of opportunity that we are pursuing. We work at FEMA and other DHS agencies. Other civilian clients include NASA and EPA. On that most recent Department of Defense vehicle John Wasson mentioned, we recently won our first task order on that too, which was good to see.

Q: Thanks. One more — you mentioned the target of returning to mid- to high-single-digit revenue growth in 2027. Does that contemplate a return to year-over-year growth in the federal government space?

A: Yes. That would assume a return to growth in the federal space. We have 60% of our business — commercial, state and local, and international — growing 10% or more collectively, and we believe that is a long-term trend. We have indicated that our IT modernization business will return to low-single-digit growth this year. That gets 80% of our business to grow. Our guidance this year for the remaining 20% of our federal business is down mid- to high-teens given difficult comps from last year’s impacts. We think we have bottomed out and are stabilizing there. If that stabilizes and the other 80% is growing, that gets us to mid-single-digit or better organic growth. The upside would be doing better than stabilization in that remainder or higher growth in IT modernization and the other 60%. And, of course, acquisitions could move us to double-digit growth.

Q: Hey, good afternoon, everyone. I wanted to touch on what you are seeing on the state and local government activity levels as far as RFPs and demand, as well as the disaster side of things. And could you also touch on what you are seeing internationally as far as the opportunity set?

A: On the state and local front, beyond disaster, our environmental services to state and local governments have been buoyed by a focus on new broadband fiber installations and opportunities in the mining sector where gold and critical minerals are in high demand. We have won some recent engagements in broadband and see more coming. For state transportation and metropolitan planning organizations, we won a suite of separate but related projects that address the resilience of transportation infrastructure to extreme weather and also focus on safety and mobility. That work is interesting, utilizes proprietary ICF International, Inc. models and deep expertise, and focuses on providing actionable, investable recommendations. We are also seeing opportunities to support states with advanced technology solutions akin to what we do for federal modernization. For a major state client, we are working on a legacy modernization project where we have the opportunity to pilot the use of generative modernization code to speed the process. That pilot is showing promise and is a new place for us to engage on the state side. On disaster, much of the work has shifted to states over the past several years, and we support state and local governments in proactive resilience. Leaning in to increase resilience before a storm is less expensive than responding after a storm. That is a priority of this administration. Programs like BRIC, and others in that proactive resilience front, are important. Internationally, we are very focused on delivery — we have won a lot in Europe and the UK in the last couple of years and are ramping up large contracts. Procurement activity there has been exciting. We continue to see strong recognition of ICF International, Inc.’s brand with UK and EU government clients. With 17.5% growth in the first quarter, there is momentum, and we continue to expect strong growth over the course of the year.

Q: Thank you for the details. One follow-up: on the prioritization of federal areas like fraud prevention, do you anticipate or are you beginning to see any of that type of work at the state and local level as well, or other examples where states are moving in the same direction as federal?

A: Some states are more focused in areas that are priorities for the federal administration, and others are focused in areas that are not priorities for the administration. In both directions, we have skills that can support state agencies. Some states are trying to fill gaps they see left by the administration shifting away from certain priorities, while other states are aligning directly with administration priorities. We are following those cues accordingly.