Website review, no card needed
proactioninc.org website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 22 October 202629 issues · 82 checks
This review found 29 issues worth fixing on proactioninc.org, 10 of them high impact, across 82 checks. The most urgent: render-blocking requests. Your full playbook turns these into prioritised fixes alongside reviews, competitors and channels.
- Homepage
- Phone render
- Links and pages
- Google PageSpeed
Google PageSpeed Insights (opens in a new tab), mobile
Site score
82BClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 1.6 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 85 ms |
| May 9, 2026 | 86 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 83 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 84 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 90 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 88 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 89 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 90 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 86 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 81 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 80 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 80 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 84 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 86 ms |
Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab): real Chrome visitors over rolling 28-day periods.
One score from every part of this review. How it works
How it loaded on a phone
0.9 s
1.8 s
2.6 s
3.5 s
4.4 s
5.3 s
6.2 s
7.0 s
Speed
Render-blocking requests
3.2 s49 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 3.2 s.
Improve image delivery
2.5 s · 458 KiB2 images could be 458 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 2.5 s faster on a phone.
Reduce unused JavaScript
1.2 s · 230 KiBAbout 230 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.2 s faster on a phone.
Mobile performance score: 57
57/100Your mobile performance score is 57 (desktop: 94). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
5 third-party services on the page
5 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, elementor.com and gtranslate.net and others), adding 223 KiB and 195 ms of main-thread time.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
150 ms · 15 KiB1 file is served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (15 KiB).
5 long tasks on the main thread
5 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 124 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Font display
100 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 100 ms).
Legacy JavaScript
23 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 23 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.
Reduce unused CSS
23 KiBAbout 23 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page.
Phones get a much slower page than desktops
Desktop scores 94 but mobile only 57. A gap that wide usually means heavy scripts and images that hit phones hardest.
Chained critical requests
Critical files load one after another instead of in parallel (3 chains). Preconnecting to key origins and preloading the hero image shortens the chain.
Forced reflow
Scripts make the browser recalculate the layout repeatedly while the page loads, which wastes processor time on phones.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 1.6 s
A phone's processor spends 1.6 s on main-thread work while loading, 604 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 7 ms
7 msYour server sent the HTML in 7 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
Largest Contentful Paint: 11.6 s
11.6 sYour largest element takes 11.6 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image “2”. Most of its time is element render delay (5.3 s).
Speed Index: 11.5 s
11.5 sVisually, the page fills in at 11.5 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Time to Interactive: 11.7 s
11.7 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 11.7 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
First Contentful Paint: 3.5 s
3.5 sThe first text or image appears after 3.5 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
1 image without width and height
1 image have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
-1%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 85 ms to 86 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
9 checks passed
Passes Core Web Vitals for real visitors
Real Chrome users on phones pass Google's Core Web Vitals on this page (28-day field data from the Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab)).
Real-user LCP: 1.7 s
1.7 sReal visitors wait 1.7 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 87 ms
87 msReal visitors wait 87 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Real-user CLS: 0.00
0.00For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.00 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Real-user FCP: 1.1 s
1.1 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.1 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 788 ms
788 msReal visitors wait 788 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Largest content (LCP) got 14% faster for real visitors
-14%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.9 s to 1.6 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.07
0.07The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.07, good is under 0.1).
Total Blocking Time: 134 ms
134 msScripts block the page for only 134 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Images and page weight
An image on the first screen is lazy-loaded
logorev.png is on the first screen but marked loading="lazy", so the browser waits before fetching it and the page looks finished later. Load it eagerly (and give it fetchpriority="high" if it is the main image).
1 image far larger than shown
324 KiB1 image is downloaded at several times the size a phone draws it, for example LSS3-scaled-1.jpg at 1,537 px wide, shown at 70 px. Resized copies would save about 324 KiB.
1 image below the first screen load straight away
1 image further down the page (330 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to it. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
1 image in older formats
1 image (330 KiB) is JPEG, PNG or GIF. The same pictures as WebP or AVIF are usually much smaller at the same quality, and every current browser shows them.
About 0.5 g of CO₂ per visit
0.55 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.55 g of CO₂e: 65.7 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
1 checks passed
Page weight: 1.9 MB in 112 requests
1.9 MBYour homepage downloads 1.9 MB in 112 requests on a phone: images 923 KiB (9), scripts 639 KiB (41) and fonts 236 KiB (9). That is a lean page.
Accessibility
1 text element with low contrast
1 text element doesn't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (26 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 26 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
No main landmark
The page has no <main> landmark, so screen-reader users cannot jump straight to the content.
1 link without text
1 visible link has no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where it goes.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h2 → h4 and h1 → h4), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 11 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
41 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 46 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 41 passed and 5 failed. 1 more need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
No meta description
No meta description, so Google writes its own snippet from whatever text it finds.
No structured data
No structured data (JSON-LD), so Google can't show rich results such as your logo, ratings or FAQs.
4 H1 headlines
There are 4 <h1> headlines (“Pro Action of Steuben and Yates, Inc.”, “Helping People. Changing Lives.” and “Our Programs”). One clear main headline is easier for people and search engines.
No social preview image
No Open Graph image (also missing: og:title, og:description), so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.
4 links with vague text
4 links use generic text like “click here” or “learn more”, which tells Google nothing about the page behind them.
No X (Twitter) card tag
No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.
51 internal links, 8 external
The homepage links to 51 pages on proactioninc.org and 8 external pages.
4 checks passed
Title: 44 characters
Your title is a healthy 44 characters: “Pro Action – Helping People. Changing Lives.”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://proactioninc.org/.
robots.txt in place
robots.txt is in place and points crawlers to your sitemap.
XML sitemap found
Your XML sitemap is reachable at https://proactioninc.org/wp-sitemap.xml.
AI search readiness
No Organization structured data
There is no Organization (or LocalBusiness) JSON-LD, so search engines and AI assistants have no machine-readable facts about who runs the site: its name, logo, profiles and contact details.
No llms.txt
There is no https://proactioninc.org/llms.txt, a short Markdown guide to your key pages for AI tools (llmstxt.org). It is optional and few AI tools read it yet, so treat it as a cheap extra.
2 checks passed
AI answer engines may read the site
Your robots.txt lets the crawlers behind ChatGPT search, Claude and Perplexity read the site and cite it in answers.
Text is in the HTML
Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (470 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
2 linked pages are broken
Your homepage links to https://proactioninc.org/resilient-children-and-families and https://proactioninc.org/basic-needs-support, which answer with an error. Visitors hit a dead end and search engines drop them.
4 pages share 2 titles
https://proactioninc.org/prosperous-futures and https://proactioninc.org/programs/prosperous-futures all use the title “Prosperous Futures – Pro Action”, and 1 other title repeat too. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.
13 pages without a meta description
https://proactioninc.org/about, https://proactioninc.org/programs, https://proactioninc.org/training-programs, https://proactioninc.org/why-work-with-us, https://proactioninc.org/contact-proaction and https://proactioninc.org/support-us and 7 others have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
2 links to non-canonical URLs
Your homepage links to 2 pages by a URL that isn't their canonical one, for example https://proactioninc.org/prosperous-futures, whose canonical is https://proactioninc.org/programs/prosperous-futures. Linking straight to the canonical URL saves crawlers a detour and keeps ranking signals on one address.
3 pages without an H1
https://proactioninc.org/about, https://proactioninc.org/why-work-with-us and https://proactioninc.org/support-us have no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
1 page slow to respond
https://proactioninc.org/thriving-seniors took over 3 s to send its HTML from our server.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 21 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
2 checks passed
No linked page is hidden from search
None of the pages we checked carries a noindex tag.
Every page has a title
All 13 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
3 checks passed
No console errors
No JavaScript errors were logged while the page loaded on a phone.
Tap targets are thumb-sized
19 of 21 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
Content and conversion
Thin social proof
Social proof on the homepage: 10 testimonial or review blocks. Pairing it with named testimonials or customer logos makes it far more convincing.
No risk reducer
No guarantee or risk reducer (money-back, free trial, no credit card) is mentioned, which is often what tips a hesitant visitor.
About 427 words of copy
The homepage carries about 427 words of visible text.
5 checks passed
Clear next step on the first screen
On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “Contact Us”.
8 calls to action
The homepage has 8 calls to action, for example “Contact Us” and “learn more”.
1 short form
A short form (1 field at most) is right on the homepage.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Analytics.
Direct contact links
Visitors can reach you directly: 4 phone links and 1 email link.
Privacy and tracking
2 trackers load before any consent
2Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager (measured from a US location before any click). No consent tool was detected. Visitors from the EU, UK and several US states must be asked first.
2 cookies set on arrival
2Opening the homepage sets 2 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).
No consent tool detected
No known cookie consent tool loads with the page. Some sites build their own banner, and some only show one to visitors from the EU.
5 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 5 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
Security, domain, email and software versions
The security, domain and email checks, software and plugin versions, and any app with a known security problem are visible only to people at proactioninc.org, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- CMS
- WordPress
- Framework
- jQuery
- Analytics
- Google Analytics
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 29 issues on proactioninc.org, including 9 speed issues, 5 SEO issues and 1 conversion gap. That is the website alone. The full Growth Playbook pairs these findings with what your customers say in public reviews and communities and what your closest competitors do better, then turns everything into at least 20 prioritised ideas, each with the evidence behind it, a step-by-step playbook, a metric and an owner.
- 28 research agents read your site, reviews, competitors, communities and public filings
- Customer review mining (G2, Capterra, Trustpilot and more) and voice-of-pain analysis in your buyers’ own words
- Competitor intelligence with battlecards for your closest rivals
- Ideal customer profile, buyer segments and buying-stage funnel
- Ranked channels, outreach sequences and content angles
- Live Reddit threads where buyers ask for what you sell, with draft replies
- Earned media and PR openings
- At least 20 ideas with evidence, a step-by-step playbook, metric, owner, effort and impact, grouped into this week, this quarter, big bets and wildcards, plus a 30/60/90-day roadmap
- PDF, Markdown, CSV, Notion and Linear exports, and a shareable page your team can track progress on
- Refresh the playbook later to see what changed
14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.