Website review, no card needed

proactioninc.org logo

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.

  1. Homepage
  2. Phone render
  3. Links and pages
  4. Google PageSpeed

Google PageSpeed Insights (opens in a new tab), mobile

Real-visitor load time (LCP)75th percentile, phones
2.0 s1.2 sMay 2Oct 171.6 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 2, 20261.9 s
May 9, 20261.9 s
May 16, 20261.9 s
May 23, 20261.8 s
Jun 6, 20261.8 s
Jun 13, 20261.9 s
Jun 20, 20261.9 s
Jun 27, 20261.8 s
Jul 4, 20261.8 s
Jul 18, 20261.5 s
Jul 25, 20261.6 s
Aug 1, 20261.6 s
Aug 8, 20261.6 s
Aug 15, 20261.4 s
Aug 22, 20261.4 s
Aug 29, 20261.3 s
Sep 26, 20261.6 s
Oct 3, 20261.6 s
Oct 10, 20261.6 s
Oct 17, 20261.6 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
92 ms79 msMay 2Oct 1786 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 2, 202685 ms
May 9, 202686 ms
May 16, 202683 ms
May 23, 202684 ms
Jun 13, 202690 ms
Jun 20, 202688 ms
Jun 27, 202689 ms
Jul 4, 202690 ms
Jul 18, 202686 ms
Aug 1, 202681 ms
Aug 8, 202680 ms
Aug 29, 202680 ms
Oct 10, 202684 ms
Oct 17, 202686 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

Full-page screenshot of proactioninc.org (desktop) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. proactioninc.org at 0.9 s0.9 s
  2. proactioninc.org at 1.8 s1.8 s
  3. proactioninc.org at 2.6 s2.6 s
  4. proactioninc.org at 3.5 s3.5 s
  5. proactioninc.org at 4.4 s4.4 s
  6. proactioninc.org at 5.3 s5.3 s
  7. proactioninc.org at 6.2 s6.2 s
  8. proactioninc.org at 7.0 s7.0 s

Speed

4 to fix57
  • Render-blocking requests

    3.2 s

    49 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 KiB

    2 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 KiB

    About 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

    57/100

    Your 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 KiB

    1 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 ms

    Web fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 100 ms).

  • Legacy JavaScript

    23 KiB

    Polyfills for old browsers add 23 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.

  • Reduce unused CSS

    23 KiB

    About 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 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 7 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

5 to fix100
  • Largest Contentful Paint: 11.6 s

    11.6 s

    Your 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 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 11.5 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

  • Time to Interactive: 11.7 s

    11.7 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 11.7 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • First Contentful Paint: 3.5 s

    3.5 s

    The 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 s

    Real 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 ms

    Real visitors wait 87 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user CLS: 0.00

    0.00

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.00 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Real-user FCP: 1.1 s

    1.1 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 1.1 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 788 ms

    788 ms

    Real 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

    0.07

    The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.07, good is under 0.1).

  • Total Blocking Time: 134 ms

    134 ms

    Scripts block the page for only 134 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.

Images and page weight

3 to fix81
  • 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 KiB

    1 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 g

    By 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 MB

    Your 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

4 to fixGoogle 9195
  • 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

5 to fixGoogle 8577
  • 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

1 to fix88
  • 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

5 to fix53
  • 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

Google 100100
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

1 to fix92
  • 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

1 to fix
  • 2 trackers load before any consent

    2

    Before 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

    2

    Opening 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

By continuing you agree to the Terms and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.

Free requests are written in the order they come in, so it can take a while. Pay $25 and yours is ready within a few hours. Either way you get a shareable link and a PDF.

  • No subscription
  • Free, or $25 to skip the line
  • Money-back guarantee

14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.

Get the full playbook · $25