MHAMHA Web SystemsAudit
The Lab

We run our business on the system we sell.

This website sits on the same kind of Website System we build for clients — lead capture, follow-up, audits, invoicing, reporting, all automated with human approval. This is the build log: what shipped, what the system did on its own, and what we learned. Unedited except for client privacy.

July 2026

The Care Plan got real tiers, and a price cut

Our monthly support plan used to start at $1,000. Looking at it honestly, that number was left over from a strategy-retainer era — and it does not match what a small business actually needs after launch, which is hosting, monitoring, security patches, backups, and someone who answers when something breaks.

So we rebuilt it as a Care Plan with three tiers: $250, $500, and $1,000 a month. Hosting, monitoring, security, and backups are the floor in every tier — the only things that change are hands-on update hours and response speed. Storage is the only thing that meters, and email, SMS, AI, and payments run on the client's own accounts, at cost, with no markup.

Cutting your own anchor price by 75% feels wrong for about an hour. Then you remember the goal is a plan a real small business says yes to, keeps for years, and never feels trapped by.

Every page now passes the gate we grade clients with

We built a quality gate this week: a script that snapshots any page before we touch it and diffs it after — title length, meta description, canonical, heading structure, schema, Open Graph tags, image alts, dead links, and whether the one call-to-action is present. The same dimensions our client audits grade.

Then we ran it on our own site and it embarrassed us, which is the point. Five pages were missing og:site_name. Five meta descriptions were long enough to get truncated in search results. The Lab page you are reading had a doubled brand suffix in its title. Three pages linked to routes we had deleted that morning.

All fixed the same day, and the rule going forward is simple: no page ships unless the gate is green and the diff shows nothing regressed. If we would flag it in a client audit, we do not get to ship it ourselves.

We deleted a third of our own website

Today we removed thirteen pages from this site. Fractional-executive services, a nonprofit strategy page, referral systems, a standalone dashboard page, two duplicate service routes, and a pile of advisory-era content — all gone, on purpose.

The reason is the same advice we give clients: a small business that lists twelve services looks like a generalist, and generalists lose to specialists. The site now sells four things, in the order they matter — the free audit, the website that generates leads, the follow-up system, and the care plan that keeps it running. Everything we cut still exists as capability. It just stopped competing for attention.

The uncomfortable part: several of those pages had decent copy we spent real time on. Deleting work you paid for is harder than writing new work. It was still the right call — the nav is shorter, the footer is honest, and every remaining page points at one door.

Search Console is wired in, and the first 28 days are humbling

We connected Google Search Console to the Workbench this week — read-only API, daily import, feeding the striking-distance panel and the demand coverage cards. The first 28 days of data took about a minute to be useful and about two minutes to be uncomfortable.

Nearly every impression we get is for searches from our old positioning — fractional executive cost queries — at positions 27 through 85, with zero clicks. The website says "website systems"; Google still remembers who we used to be. That's not a surprise, it's a measurement: repositioning isn't done when you rewrite the website. Search lags by weeks, and until now we were guessing at how far behind it was.

The sitemap is resubmitted, the titles are rewritten, and the dashboard now watches the migration instead of us wondering. When the website-systems queries start showing up in the report, we'll post the chart. If they don't, we'll post that too.

We pointed our own audit tool at our own site

Our free website audit is the front door of this business, so we ran it against our own site — full pipeline, same as any prospect gets. First pass: 61 out of 100. Not the number we wanted to see, and exactly why we ran it.

It caught one product bug and one business gap. The product bug: our scanner flagged a form field as unlabeled, but that field was a hidden anti-spam trap that no human ever sees. The scanner was wrong, so we taught it the difference — every future audit we run for a prospect is now more accurate. The business gap was real: our homepage made claims and offered no route to proof. No link to case studies, no link to this build log. A visitor had to take our word for everything. That's fixed.

Second pass: 68, with two red items left standing — both deliberate. We show no local address until our relocation lands, and our search visibility for the new positioning is mid-reindex. An honest audit report has red in it; the value is knowing which red is a problem and which red is a decision.

Want a system like this doing your follow-up?

Start where our clients start — the free audit shows exactly where your website is leaking leads.

Get the free Website + System Audit