~$~/nine/index.tsx
LIVEv0.9 · mainEST. 2003

Work/case study/Harborview Care Network

case study — Insight Genesis · Healthcare

What an audit actually finds.

Six weeks. Seven pages reviewed. 47 findings logged, 5 critical. What follows is the diagnostic delivered to a multi-state senior-care network — and the kind of clarity an Insight Genesis audit produces for every client.

client_snapshot

client

Harborview Care
Network

industry

Senior & Continuing Care
Multi-location

engagement

Insight Genesis
6 weeks · from $10K

delivered

May 2026
Mixed-stakeholder report

HEALTHCARE · MULTI-LOCATIONHarborview Care.harborviewcare.org · 7 facilities

the_finding_that_defines_this_audit — privacy & compliance

findings/healthcare-tracking-pixels.md
critical

FINDING 01 · PRIVACY & COMPLIANCE

A class-action waiting to happen.

Meta Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, and Google Ads remarketing all fire on harborviewcare.org pages that collect program-of-interest data — including the Request Info form where users specify which condition or care type they need.

Context: In the past four years, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights, the FTC, and several state Attorneys General have specifically targeted hospital and provider websites that load Meta Pixel on pages collecting condition-related data. Multiple peer healthcare organizations have settled class-action complaints in the eight-figure range. This site was loading these pixels before the user had even responded to the cookie consent banner.

impact

Significant HIPAA / OCR enforcement exposure. Class-action precedent at peer providers. Pre-consent firing also creates GDPR/CCPA non-compliance for any visitor in those jurisdictions.

recommendation

Engage privacy counsel immediately. Gate marketing pixels behind explicit opt-in consent. Strongly consider removing them from /request-info/ and condition-specific pages entirely.

audit_scoreboard

Six dimensions. Six grades.

Industry standards: WCAG 2.1 AA · Core Web Vitals · HIPAA guidance

C+

UX & INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE

Clear nav, hurt by overlay friction.

Logical content categories. Compromised by cookie + promo modal stacking on first visit and a clipped Request Info CTA at 1440px viewport.

C

ACCESSIBILITY (WCAG 2.1 AA)

Reasonable foundation, broken hierarchy.

Alt text usage and ARIA basics in place. Compromised by missing skip link, h2→h6 heading jumps across all facility pages, hash-only nav links, and missing form autocomplete.

B

MOBILE RESPONSIVENESS

Adapts cleanly with one gap.

Layout reflows correctly. Phone number disappears from persistent mobile header. Accessibility widget overlaps menu items.

B-

PERFORMANCE

Fast top-line, heavy underneath.

TTFB ~580ms, FCP ~740ms — healthy. Page weight 2.8 MB with 1.48 MB of JavaScript across 17 scripts. 11+ third-party domains. 20 render-blocking resources.

C

TECHNICAL SEO

Basics there, structured data missing.

Sitemap, robots, canonicals all present. No Organization or NursingHome schema — a measurable miss for a multi-location healthcare brand. Title tags inconsistent, meta description has a typo.

D

PRIVACY & COMPLIANCE

Highest-risk area found.

Marketing pixels (Meta, LinkedIn, Google Ads) load on a healthcare site that collects program-of-interest data. Known enforcement area. Legal review recommended.

five_findings — immediate_action_required

What we’d fix first.

5 critical · 14 high · 16 medium · 12 low

02
criticalUX · CTA Clipping

The Request Info button is invisible at the most common desktop width.

At 1440px — the most common desktop viewport — the “Request Info” button is positioned at x=1393–1556px. About 116px of the highest-intent conversion element on the entire site sits outside the visible area. Users see only “Re...” or nothing at all.

measured at 1440px116px clippedfix: 1–2 days
03
criticalUX · Overlay Stacking

Two overlays cover 65% of the viewport on first visit.

An event RSVP modal stacks on top of a cookie consent banner before any content is visible. For a healthcare audience that skews older, dismissing two overlays before reaching the content is a measurable abandonment risk — the moment of highest first-impression failure.

~65% viewport covered2 overlays stackedtarget audience: older adults
04
criticalAccessibility · Heading Hierarchy

Sitewide template jumps from h2 directly to h6.

Across at least 7 facility pages, the template renders facility names (“Ridgewood Senior Care and Short-Term Rehab”) as h6 immediately after h2, skipping h3, h4, and h5 entirely. This breaks screen-reader navigation by heading and weakens topical signals to search engines. Template-level — one fix cascades across every facility page.

affects 7+ pagesWCAG 1.3.1single template fix
05
criticalUX · Equity

Nine languages offered, zero translated.

The homepage language selector exposes 9 language options. Every single one resolves to "#" — no translation logic exists. For a network serving a multilingual metropolitan service area, half-implemented translation is worse than none: it suggests the organization values inclusion as theater. UX failure plus equity-claim exposure.

9 languages brokenfix or removedecision: 2–5 days
06
highConversion · Form

11 invisible duplicate “Location of interest” fields in the DOM.

The Request Info form contains 11 separate <select> elements all labeled “Location of interest,” shown and hidden by conditional logic. Screen readers may announce up to 11 identical fields — an enormous cognitive load for the audience that most needs the form to work. Single dynamic select would solve it cleanly.

11 hidden duplicatesprimary lead formfix: 2–3 days

measurements

Measured against the real numbers.

Performance API data from a single session, supplemented by Resource Timing, Paint Timing, and a manual network-traffic review. Field data via Google CrUX and PageSpeed Insights was recommended as the next step.

~/measurements.tstypescript
01// Homepage measurements — May 2026
02
03export const audit = {
04 page_weight_kb: 2863, // vs 1.6 MB healthcare median
05 javascript_kb: 1480, // 17 separate scripts
06 css_kb: 481, // 30 stylesheets — plugin sprawl
07
08 ttfb_ms: 580, // good · <800 threshold
09 first_paint_ms: 740, // good · <1800 threshold
10 load_event_ms: 1656, // heavy from 3rd-party tags
11
12 third_party_domains: 11, // supply-chain surface
13 render_blocking_resources: 20,
14 total_links: 137,
15 hash_only_links: 21, // keyboard nav broken
16 contrast_failures: 2, // search + modal close
17 images_missing_alt: 0, // strong baseline ✓
18};

remediation_roadmap

Three waves. One quarter.

None of these findings indicate a need for a redesign. The site is fundamentally sound. What it needs is a focused 4–6 week remediation sprint, sequenced by the cost of inaction.

WAVE 01 · WEEKS 1–2

Stop the bleeding.

Address conversion, accessibility-claim, and privacy exposure immediately.

  • Resolve Request Info CTA clipping at 1280–1440px
  • Sequence cookie banner before promotional modal
  • Engage privacy counsel re: tracking pixels
  • Gate non-essential pixels behind affirmative consent
  • Either fix or remove the 9-language selector
  • Add skip link to global header
  • Increase modal contrast and add alt text

7 actions · ~10–14 dev days

WAVE 02 · WEEKS 3–6

Defensible posture.

Bring accessibility to a defensible WCAG 2.1 AA baseline and rebuild structured data.

  • Fix heading hierarchy template-wide
  • Convert hash-only menu items to real navigation
  • Add MedicalOrganization & NursingHome JSON-LD
  • Add og:image and twitter:image defaults
  • Rewrite generic “Learn more” link text site-wide
  • Add autocomplete + improved validation to forms
  • Define a 2–3px branded focus indicator
  • Templatize title tags + meta descriptions
  • Render visible breadcrumbs

9 actions · ~3 sprint weeks

WAVE 03 · QUARTER

Performance & polish.

Improve Core Web Vitals, reduce supply-chain surface, mature analytics.

  • JavaScript audit and reduction (target <800 KB)
  • Combine and minify CSS via build pipeline
  • Install web-vitals.js to monitor LCP, INP, CLS
  • Add FAQPage schema to /faqs/
  • Footer enhancement: address, NOPP, social labels
  • Add tap-target padding to under-sized links
  • Quarterly accessibility regression test (axe-core)

7 actions · ongoing optimization

what_the_client_walked_away_with

Clarity, in writing.

Most agencies sell engagements before they understand the problem. Insight Genesis flips that — six weeks of paid diagnostic, fixed scope, written diagnosis. If we don’t think you need our help after the audit, we’ll say so. Most clients don’t hear that from agencies.

deliverables

  • 47-page written audit — UX, accessibility, performance, technical SEO, privacy/compliance
  • Three-wave remediation roadmap with effort estimates and owner assignments per action
  • Mixed-stakeholder report structured for executive, marketing, technical, and legal review
  • Live walkthrough with the client team — every finding discussed, prioritized, and reality-checked
  • No commitment after — the diagnosis is the deliverable, the next phase is optional

Want one of these for your business?

get_started

~$nine init --audit

Six weeks. Fixed scope. Starting at $10,000. A written diagnosis of where your marketing actually stands — and a sequenced plan to move it. If we don’t think you need us, we’ll say so.

Start an audit→↵Book a discovery call⌘ B