Is the website helping turn interested homeowners into booked estimates, or losing them before anyone responds?
—Our July 25, 2026 review covered 105 directory-listed DFW electrician website hosts. Of 95 reachable homepages, 36 showed both a telephone link and an HTML form; 31 showed one, and 28 neither. These are markup observations, not proof of lost jobs. Use the scorecard below to test what a real customer experiences before buying more traffic.
Use on your own website
Website and intake audit scorecard
Run these checks with your team’s permission. Mark only checks you personally completed. A passed check records a functioning step at the test time; it is not a conversion benchmark.
0 of 8 checks completed
Example finding: A test form reached the shared inbox at 9:05 a.m., but no one owned the reply. Repair: assign a primary and backup owner; repeat the test and record the response time. This is an illustrative example, not a measured client result.
Download the audit log (CSV)September recheck: two reasons to inspect the actual inquiry path
On September 24 we manually reviewed public page text and HTML for the first four hosts in the original file order. This convenience check is not a new prevalence study or a rendered mobile test. We made no calls or submissions.
Anthony’s Electric had no homepage telephone link or HTML form, but its linked quote page had inquiry fields. Conductive Electric had a telephone link and a homepage search form; inquiry fields were on its separate contact page.
Cassady Electric had a telephone link plus separate newsletter and contact forms. Cooper Electric Service had telephone links and no detected homepage HTML form. None of these observations establishes delivery, response, or lost leads. The original 36/31/28 counts remain July markup classifications.
The audit found 59 reachable homepages where at least one basic intake control was not detected.
Of 95 reachable homepages, 36 showed both a telephone link and an HTML form. Thirty-one showed one of the two, and 28 showed neither in the page markup that was reviewed.
Treat that as a prompt to test, not a score. A site may use a widget or place its form elsewhere; a detected HTML form may be a search box rather than an inquiry form. A visible button can also route badly or sit unanswered. The live customer journey is what matters.
Start with the call and form path because that is where an interested customer tries to act.
Match the repair to the first failure you can reproduce.
| Observed failure | Smallest useful repair | Measure after repair |
|---|---|---|
| Number is hard to find or tap | Make the primary mobile call control obvious and functional | Completed calls |
| Form does not arrive | Repair delivery and assign an inbox owner | Delivered submissions |
| Inquiry sits unanswered | Add primary and backup response coverage | First response time |
| Estimate stalls | Create a follow-up owner and cadence | Booked estimates and win rate |
| Jobs win but underperform | Review pricing, scope and production | Collected revenue and gross margin |
Approve spend only after you can name the broken step and the number that should improve.
Write down the failure, the smallest repair, the owner, and the measure you expect to move. Useful measures include completed calls or forms, first response time, booked estimates, won jobs, collected revenue, and gross margin. Re-run the same test after the repair.
Put the findings to work
Use the crew-planning worksheet, after-hours response checklist, or estimate follow-up workflow to test the next step in your shop.
Get help connecting intake, estimates, and operating reports →What supports this report
105 unique hosts sourced from Expertise.com city pages; automated fetch and heuristic screen, not a census or full UX review.