Technical checks should confirm crawlability, user access, data accuracy, and implementation quality rather than promise rich results or rankings.
FinancialService and service markup | Evidence required: visible service information, valid JSON-LD, and a schema type that accurately describes the entity or service. Pass: markup matches visible content and validates syntactically.
Fail: unsupported properties, invented claims, or schema that describes a different service. Severity: Medium. Owner: Technical SEO and web development. Corrective action: remove unsupported markup and use only appropriate vocabulary.
Validation: review Schema.org documentation and test implementation with Google Rich Results Test where supported, without assuming eligibility or display.
Core Web Vitals and mobile usability | Evidence required: field or lab performance data, mobile interaction testing, and page-level issue examples. Pass: important debt counseling journeys are usable on mobile and known performance problems have assigned fixes.
Fail: slow, unstable, or obstructed pages remain unresolved without ownership. Severity: High. Owner: Front-end engineering and UX. Corrective action: address the measured bottlenecks rather than optimizing to a generic score alone. Validation: retest with PageSpeed Insights and Search Console after deployment.
Internal links to the core service resource | Evidence required: crawl data, contextual links from relevant educational pages, and understandable anchors. Pass: appropriate content naturally connects readers to the primary debt counseling service page.
Fail: important pages are orphaned, links are irrelevant, or anchors exist only to repeat keywords. Severity: High. Owner: SEO and editorial. Corrective action: add useful contextual routes and remove manipulative or redundant linking. Validation: re-crawl with Screaming Frog or Ahrefs and manually inspect the most important paths.
HTTPS and privacy controls | Evidence required: valid transport security, security headers where appropriate, current privacy documentation, and confirmation that sensitive form handling follows the firm's approved requirements.
Pass: the site uses HTTPS correctly and privacy controls match the data actually collected. Fail: certificate errors, insecure requests, misleading privacy language, or unresolved security findings. Severity: Critical.
Owner: Security, engineering, privacy, and legal or compliance reviewers. Corrective action: remediate the documented security or privacy defect. Validation: test with SSL Labs, Security Headers, browser checks, and the firm's internal privacy review.