29-Page Pediatric Dentistry WordPress Build

Client (end user): All Kids Pediatric — Charlotte, NC
Engagement: White-label development for a US marketing agency
Delivered: January 2025 – February 2026 · 389 days · 153 hours across build, refresh, and redesign phases

The Craft of a Build

68 tickets across 389 days for a three-location pediatric dental practice — a 29-page Elementor build in January 2025, three refresh cycles through May, June, and July, and a 15-page redesign in September, all on one Original Design template across WP Engine. The same team sustained the entire span across 153 hours, closing each phase through the agency’s per-ticket QA gate without re-estimation between stages.

This case study is a record of such a sustained engagement — an initial 29-page build for a three-location pediatric dental practice, followed by refresh cycles in May, June, and July, and a 15-page redesign in September — all delivered inside a single retained relationship.

Snapshot

The Brief

All Kids Pediatric is a pediatric dental practice in Charlotte, North Carolina, with three office locations serving children and families across the metro area. A US marketing agency specialising in local-business websites managed the full engagement: they owned the design, the content strategy, the hosting setup on WP Engine, and the client relationship. Our scope was to build the initial site, then sustain it through refresh cycles and a mid-year redesign — all while remaining invisible to the end client.

The workbook structured the engagement across 29 active URLs mapped to the agency’s Original Design template. Every sitemap row carried an Hours Estimated value; the aggregate for the initial build came to roughly 17 hours of direct page work, with the remaining hours allocated across project management, QA, the three refresh phases, and the 15-page redesign. The ask: build all pages, wire the appointment-request form, handle meta and H1 per the sitemap, work through the issues backlog, and close the launch checklist before each phase’s handoff. Design, content, SEO strategy, and client communication remained with the agency.

How We Did It

1. One template, 29 pages, one pipeline — built for a three-location practice. The site’s 29 pages spread across the agency’s Original Design template: homepage, two team pages (meet the doctors, meet the team), 11 service pages covering the full pediatric dentistry service set, three location pages (Arrowood, Plaza Midwood, Indian Trail), an appointment-request page, and a suite of parent-resource pages (patient forms, financial information, FAQs, office tour, testimonials). Each page was mapped to the template from the sitemap row before build began.

2. Multi-location discipline on a single template. All three locations share the same Original Design template but require distinct address blocks, embedded maps, and local phone routing. The location pages — and the location-specific references in the contact and appointment-request flows — were built so that a parent searching for the Plaza Midwood office lands on the correct page with the correct address and booking path. The Square Appointments embeds were wired per location so that appointment requests route to the right office scheduler.

3. Spec followed line-for-line — including the per-page Hours Estimated column. The agency’s workbook carried an Hours Estimated value for every row. We implemented against that value. Where a row specified 8 hours for the homepage and 0.2–0.5 hours for standard service pages, that was our budget for the row, and the aggregate came in at the agreed hours for each phase.

The principle behind this is simple: on a build with a pre-costed sitemap, the workbook is the contract. A dev team’s job is to deliver inside the row-level budgets, not to re-open the pricing conversation page by page.

4. Three refresh phases and a 15-page redesign, all inside the retained engagement. After the initial build closed in January, the agency returned with refresh work in May (20 hours), June (8 hours), and July (4.3 hours) — content updates, image swaps, and template adjustments. In September, a 15-page redesign phase (18.5 hours including QA) reworked a significant portion of the site against an updated design spec. All phases were tracked in the same Redmine project, worked by the same team, and closed through the same QA loop. When the TrustIndex review widget on the redesigned testimonials page produced a 403 server error on save, we reserved a placeholder area and closed the page build — the widget was re-integrated in a later fix round rather than blocking the full redesign phase.

Working on the live WP Engine environment during the May refresh surfaced Elementor style conflicts that had to be resolved inside the same sprint — elements dropping out, styles overriding each other. The September redesign handled this differently: every page built in drafts, reviewed against the Figma before publishing, so the live site was untouched until the page was agency-cleared. The lesson from May paid for itself in September.

Operational Integrity at handoff

Pre-handoff checks on the 29-URL build covered workbook-to-spec verification across every sitemap row, link integrity (phone tel: markup and PDF paths on patient-forms caught and corrected), trailing-slash parity across all 29 URLs, and Elementor data re-alignment on the seven service pages that had drifted from the shared template during a mid-engagement revision sprint. Pre-handoff QA ran through Site Checker — see our QA discipline for the categories and the fail-zero gate. The agency’s own QA layer — their tools, their process — ran post-handoff and surfaced issues into the shared backlog for our fix loop until they signed off.

Results

The outcome, restated plainly: the agency’s 29-URL pediatric dental build shipped on WP Engine, inside the quoted budget, and the same team sustained it through three refresh cycles and a 15-page redesign over the following 11 months — without the agency re-onboarding a new dev partner.

Process

Phases overlapped in practice — the refresh cycles were scoped and started without a full re-estimation, which is why the calendar spans 389 days rather than the sum of individual phase estimates.

Team

Delivery team

• Nikita Tumasevic — build review and QA on initial construction
• Pavel Sazhin — lead developer across initial build, refresh cycles, and redesign phase
• Anna Polunina — implementation support and QA
• Evgeniy Karpov — developer support on refresh and redesign rounds
• Timur Arbaev — design-vs-build review and pre-handoff QA
• Natalia Bogatel — QA and project coordination
• Anton Hersun, xaverPRO — project lead (estimation, agency-side communication, sign-off)

Agency-side project management and client-facing communication remained with the partner agency throughout. Our team was invisible to the end client. All change requests from the refresh and redesign phases arrived through the same shared backlog channel as the initial build.

For agencies commissioning a white-label WordPress build