19-Page Egg Donor Agency WordPress Build

Client (end user): Signature Egg Donors — New York & Connecticut
Engagement: White-label development for a US marketing agency
Delivered: March–April 2025 · 19 days · 40 hours

The Craft of a Build

19 pages of a reproductive-medicine WordPress build to a six-template library on WP Engine, delivered in 40 hours across 19 days. The agency’s spec split the site into two audience tracks — a donor path at /egg-donor/ and an intended-parent path at /parents/ — with per-button conversion tracking wired independently so the agency could measure each CTA without overlap.

This case study is a record of such a build — delivered for a US marketing agency in the reproductive-medicine segment. Signature Egg Donors is an egg-donor agency serving intended parents and prospective donors across New York and Connecticut.

Snapshot

The Brief

A US marketing agency retained by Signature Egg Donors — a New York and Connecticut egg-donor agency serving two distinct groups of people — handed us a Google Sheets workbook carrying the full sitemap, a template catalogue, a launch checklist, and the project’s technical specification. The build sat on WP Engine; the page builder was Elementor; the contact form used Gravity Forms.

The agency’s content architecture for this client was deliberately split into two parallel tracks: a /egg-donor/ service page for prospective egg donors, and a /parents/ service page for intended parents. Both tracks had existed on the original site under different URLs (/for-donors and /for-donors-1). Part of the build brief was to migrate both to clean, permanent URLs and to wire up per-button conversion tracking so each call-to-action on each page could be measured independently.

A third thread ran through the whole engagement: the site carried 13 blog posts that needed to move from a flat /post/ path to a /blog/ subdirectory, with meta and heading fidelity preserved across every post.

How We Did It

1. Six templates, 19 pages, one build pipeline. The agency’s template library carries ten standard templates. For this client, six were applied: Homepage (1 page), About Us (1), Service Page (2 — one per audience), Contact Us (1), Blog Lander (1), and Blog (13 posts). The remaining four templates in the library — Doctor Page, Default Template, Services Lander, and Testimonials — were provisioned but not used; the client’s sitemap did not call for them. Every page was built on its assigned template from the workbook sitemap row.

2. Spec followed line-for-line — including per-page Hours Estimated. The sitemap carried a row-level Hours Estimated value for every URL. The homepage received the largest allocation (6h) reflecting its video-heavy layout with an embedded MP4 hero and the scroll-reveal navigation behaviour carried over from the original site. The MP4 caused scrolling lag on staging and required compression before the scroll-reveal behaviour matched the original. Both service pages carried dedicated allocations for their video backgrounds and conversion-tracking integrations. We delivered inside each row’s budget; the aggregate landed at 18h development against an 18h estimate.

3. Dual-audience URL migration and per-button conversion tracking. The original site’s two service paths used internally inconsistent slugs (/for-donors and /for-donors-1). The new build landed them at /egg-donor/ and /parents/ — permanent, clear, distinct. We chose shortcode-based button tracking over a dedicated analytics plugin because the agency’s spec required per-audience URL-based tracking within a shared Elementor template. Per the technical specification, unique button tracking was wired to each page independently, so the agency’s analytics layer could distinguish donor-path CTA events from intended-parent-path CTA events without overlap.

4. Blog path migration: 13 posts from /post/ to /blog/. The original site organised posts under a flat /post/ path. The new build moved each post into a /blog/ subdirectory, preserved original H1 headings and meta data, and confirmed staging URL parity against the original site’s Screaming Frog crawl before handoff.

5. Two QA loops, closed before launch. Issues were tracked in two agency-side backlog tabs. The Issues Backlog (22 rows) surfaced after the agency’s own QA pass: meta description corrections on three pages, responsive layout fixes across mobile viewports, blog heading structure corrections, Instagram feed integration, and a set of smaller styling fixes. Twenty items closed as Completed; one item remained Info Needed (a menu-behaviour question confirmed to match the original site’s behaviour); one item was deferred to a future SEO budget round. The Account Manager’s QA review (2 items — footer sizing and an H1 line-count correction on the egg-donor page) closed at 2/2 Completed. The launch checklist covering Design, Functionality, Content, SEO and Analytics, and Responsive columns was signed off in full.

Shortcode-based button tracking was the discipline that carried the conversion architecture. The spec required per-audience URL-based CTA measurement within a shared Elementor template — a plugin-based approach would have collapsed the two tracking surfaces into one. Shortcodes kept /egg-donor/ and /parents/ analytically distinct without diverging the template.

Operational Integrity at handoff

QA on this build ran across two categories: conversion-path integrity (per-button tracking IDs confirmed distinct for /egg-donor/ and /parents/, Gravity Forms notification wired to info@signaturedonors.com) and structural fidelity (H1 line-count on /egg-donor/ corrected to single-line, footer sizing brought to spec — both from the Account Manager’s staging review, both closed Completed before handoff). 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

Process

The build and the QA phases overlapped — issues surfaced on 31 Mar while remaining development work ran in parallel. This is the standard single-phase-with-tail shape on a 19-day engagement.

Team

A US marketing agency managed the client relationship and directed all content and design decisions. Our team was invisible to the end client throughout.

• Nikita Tumasevic — task coordination and internal QA
• Pavel Sazhin — QA and pre-handoff verification
• Anna Polunina — implementation support and QA
• Timur Arbaev — design-vs-build review and pre-handoff QA
• Lyudmila Travkina — development lead
• Anton Hersun, xaverPRO — project lead (estimation, agency-side communication, sign-off)

All client-facing communication and content decisions stayed with the agency. We wrote no copy and made no design decisions of our own.

For agencies commissioning a white-label WordPress build