53-Page Eye Care Template Customisation

Client (end user): Vision Source Mandan — an optometry practice in Mandan, North Dakota
Engagement: White-label template customisation for a US marketing agency
Delivered: September 2025 · 108 days · 119 hours · 53 URLs (plus 264 blog posts migrated) · on schedule

The Craft of Template Customisation

53 pages of an optometry practice customised to the agency’s Figma on their WP Engine dental template, plus 264 blog posts migrated under the post template and 300 redirect entries imported by CSV — all delivered in 108 days. The blog migration was a URL-integrity commitment: a 404 on /blog/nearsighted-farsighted/ was surfaced and closed before the build left our hands. Customisation and migration ran concurrently under the same six-round QA cycle.

The value is speed with consistency — but only if the customisation is disciplined. A dev team that “interprets” the Figma, skips QA rounds, or deviates from the template’s design system is worse than starting from scratch.

This case study is a record of a template customisation executed to the agency’s Figma, with a QA profile that shows the discipline it takes — and with the additional scope that an optometry practice carries a content history the practice’s patients had been navigating for years, which meant 264 blog posts needed to migrate alongside the customised pages without breaking a single URL.

Snapshot

The Brief

A US marketing agency delivered us a Figma design for Vision Source Mandan and a deployment target on their branded WP Engine template system. The agency had already done the upstream work: design audit, client approval, hosting setup, and the per-page content plan mapped against an existing site that needed to be carried across intact. What they needed was a development team that would map the Figma onto the template faithfully, then move every blog post and every legacy page across without losing the URL structure the practice’s patients relied on for eye-care information.

The ask was operational, with a migration dimension. Take the Figma as the source of truth. Customise the template to match it page by page, breakpoint by breakpoint, with the optometry navigation conventions intact: vision-care service categories grouped to match the vertical’s standard taxonomy, individual doctor bios on linkable sub-pages, online payment and patient-forms flows surfaced correctly. And carry the blog — 264 posts — over under the post template without silently dropping a single entry.

What the agency was hedging against here was a dual failure mode: a dev shop that approximates the Figma rather than matches it, and — given the blog migration — one that treats a post count as a checkbox rather than a URL-integrity commitment. An optometry practice depends on local search for patient acquisition; any slug that silently changes during migration is a breakage that shows no error in the CMS but loses the URL the patient had bookmarked. The content and SEO surface check in our pre-handoff QA pass was the staging gate that caught those before they shipped.

How We Did It

1. Figma-as-contract, template-as-canvas. The Figma file was the design spec. The branded template was the underlying page structure. Our job was to reconcile the two page by page — where the template’s default layout matched the Figma, we kept it; where the Figma required a deviation (eye-care service tile layouts, doctor-bio cards, frames-and-lenses content blocks), we customised. No design decisions originated on our side.

2. QA cycle at template-customisation scale. A clean template customisation is not “build once, review once”. It is “build, QA, adjust, QA, adjust”. The agency tracked 160 individual issues across two backlog tabs in the shared workspace — 112 SEO findings and 48 CX findings — every one of which was assigned, addressed, screenshotted where useful, and closed only on agency sign-off. This volume is not a sign of instability; it is the discipline that separates a templated site that looks “roughly right” from one that matches the design.

The principle behind this is simple: on a templated build, the QA loop is where the value is delivered. A shorter QA cycle is a weaker match to the design, not a faster delivery.

3. Customisation without drift. Every change we made to the branded template — whether to a page layout, a section component, or a style token — was documented against the Figma reference. Eye-care category pages, doctor-profile cards, online-payment widgets, and patient-forms layouts were customised inside the page scope, not in the shared template. This project’s work did not degrade the template for the next site it would serve.

4. Cross-device verification. Customisations were QA’d against Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge on desktop, tablet, and mobile viewports — the standard agency breakpoint set. Each QA round covered the pages affected by that round’s design deltas, plus a sample of the migrated blog posts to confirm the post template held up at every viewport.

The blog migration and the Figma customisation ran as parallel QA surfaces — 264 posts to verify by URL, 53 pages to verify by design match. We separated the two explicitly: blog migration closed via a 300-entry CSV redirect import and a per-URL pass, which kept it from bleeding into the design QA loop. Each surface was accounted for independently; neither collapsed into the other.

Operational Integrity at handoff

The QA load on this engagement was driven by the blog migration: 300 redirects needed importing to preserve slug integrity, a 404 on /blog/nearsighted-farsighted/ was surfaced and flagged in the internal QA pass, and encoding artifacts (hash characters) were caught in migrated post metadata — all three resolved before the build left our hands. 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.

Customisations stayed in the per-client overrides; the agency’s shared template components were not modified.

Results

The outcome, restated plainly: the agency’s Figma was implemented against their branded template across 53 pages and 9 templates, with 264 blog posts migrated under the post template, over 108 calendar days, inside the 119-hour estimate.

Process

Development and QA ran concurrently — this is characteristic of template-customisation work, where no “QA phase” closes cleanly; the loop runs continuously until the agency signs off.

Team

Delivery team

• Nikita Tumasevic — lead developer (template customisation and Figma-to-layout mapping)
• Pavel Sazhin — QA iterations and fixes
• Anna Polunina — coordination and content workflow on the migration side
• Liza — manager-side QA spot-checks
• Anton Hersun, xaverPRO — project lead (estimation, agency-side communication, sign-off)

The partner agency retained full ownership of project management, design decisions, and the end-client relationship throughout. The build was invisible to Vision Source Mandan — every request and sign-off moved through the agency’s shared backlog, and no round was marked closed until their reviewer confirmed it.

For agencies with a branded template system