This is a sample. A real audit of a real practice, shown with identifying details removed.

The audit is the scorecard itself. The review is the thirty minutes we spend going through it together.

FAx

VISIBILITY
SCORECARD

Specimen V, a Los Angeles med spa
specimen-v.example.com · July 28, 2026 · Tier 1 audit · Rubric v1.1
13
signals measured
Sample scorecard
More once we complete the manual review together.
Executive summary

Patients searching for a Los Angeles med spa can find you, and AI search names you nearly half the time, but your results and proof of work are thin where it counts. Your visibility, which is typical for your market. The gap costs consultations weekly.

What the audit found

Strengths

+AI search already names youContent and discoverability

Across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity, you were named in 46% of answers and your site cited in 49%. Patients asking AI for a med spa are more likely to reach you than competitors AI ignores.

+Booking button is easy to find on mobileWebsite and booking

A clear "Book Now" button sits at the top of your mobile page. Most patients search on their phones, so a visible way to book keeps interested visitors moving instead of leaving.

+Active paid ads with fresh creativePaid media

Six active Meta ads launched in July across several treatments. Patients scrolling social see you promoting current services, which signals an active, working practice.

+Google Business Profile has the basicsLocal presence and Google

Your hours, categories, and accessibility details are populated, and your categories match aesthetic medicine. This helps the right patients find you on Google and know you are relevant.

Costliest gaps

No before-and-after galleryReputation and proof

No results gallery was found on your site or navigation (scored 0 of 4). Aesthetic patients decide on visible results. Without proof of your work, they are more likely to pick a practice that shows theirs.

Slow mobile pageWebsite and booking

Your mobile speed scored 48 (1 of 3). Most patients arrive on phones, and a slow page tends to lose them before they see anything, so interest never reaches your booking button.

Search engines can't tell they're a medical spaContent and discoverability

Your site carries only basic organization code labels, not the medical-business labels that tell search engines what you are (scored 1 of 3). This weakens how clearly you surface against clearer competitors.

Missing from aesthetic directoriesIdentity and listings

No profile surfaced on the aesthetic directories patients trust for research (scored 0 of 2). Patients comparing options there do not see you, so you are absent at the moment they are choosing.

Booking sends patients off your siteWebsite and booking

Your scheduler works but links out to a separate site (scored 2 of 4). Each handoff is a point where a patient can drop off before the appointment is confirmed.

The path forward

Discuss the findings

Let's sit down and walk through what patients see when they compare you to other Los Angeles practices. An hour together turns these findings into a clear plan for the consultations you are missing.

Lazar preps before the call: no before-and-after gallery, and slow mobile page, both mapped in advance, plus every item marked In your review, ready to walk through together.

Book your 30-minute review →

Lazar LaLone · lazar@fractionalaesthetics.com · (412) 944-5506

Methodology

The goal: a diagnostic read of what a patient, or a referring doctor, sees from the outside, working only from what is openly on display and never from the practice's own dashboards or private analytics. It intentionally does not prescribe fixes, because effective solutions need further conversation and analysis to get right.

Rubric
Aesthetic Practice Visibility Scorecard v1.1, 100-point composite
Two kinds of number
Scores of 0 to 3 are ours, applied from this rubric. Figures such as Google's PageSpeed result, your star rating, review counts and follower counts are third-party measurements we read and report, not numbers we assign
This audit
Tier 1, the complimentary read. Every one of the 34 signals is drawn from patient-facing data. Tier 2 adds paid-media spend analysis, and only when you choose to share your ad data.
Signals
13 measured from patient-facing data so far; the rest walked through together in your review
Review items
Excluded from both earned and maximum points; they never count against the practice, and we look at them together in your review
Generated
July 28, 2026
Category breakdown
IN YOUR REVIEW = these signals need a closer look than patient-facing data alone allows, so we walk through them together in your review. They are excluded from the score entirely and never count against the practice.
1Local Search Visibility
67%
Your Google Business Profile has hours, relevant categories, and accessibility details in place, and a recent post shows activity. Several pieces still need a closer look than public data allows, including photos and how you rank in the map results. The basics are working; the depth is unconfirmed.
1.1 GBP Claim & Completeness 2 / 3
1.2 GBP Categories 2 / 3
1.3 Service Menu on GBP In your review
1.4 GBP Photo Volume & Recency In your review
1.5 GBP Posts Frequency 2 / 3
1.6 Local Pack Presence (Primary Terms) In your review
1.7 Q&A Section Activation In your review
2Website & Infrastructure
67%
Your mobile booking button is easy to find, which keeps interested patients moving. Two things hold this back: your mobile page scored 48 and loads slowly, and booking sends patients to a separate site. Both are points where patients tend to drop off before they book.
2.1 Mobile Speed Score 1 / 3
2.2 Above-the-Fold Booking CTA 3 / 3
2.3 Online Scheduling Integration 2 / 3
2.4 Branded Treatment Page Coverage In your review
2.5 Financing Surfacing In your review
3Reputation, Trust & Innovation
0%
This is your weakest area, scoring 0. No before-and-after gallery was found, and aesthetic patients decide on visible results. Your board credentials and patient proof beyond star ratings are areas we walk through together, since patient-facing data alone does not show the full picture.
3.1 Google Review Volume (Market-Relative) In your review
3.2 Review Response Discipline In your review
3.3 Before/After Gallery Depth & Consent 0 / 3
3.4 Board Certification & Society Visibility 0 / 3
3.5 Patient Evidence Beyond Stars In your review
3.6 Innovation Leadership & First-Mover Evidence In your review
4Content & Discoverability (incl. AEO)
72%
AI search is a real strength: you were named in nearly half of answers across four engines and cited as a source in about half. The weak spot is the code labels on your site, which do not identify you as a medical spa, so search engines read you less clearly than they could.
4.1 Blog Recency & Topical Depth In your review
4.2 Visibility in AI search 3 / 3
4.3 Schema Markup Completeness 1 / 3
4.4 Podcast/Video Content Indexing In your review
5Paid Media Presence
67%
You run six active ads across several treatments, all launched recently, so patients on social see a working practice. All are video only, and whether your ads on Google and their landing pages line up are items we review together rather than score from the outside.
5.1 Meta Ad Activity & Creative Variety 2 / 3
5.2 Google Ads Presence (Competitive Terms) In your review
5.3 Landing Page Alignment In your review
6Social & Community
67%
Your link-in-bio hub works and points to multiple destinations, though it currently routes only to other social platforms rather than booking. Your posting rhythm, engagement, and content mix need account-level data we walk through together before we can judge them fairly.
6.1 Instagram Posting Cadence In your review
6.2 Engagement Rate In your review
6.3 Content Mix Diversity In your review
6.4 Link-in-Bio Strategy 2 / 3
6.5 Story Highlights Organization In your review
7Identity & Citation Consistency
0%
This area scored 0. No profile surfaced on the aesthetic directories patients use to research providers, so you are absent when they compare options there. Whether your name, address, and phone are consistent across the web is something we confirm together in the review.
7.1 NAP Consistency Across Directories In your review
7.2 Aesthetic-Directory Presence 0 / 3
7.3 One consistent identity online In your review
7.4 Cross-Channel Brand Consistency In your review
Fractional Aesthetics

That is the whole read: 13 signals measured from what a patient can see. The rest we go through together.

Prepared for Specimen V, a Los Angeles med spa · July 28, 2026 · Rubric v1.1

Download this scorecard (PDF) ↓ All sixteen samples →

Want one for your practice?

Complimentary, no call required, and every scorecard is prepared and personally reviewed before it goes out. Leave your practice's website and yours is on its way.

Run my audit →