We are a small advocacy group with no web team. Is this for us?

What stays the same on both engagements

The platform work does not change with the size of the organisation. The question set is built per issue, persona, and country and runs daily on every major engine. Every answer and citation is kept. The cited-domains and cited-pages tables rank what the engines lean on, tagged as yours, another organisation's, or a third party's. Each month someone reads the window against the one before and tells you what moved and why. A group of three people gets the same read as a trade association with a policy department.

What Managed GEO takes off your hands

The consulting engagement ends in a roadmap with an owner on every line, and it assumes you have a policy team, a comms team, and a web team to own those lines. Without them, the roadmap sits in a drawer. On Managed GEO our team takes the lines instead. We run the GEO audit of your site and ship the fixes it finds. We build the position page for each issue, in HTML, with the evidence in the first paragraph and the PDF linked under it. We write the explainers for the questions the engines answer without you.

You approve every draft before it goes live. Nothing is published on your behalf without a person on your side reading it, because a position page carries your name and your evidence, and the facts have to be yours.

How the choice gets made

The free audit comes first in either case, and it shows what the engines say about your issues and your organisation today. The call that walks you through it is where we say which engagement fits. A group with a comms person who can publish a page a month may be better served by the consulting roadmap. A group with nobody to publish is better served by us doing it, from US$990 a month, scoped to what the audit found.