Monthly Report
eWaste Pro — Month Report
Outbound campaign performance analysis covering March 16 – April 20, 2026. This report covers lead generation, campaign efficiency, the mid-period outage, and recommended next steps for the eWaste Pro outreach program.
Data Sources
  • Instantly GET /api/v2/campaigns/analytics/overview
  • Instantly GET /api/v2/campaigns/analytics
  • Instantly GET /api/v2/campaigns/analytics/daily
  • Positive-reply appendix from Instantly received emails filtered to ue_type = 2 and i_status = 1
Reporting Window
  • Analysis window: March 16, 2026 – April 20, 2026
  • First meaningful campaign activity: March 17, 2026
  • Total active sending days: ~18 of 35 (outage excluded)
Executive Summary
Campaign at a Glance
Despite a 17-day delivery outage, the program generated 36 interested leads across both phases of the month — demonstrating strong underlying demand in the eWaste and school district markets.
Campaign Volume Overview
Lead Split: Pre-Gap vs. Post-Gap

The campaign generated 36 interested leads / opportunities in the first 35 days of work — including 18 before and 18 after the mid-period outage.
Timeline
What Happened & When
The reporting period was split into three distinct phases by an operational outage. Understanding this timeline is essential context for interpreting all performance metrics.
1
Mar 17 – Mar 26
Original Launch — Highest-efficiency phase. 1,863 emails sent, 18 interested leads generated. Strong early-market fit with existing eWaste / recycling audience.
2
Mar 27 – Apr 12
Full Delivery Outage — Zero campaign sends recorded. Prior system shut off due to billing / cancellation issues. Provider migration and full system rebuild completed during this window.
3
Apr 13 – Apr 20
Rebuilt System Live — New provider relaunched. 5,390 emails sent, 18 interested leads generated. Volume recovered quickly; efficiency still being optimized.

The 17-day gap was operational, not strategic. The prior sending environment went offline due to non-payment / cancellation issues. We rebuilt and relaunched the outreach stack on a new provider before resuming sends.
Program Performance
Full Period vs. Pre-Gap vs. Post-Gap
The table below compares all key metrics across the three phases of the reporting period. Lead generation count recovered after the rebuild — but efficiency did not fully recover yet.
Pre-Gap Efficiency
  • Unique reply rate: 1.53% of contacted
  • Interested lead rate: 1.02% of contacted
  • Bounce rate: 1.02% of sent
Post-Gap Efficiency
  • Unique reply rate: 0.58% of contacted
  • Interested lead rate: 0.40% of contacted
  • Bounce rate: 1.99% of sent
Outage Impact
The Delivery Gap — Cause & Effect
Zero Instantly campaign sends were recorded from March 27 through April 12, 2026 — a 17-day window that interrupted momentum immediately after the strongest early response window of the campaign.
The relaunch restored daily volume, but the lost continuity likely reduced short-term reply efficiency. Inbox warming, domain reputation, and contact sequencing all reset during the migration.
What We Did During the Gap
  • Migrated to a new sending provider
  • Rebuilt the full outbound sending environment
  • Reconfigured campaign sequences and mailbox rotation
  • Relaunched campaigns on a more stable infrastructure

Outreach paused for roughly two weeks because the previous sending system was shut off due to billing / cancellation issues. The new setup is designed to prevent this class of disruption going forward.
Phase 1 — Pre-Gap
Mar 17–26
1,863 emails sent
18 leads
1.53% reply rate
HIGH EFFICIENCY
Phase 2 — Gap
Mar 27–Apr 12
0 emails sent
0 leads
17 days lost
ZERO ACTIVITY
Phase 3 — Post-Gap
Apr 13–20
5,390 emails sent
18 leads
0.58% reply rate
VOLUME RECOVERED
Campaign Results
Performance by Campaign
Eight campaigns ran during the reporting period. The table below shows full-period results. Top performers by interested leads are highlighted below.
Interested Leads by Campaign
Emails Sent vs Leads Generated
🥇 [E2] Senior Leaders
9 interested leads — Top campaign across the full period. Strongest performance in the existing eWaste / recycling industry audience.
🥈 [SD2] School Districts Directors
6 interested leads — Best post-rebuild campaign. 6 leads from just 732 sends — the most efficient campaign after relaunch.
🥉 [FIXED E1] Decision Makers
5 interested leads — Validated the rebuilt decision-maker angle quickly after the provider switch. Major post-gap contributor.
Pre-Gap vs. Post-Gap
Campaign Winners: Before & After the Break
Pre-Gap vs. Post-Gap: Leads by Campaign
Pre-Gap Campaign Results (Mar 17–26)
The strongest initial traction came from known-market recycler / industry-adjacent targeting. School district campaigns were not yet materially active before the shutdown.
Post-Gap Campaign Results (Apr 13–20)
SD2 emerged as the highest-performing campaign after the rebuild. Official List 4/16 added scale but did not yet generate interested leads in the measured window.
Leads Generated
Confirmed Positive Replies
Instantly campaign analytics records 18 interested leads before the pause and 18 interested leads after the rebuild. The named contacts below reflect confirmed positive-reply contacts visible in the inbox extract.
Before the Break (Mar 17–26)
  • Mike Godfrey — mgodfrey@critical-technology.com
  • Jason Schott — jschott@thinkdynamic.com
  • Troy Henley — troy@shredamerica.com
  • Jesse DeGroot — jesse.degroot@ucslogistics.com
  • Sheldon Bond — sheldon@delicatedestruction.com
  • Greg Elpers — greg.elpers@ctlus.com
  • Cristina — cristina@aoli-norcross.com
  • Emre Washburn — ewashburn@ptnw.com
  • Anna Dengler — dengler@greatforest.com
  • Photios Dalamagas — photi@denovamedical.com
  • Neil Hickey — nhickey@thinkdynamic.com
  • Greg Elpers — greg.elpers@closetheloop.com
  • Joshua Anderson — joshua.anderson@schupan.com
After the Rebuild (Apr 13–20)
  • John Martorano, Jr. — john@magnum-llc.us
  • Megan Higgins — megan@eco-shred.com
  • Alan Shirfan — alan@rts.com
  • Larry Horning — larry@siggreen.com
  • Shane Farmer — farmers@lawsoncardinals.org
  • Lauren Luckert — lauren.luckert@northvillecsd.org
  • Aaron Bemelman — abemelman@cruhsd.org
  • Brad Meyer — meyerb@dist3.org
  • Hattie Balmer — hattie.balmer@cash4smartphonesfoco.com
  • Richard Lee — richl@svtechsource.com
  • Parish — parish@documentsecuritysolutions.net
  • Andres Salazar — andres@ecogreenequipment.com
  • Quoc Hoang — qhoang@smusd.us
  • Barry Schneider — barry@gizmogul.com
  • Monique Yates — moyates@petersburg.k12.va.us
Analysis
What Worked & What Needs Work
Efficiency Drop: Pre-Gap vs. Post-Gap
Reply Rate: Pre-Gap 1.53% → Post-Gap 0.58% (drop of -62%)
Lead Rate: Pre-Gap 1.02% → Post-Gap 0.40% (drop of -61%)
Bounce Rate: Pre-Gap 1.02% → Post-Gap 1.99% (increase of +95%)
✅ Existing-Industry Targeting
Known-market recycler and industry-adjacent targeting produced the strongest initial response quality and the highest reply rates of the period.
✅ School District Directors
SD2 became the best-performing campaign after relaunch — 6 interested leads from 720 sends, the most efficient post-rebuild campaign.
✅ Rebuilt Decision-Maker Campaign
FIXED E1 validated quickly after the provider switch and became a major contributor with 5 interested leads post-rebuild.
✅ Consistent Lead Generation
The program generated 18 interested leads in both phases of the month — even with a 17-day outage interrupting momentum.
⚠️ Post-Rebuild Efficiency
Post-gap reply rate (0.58%) and interested lead rate (0.40%) are materially below pre-gap levels (1.53% and 1.02%). Optimization is needed.
⚠️ Elevated Bounce Rate
Bounce rate increased from 1.02% pre-gap to 1.99% post-gap. List quality and mailbox health on the new provider need auditing.
⚠️ Broad-Volume Campaigns
Some new-volume campaigns (e.g., Official List 4/16) created reach without yet producing qualified interest — 1,108 sends, 0 leads.
⚠️ School District C-Suite
SD1 generated replies but not interested opportunities in this window. Messaging or targeting angle may need refinement.
Next Steps
Recommended Actions & Client Notes
01
Scale School Districts – Directors [SD2]
SD2 is the highest-efficiency post-rebuild campaign. Increase send volume, expand the contact list, and continue iterating on messaging to maximize lead flow from this segment.
02
Continue Iterating FIXED E1 (copy)
The rebuilt decision-maker campaign validated quickly. Keep refining subject lines, copy, and targeting to push the interested lead rate higher.
03
Tighten Broad-Volume Campaigns
Reduce or pause campaigns producing sends without opportunities. Redirect that volume toward proven segments to improve overall program efficiency.
04
Audit List & Mailbox Quality
Bounce rate rose to 1.99% post-rebuild. Audit list hygiene and mailbox health on the new provider to bring bounce rate back below 1%.
05
Split Reporting Going Forward
Separate reporting into: (1) existing eWaste market, (2) school district market, and (3) rebuilt-provider performance vs. baseline — for cleaner attribution and optimization.

Important Client Notes: The total_opportunity_value metric in Instantly is a platform-side nominal value, not booked revenue. There were no meetings booked or closed deals recorded inside Instantly during this reporting window. This report should be positioned as an outbound lead-generation and pipeline-development report, not a closed-revenue report.