GoBoom case study / A nationwide immigration practice
A CRM-verified 12.1x return on ad spend, with the firm approving every move.
GoBoom runs approval-gated paid acquisition for a nationwide immigration practice across Google and Meta. On the spend the firm could tie all the way through to signed contracts in its own case-management system, the return is a verified 12.1x: about $23,569 in ad spend produced $286,175 in signed contracts across 20 cases.
The wider account context is just as telling. Over roughly four months GoBoom has managed about $414,000 in spend and delivered more than 31,000 leadsat a blended cost of about $13, scaling spend roughly 3x while holding cost per lead near $13 the whole way. Every account change ran through GoBoom's approval gate.
Return verified against the firm's case-management system: about $23,569 in spend to $286,175 in signed contracts.
01 / The starting point
A category where cost per lead is the whole game.
Category · Immigration
Reach · Nationwide
Immigration is one of the highest-volume, highest-competition categories in paid acquisition. Demand is steady and nationwide, because immigration law is federal, but so is the bidding pressure. Two numbers decide whether the spend works: cost per lead and lead quality.
At stake was simple. The practice could scale paid acquisition while holding its economics, or it could not. A budget moving toward six figures a month only works if every added dollar still returns. The brief was to grow the spend and keep the cost per lead flat, with the firm in control of every change rather than handing the account to a black box.
02 / The approach
AI that watches the accounts, and a firm that holds the approve button.
GoBoom monitors the accounts continuously across Google and Meta, runs ongoing analysis and creative-fatigue checks, and surfaces every change for the firm to approve before it goes live. The system catches drift early and proposes the next move with the math attached.
Monitor both platforms, around the clock
Google + Meta · 24/7GoBoom watches the Google and Meta accounts continuously, on machine cycles rather than a weekly check-in. Daily metrics flowed without a gap for roughly 250 days. Spend, leads, and cost per lead were tracked at the campaign level so a drift in efficiency showed up the day it started, not at the end of the month.
Run continuous analysis and creative-fatigue checks
Hundreds of cyclesAcross the window, GoBoom ran hundreds of automated analysis cycles, performance checks, and creative-fatigue checks. When a creative started to tire or a segment started to slip, the system flagged it and proposed the next move. This is how cost per lead stayed near $13 while the budget kept climbing.
Surface every change for the firm to approve
Approval-gatedNothing changed in the accounts without the firm signing off. Every budget shift, every pause, every creative swap was proposed with the data behind it and held until the firm approved it. The practice held the approve button the entire time. That is the wedge: you stay in control, and you get the receipts on why each move was worth making.
03 / The results
A CRM-verified 12.1x, on top of a flat cost per lead at scale.
Two scopes, kept separate on purpose. The 12.1x is verified against the firm's case-management system. The wider account numbers are the four-month production totals across Google and Meta, where the story is a cost per lead that held near $13 while the budget tripled.
Source · CRM + production
Window · 2026-02-11 to 2026-06-15
Verified in the firm's case-management system
CRM-verified ROAS
VerifiedAbout $23,569 in spend tied to $286,175 in signed contracts.
Signed contracts
Signed pipeline confirmed in the firm's CRM.
Signed cases
Cases signed and attributed back to the spend.
Avg signed case
Average value of a signed immigration case.
The wider account · four months across Google and Meta
Managed ad spend
Deployed across Google and Meta over roughly four months.
Leads delivered
Inbound leads generated across both platforms.
Blended CPL
Held steady as spend scaled. Strong for immigration.
Spend scaled
About $47K in month one to about $118K at peak, while CPL held.
Monthly spend climbed about 3x while cost per lead stayed flat
Sky · monthly spend · Emerald · cost per lead
The headline is the CRM-verified 12.1x. The achievement is the flat line. Tripling a budget is easy if you are willing to let efficiency slide. Tripling it while holding cost per lead near $13 means the added spend kept finding qualified demand instead of buying the next, more expensive tier of clicks. That is the difference between scaling and just spending more.
04 / The GoBoom difference
Why this holds up.
Two things made this result repeatable rather than lucky. The firm stayed in control of every change, and the return is backed by signed-contract receipts, not a rounded slide.
Approval-gated control
Every move
No change reached the live accounts without the firm approving it. The practice scaled winners and paused losers on its own authority, with the data attached to each decision.
Continuous watch
24/7
Hundreds of analysis and creative-fatigue checks across the window meant drift got caught the day it started, not at month-end, which is how CPL stayed near $13.
Receipts, not promises
12.1x
The return is verified against the firm's own case-management system, $286,175 in signed contracts on the tracked spend, not a rounded slide.
This is one practice over four months, and we are showing it because the data holds up to inspection. We have not named the firm, and we are not implying these numbers are typical for every account. They reflect a specific account, in a specific category, with the firm approving every change along the way.
See what GoBoom would do for your firm
Get a clear read on your paid acquisition across Google and Meta, with you holding the approve button on every change. Same approach, your account, your numbers.
Anonymized client case study. This case study describes the results of one nationwide immigration practice over a specific window and has been anonymized at the firm's request. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.