---
name: review-budget-allocation-by-channel
description: "Check where ad money went and what it did. Plan any change from the same goal and real costs."
category: Content Factory — Promote
stage: Promote
definitive_article: /social-amplification
status: needs-work
---

# Review budget allocation by channel

Your ad money may be spread across several places. This guide helps you see what each one cost and what it did. Start with the goal and the real spend for the same time span.

**The path:** Matched spend → comparable results → bounded proposal → measured recheck.

**Use this when:** A campaign budget review is due or spending no longer appears aligned with the stated goal.

## Inputs
- Dated spend and result exports by channel/campaign with currency, attribution and result definitions.
- The actual total budget, commitments, targets and stage roles; margin/revenue evidence when return is part of the goal.
- Prior allocation decisions, current operator authority and any limits on changes, stops or new tests. Read access is enough to prepare the review.

## First-run prompt

> Reconcile spend and compare each line with its matching goal. Separate cost targets from return targets and preserve attribution limits. Propose a bounded before/after allocation, keeping uncommitted funds unspent unless their use is authorized. Execute only changes already in scope and record actual read-back.

## Steps
1. Build a table by channel and campaign with spend, result count, definition, matching cost or return, target and stage. Reconcile totals to source reports, avoiding double-counted campaign/ad-set subtotals.
2. Keep currencies and windows consistent. Do not add each platform’s attributed conversions as unique business sales without a supported reconciliation. Keep paid, organic and blended measures explicitly separate.
3. Compare like goals. For cost per acquisition, above the target is worse; for return on ad spend, below the target is worse. A cheap view is not a cheaper lead, and revenue divided by spend is not profit.
4. Check result quality, tracking and minimum evidence before labeling a winner. An ad at its budget limit is not automatically underfunded, and an expensive qualified sale can be more useful than cheap irrelevant leads.
5. Review stage coverage against the actual plan and eligible audiences. A full nurture program may need several jobs, but every account need not fund all stages or all platforms. A stage can remain unfunded when evidence, audience size or scope does not support it.
6. Create a before/after proposal with each change’s reason, amount, dates and recheck. Preserve the small-test method and ≤2× ceiling for any separate increases, without claiming platform learning is guaranteed safe. Consider the current $30 total/30-day continuation before assuming vertical increases.
7. Keep any research reserve tied to actual authority and proven-content rules. The old roughly-10% language is not permission to divert money into unproven ads. Stopped spend stays uncommitted unless a specific reallocation is covered.
8. Apply only authorized exact changes and read them back; otherwise deliver the proposal through the existing route. Record what really changed and the next measurement window so the following report can judge the decision.

## Definition of done (QA checklist)

- [ ] Spend totals reconcile without duplicate subtotals or mixed currencies.
- [ ] Cost and return goals use the correct direction and matched result type.
- [ ] Quality/attribution gaps prevent unsupported winner labels.
- [ ] The proposal fits real totals, stages, dates and change authority.
- [ ] Proposed, applied and observed effects are separately documented.

## Example(s)

**Fictional teaching example:** Two channels spend $100 each. A produces five qualified leads, or $20 per lead. B produces ten, or $10 per lead, against a $15 target. A’s source quality is checked before a stop is proposed. B is a candidate for a further bounded test, not proof that twice the spend will buy twice the leads. Separately, a sales campaign has a 4× return target but records 3×, so it misses the target even though the number is “below target.” Unspent money is not moved without the existing scope covering that change.

## Handoff and Content Factory context

Send the proposal and actual changes to [list top 3 5 recommendations for next 7 days](https://local-service-spotlight.github.io/task-library/?task=list-top-3-5-recommendations-for-next-7-days#task-list-top-3-5-recommendations-for-next-7-days). Any supported increase follows [scale winners by increasing budget gradually](https://local-service-spotlight.github.io/task-library/?task=scale-winners-by-increasing-budget-gradually#task-scale-winners-by-increasing-budget-gradually); the next [compare current vs last period performance](https://local-service-spotlight.github.io/task-library/?task=compare-current-vs-last-period-performance#task-compare-current-vs-last-period-performance) checks its observed result.

This task is in Promote within the [Content Factory](https://blitzmetrics.com/content-factory/). Produce gathers real source material; Process makes useful assets; Post places and checks them; Promote distributes suitable work within its own scope. Use the proof and checked posts from earlier stages; a Promote task does not automatically redo all four stages. Use the actual next step above; catalog neighbors are not prerequisites.

## When this runs

Use the existing weekly or monthly optimization cycle, or perform one specific review. A recurring reallocation rule needs explicit limits, actual execution capability and checked state; this file only describes the method.

## First-run setup and continuity

Open the supplied task file and its linked source. Verify the project’s real inputs, account, access and output folder before work. This Markdown file is a guide; it does not install an app, connect an account, supply a subscription or create a schedule. Carry out work already authorized; do not ask for the same approval again. Keep any unsupplied destination or new action outside that scope clearly pending.

Save source IDs, versions, decisions, checked outputs and next owner in the project tracker. Before a retry, check the saved state and other workers’ changes. A model name does not guarantee memory or a running timer. Repeated work needs an actual configured trigger and durable state; one-off work can be started by the prompt above.

Keep agent media muted with volume zero before playback. If mute cannot be verified, use captions, metadata or still frames. State the limit: silent visual checks do not prove spoken-word accuracy or audio quality. Do not start sound through the user’s speakers unless explicitly asked.

## Write up the real run

For every actual attempt, [write its meta article](https://blitzmetrics.com/meta-article-prompt/) with this recipe and revision, trigger, steps performed, output evidence, measured result, gaps and next owner. Failed, blocked and partial attempts also get a written record. A draft can satisfy writing; publishing it follows the existing job scope.

Keep one stable execution ID across retries and edits. A separately scoped child task may have its own ID linked to its parent. Writing the parent’s meta record is part of that run, not an endless new chain. The [recipe and meta-article guide](https://localservicespotlight.com/meta-articles/) explains this distinction. Teaching examples are not real executions and must not enter the run count.


<!-- factory-layer:start -->

## Factory chain (do not treat this as isolated)

- **Phase:** Promote
- **Importance:** 5/5 `●●●●●` — frequency 4, revenue 5, gating 3 (runs every factory cycle or weekly; ads/revenue path)
- **Suggested previous station:** `scale-winners-by-increasing-budget-gradually`
- **Suggested next station:** `create-youtube-campaigns-using-aducate-model`
These stations are generated neighbors, not verified prerequisites or handoffs. Follow the task’s actual Inputs and Handoff sections.
- **Handoff:** Organic metrics CSV (or Ads Manager export), pixel ID, creative filenames, kill/scale log. Next week's ranking starts from this file.

## Model routing (same factory, any engine)

- **This task's lane:** `computer` — Logged-in UI (Meta Ads Manager, Descript, GSC, wp-admin when REST is blocked). Requires a supported browser tool and the right account access.
- **Single-engine path:** Use the capable AI app you already have. Check its required tools and access before starting. Pass the actual result and proof to the next task.
- **Optional multi-engine:** A tested local model may draft; a stronger model may review facts and voice. Use supported tools for approved actions. Pick models from observed quality and cost; a model name does not prove it can run this task.
- **Never** store the working state in one vendor's memory. Files in the Content Library are the bridge.

<!-- factory-layer:end -->
## Definitive article & links

- Canonical article: https://blitzmetrics.com/social-amplification
- Exact task: [Review budget allocation by channel](https://local-service-spotlight.github.io/task-library/?task=review-budget-allocation-by-channel#task-review-budget-allocation-by-channel)
- Writing standard: [Article Guidelines](https://localservicespotlight.com/article-guidelines/)
- [Dollar-a-Day method](https://blitzmetrics.com/dollar-a-day/)
- [Metrics, Analysis, and Action](https://blitzmetrics.com/maa/)
- [Goals, Content, and Targeting](https://blitzmetrics.com/gct-business-strategy/)
- [Social Amplification Engine](https://blitzmetrics.com/social-amplification/)
- [Meta significant-edit help](https://www.facebook.com/business/help/316478108955072)

## Review and evidence still needed

The source contributor status is preserved. It is not certification of this draft or proof of account access, completed work or a live outcome. The worked example teaches the method and is explicitly fictional.
- Actual budget authority, financial targets and cross-channel business reconciliation are not supplied.
- The owned method’s 90/10 wording does not by itself define an enforceable account budget allocation.