EverNorth — Daily Callers Report

Wednesday, 12 August 2026

built 13 Aug 2026, 18:40 · America/Toronto
archive

Calls

54 out / 6 in

Leads

new today

Reached

52 answered − 17 vm, 14 short

Qualified

good status

Booked

moved to 1.4

Messages

SMS

Follow-up

15 reached, 14 vm, 8 short, 4 missed

Lead→Booked

26.7%

daily rate

Day timeline bar height = call length · grey = no answer

070911131517192123

Sara

Sanit Kumar

08:3210:40

outgoing answered

checklist21/26

Akil Selot

08:580:08

outgoing too short

Tim Chin

09:030:09

outgoing too short

Ziad Jamal

09:060:06

outgoing too short

Ziad Jamal

09:080:38

outgoing voicemail

Antony Noel John

09:107:10

outgoing answered

checklist15/26

2894661244

09:230:00

incoming no answer

Jude H Rupasinghe

09:242:17

outgoing answered

checklist9/26

Afthabul Ameen

09:309:12

outgoing answered

checklist24/26

Mauricio Arocha

09:480:41

outgoing voicemail

2894661244

09:490:25

incoming answered

Madhav Nepal

09:520:09

outgoing too short

Doeminic Surio Velasquez

09:540:03

outgoing too short

Gaurang Chandgadhiya

09:580:31

outgoing voicemail

Sunny Prem Kandi

10:022:09

outgoing answered

checklist7/24

Sunny Prem Kandi

10:051:34

outgoing answered

checklist8/24

+14379377879

10:100:03

outgoing too short

Pujan Dahal

10:290:14

outgoing voicemail

+15198017868

11:320:09

outgoing too short

2894661244

11:570:00

incoming no answer

Sarah

12:461:31

outgoing answered

checklist5/26

Jagadish Singh Dadal

13:019:37

outgoing answered

checklist21/24

2894661244

13:111:48

incoming answered

Ziad Jamal

13:3015:17

outgoing answered

checklist6/26

+14379377879

13:450:04

outgoing too short

+16478352572

13:470:43

outgoing voicemail

Christian G Doekpar

13:500:40

outgoing voicemail

Sanit Kumar

13:550:56

outgoing answered

checklist3/26

Abraham jacob Tharakan

14:100:00

incoming no answer

Anshuman

+14378331458

07:290:22

outgoing no speech

checklist2/2

+12892990235

11:050:00

incoming no answer

Al Haque

17:116:37

outgoing answered

checklist9/26

Christal Gem Fiesta

17:280:04

outgoing too short

Jovan Alexander George

17:290:03

outgoing too short

Suneet

17:390:03

outgoing too short

Reine

Mr Chizzy

09:500:06

outgoing too short

Wisam

09:542:10

outgoing answered

checklist6/26

Sidu

09:568:51

outgoing answered

checklist20/26

Mr Chizzy

10:216:45

outgoing answered

checklist19/26

Sangat

10:340:38

outgoing voicemail

William Li

10:370:37

outgoing voicemail

Gurpal Singh

10:3910:01

outgoing answered

checklist18/26

Nerwin Alvarez

10:540:00

outgoing no answer

Nerwin Alvarez

10:550:00

outgoing no answer

Abdul Ahad

10:551:21

outgoing answered

checklist9/26

Ashish Ashish

11:010:57

outgoing voicemail

Ashish Ashish

11:020:31

outgoing voicemail

+12894795739

11:050:00

outgoing no answer

Marshall

11:090:35

outgoing voicemail

+14379832991

11:120:07

outgoing too short

Anand Miglani

11:407:15

outgoing answered

checklist19/26

Ameer Jawabra | Software Engineer

11:520:37

outgoing voicemail

Jeronie Robinson

11:560:00

outgoing no answer

Syam Padikkat Saseendran

12:010:40

outgoing answered

checklist3/26

Chirag Kaushal

12:040:31

outgoing voicemail

Amine El Andaloussi

12:065:16

outgoing answered

checklist11/26

Marco Antonio Barnett Medina

12:130:24

outgoing voicemail

Devershj Devershi

12:180:29

outgoing voicemail

Alfajbhai Ghanchi

12:200:31

outgoing voicemail

Jonathan

no calls

Leads by source 15 total

Meta-Form-PGWP

Landing-PGWP

SMM-Organic

Web-Organic

Speed to lead working minutes · 2 of 15 leads called

Fastest

39 min

Anshuman Mishra 17:00–21:00

51 min on the clock

Slowest

84 min

Sara Habchi 08:00–14:00

407 min on the clock

median 84 min · 13 leads never called

Conversion by caller

Caller	Leads	Calls	Reached	Reach	Booked	Book
Sara Habchi	1	29	12	41.4%	2	200.0%
Anshuman Mishra	9	7	1	14.3%	0	0.0%
Reine Francis	1	24	8	33.3%	2	200.0%
Jonathan Gutman	0	0	0	0.0%	0	0.0%

Daily funnel

Leads

Contacted

Qualified

Consultations

Reach peaks when they pick up · last 14 days

12:00–14:00 best connect

31/76

40.8%

08:00–10:00

55/135

40.7%

10:00–12:00

77/205

37.6%

16:00–18:00

6/16

37.5%

18:00–20:00 worst

1/10

10.0%

average 38.5% over 442 outgoing calls

Lead statuses at end of day one bucket per lead

Consultation booked

Not qualified / lost

Qualified

In progress (contacted)

New / no activity

Caller activity

Caller	Calls	Talk	Span	First	Last	Notes
Sara Habchi	29	1:02:36	5:37:50	08:32	14:10	44
Anshuman Mishra	7	6:37	10:57:22	06:42	17:39	15
Reine Francis	24	42:19	2:29:14	09:50	12:20	113
Jonathan Gutman	0	0:00	—	—	—	0

Leads and first call 13 never called · sorted by delay

Lead	Created	First call	Caller	Delay	Score
Mahamad Mustapha	09:06	—	Reine Francis	no call	—
Jiggy Wonder	16:52	—	Anshuman Mishra	no call	—
Hussanpreet Kaur	17:04	—	Anshuman Mishra	no call	—
Idowu Emmanuel Bankole	17:11	—	Anshuman Mishra	no call	—
Okoro Emmanuel	17:13	—	Anshuman Mishra	no call	—
Hanish Gupta	17:27	—	Anshuman Mishra	no call	—
Emre Kolsuz	18:00	—	Anshuman Mishra	no call	—
Dan Almenar	19:06	—	Anshuman Mishra	no call	—
Sharmake Ahmed	19:51	—	Anshuman Mishra	no call	—
Harsh Sharma	20:27	—	—	no call	—
Ajay Singh	22:18	—	—	no call	—
Dev	22:38	—	—	no call	—
Aftab Hussain	23:01	—	—	no call	—
Jude H Rupasinghe	02:36	09:24 (2:17)	Sara Habchi	84 min	9/26
Suneet	16:48	17:39 (0:03)	Anshuman Mishra	39 min	—

Booked consultations 4 today

Client	Source	Booked by	Lead created	Booked at
Sanjaybhai Jayeshbhai Patel	Meta-Form-PGWP	Reine Francis	05 Aug 22:35	09:26
Samanda Mau	SMM-Organic	Sara Habchi	06 Aug 04:32	11:01
Rajveer Singh	Landing-PGWP	Sara Habchi	20 May 08:23	11:57
Prakash Dandhi (copy)	Reception-Calls	Reine Francis	10 Aug 20:00	12:11

SMS 60 sent · 8 received · 33 contacts

Reply rate

15.2%

5 of 33 conversations

Median reply

5 min

client's first answer

Caller	Sent	Received	Contacts	Started	Replied	Reply
Sara Habchi	22	2	13	12	1	8.3%
Anshuman Mishra	0	0	0	0	0	0.0%
Reine Francis	38	6	21	21	4	19.0%
Jonathan Gutman	0	0	0	0	0	0.0%

Waiting for a reply 3 conversations where the client wrote last

Mr Chizzy 09:57 · Reine Francis 843 min

Yes

Marco Antonio Barnett Medina 12:16 · Reine Francis 703 min

Hello, not yet thanks

Emre Kolsuz 18:05 · Sara Habchi 354 min

Hello, I submit the assessment form on the website. I received text messages and it's said I need to send a message for

Call reviews 36 of 21 live conversations

Anshuman Mishra — 07:29 · 0:22 2/2

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and named the company, and asked for the lead's name promptly.

What went wrong

The call was very short, only 22 seconds, and did not progress beyond the initial introduction and asking the lead's name. There was no further engagement or information gathered.

Sara Habchi Samit 08:32 · 10:40 21/26

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough and professional conversation, confirming key details such as Samit's status, education, and work experience, and clearly explaining the eligibility criteria and available programs. The caller also offered a clear next step with the paid consultation and confirmed contact details via WhatsApp, ensuring the lead was well informed.

What went wrong

The caller did not explicitly handle common objections like 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself,' which could help in advancing the sale. Additionally, the call ended without locking a specific appointment date and time or summarizing the agreements, missing an opportunity to secure commitment and clarity.

Sara Habchi — 09:08 · 0:38 0/0

What was good

The caller reached the voicemail promptly and the greeting was clear.

What went wrong

No message was left, so no opportunity to engage or provide information.

Sara Habchi Anthony 09:10 · 7:10 15/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and engaged Anthony in a detailed discussion about his current status and options, explaining the Francophone Mobility Program and the visitor record process well. She carefully assessed his eligibility and provided realistic advice without making any illegal promises, showing good professionalism.

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to ask about Anthony's age and education, which are important for eligibility assessment. She also did not confirm contact details, offer a paid consultation, or lock in a next step, which are key for progressing the sale. Additionally, there was no summary of agreements at the end to reinforce the next actions.

Sara Habchi Jude 09:24 · 2:17 9/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and confirmed the lead's name early on, establishing rapport. She offered a next step by proposing to schedule a consultation and confirmed WhatsApp contact details for easy communication. The caller avoided making any illegal promises or guarantees about visa outcomes.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any substantive information about the lead's profile such as citizenship, immigration status, or goals beyond PR interest. No eligibility assessment or program explanation was provided. Also, no specific appointment date and time were locked, which leaves the lead without a firm commitment.

Sara Habchi Amin 09:30 · 9:12 24/26

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough and professional conversation, confirming all relevant details and clearly explaining the immigration pathways and next steps. They effectively presented the paid consultation and clarified payment and scheduling options, ensuring the lead understood the process.

What went wrong

The caller did not handle any objections such as 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself,' which could have been opportunities to further engage the lead. Otherwise, the call was well managed with no compliance issues or misleading promises.

Sara Habchi — 09:48 · 0:41 0/0

What was good

The caller left a voicemail message identifying the lead's name and company, which is appropriate for this situation.

What went wrong

No message was actually left after the greeting, so the lead may not have enough information to call back or recognize the caller. Leaving a brief message would improve contact chances.

Reine Francis Wisam 09:54 · 2:10 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced himself and confirmed the lead's name and current immigration status clearly. He was polite and attempted to clarify the lead's details despite poor audio quality.

What went wrong

The call was cut short due to audio issues and the caller did not progress to asking about the lead's goals or other key qualifying questions. No next steps or consultation offers were made, and the call ended abruptly without confirming contact details or summarizing agreements.

Reine Francis Sidu 09:56 · 8:51 20/26

What was good

The caller effectively guided the lead through the consultation process, explaining options clearly and confirming next steps including contact details and booking possibilities. They handled objections well and maintained compliance by avoiding any illegal promises.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask about the lead's citizenship, age, education, language proficiency, or detailed work experience, missing opportunities to gather important information early in the call.

Sara Habchi — 09:58 · 0:31 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, referencing a previous arrangement and requesting a reschedule if needed. This keeps the communication open and professional.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or advance the sale. The caller should follow up to try to reach the lead directly.

Sara Habchi Sunny 10:02 · 2:09 7/24

What was good

The caller clearly identified herself and the company, and confirmed the lead's name Sunny. She successfully rescheduled the consultation to a specific time, saying 'I will add it on the calendar' and confirmed contact details for sending the invitation link.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any immigration-related information such as citizenship, goals, or eligibility, nor did she present any program or offer a paid consultation. There was no summary of agreements at the end, and no handling of objections since none arose. This call was purely administrative and missed opportunities to engage the lead further.

Sara Habchi Sunny 10:05 · 1:34 8/24

What was good

The caller successfully confirmed the lead's name Sunny and managed to reschedule the consultation to a specific date and time, saying "I will be booking it now, tomorrow at 12 p.m." The call ended with a clear summary of the agreement.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they gather any immigration-related information such as the client's goals, status, or eligibility. There was no attempt to confirm contact details or discuss the services offered, which are important for a productive sales call.

Reine Francis Renee 10:21 · 6:45 19/26

What was good

The caller clearly explained the consultation process and available programs, saying things like "we usually start with a first consultation" and "we are currently taking consultations." They successfully booked a specific date and time for the consultation and confirmed contact details via WhatsApp. The caller also avoided any illegal promises, maintaining compliance throughout.

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to ask about the lead's age, education, English/French proficiency, and work experience, which are important for a thorough assessment. They also did not handle any objections or summarize agreements at the end, which could improve clarity and client confidence.

Sara Habchi — 10:29 · 0:14 0/0

What was good

The caller correctly identified that the voicemail box was full and did not leave a message, avoiding wasted effort.

What went wrong

The call ended immediately due to a full voicemail box, so no opportunity to engage the lead was missed, but no message was left to prompt a callback.

Reine Francis — 10:34 · 0:38 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, identifying themselves and the company, and inviting the lead to respond via call, WhatsApp, or email. The message was concise and professional.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail with no live conversation, there was no opportunity to engage the lead or gather information. The caller could consider leaving a slightly more personalized message to encourage a callback.

Reine Francis William Lee 10:37 · 0:37 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, introducing themselves and referencing the lead's application. They offered flexible options for follow-up, mentioning email or WhatsApp as alternatives.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage the lead or gather information. The message could be slightly shorter to respect the lead's time.

Reine Francis Grofan 10:39 · 10:01 18/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and the company, confirming the lead's name and current immigration status early on. They provided detailed information about relevant programs and next steps, including the consultation process and fees, and mentioned the RCIC license to build trust.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask about the lead's age, education, or language proficiency, which are important for eligibility assessment. They also did not lock in a specific consultation date and time, only asking the lead to get back later. There was no summary of agreements at the end, and some common objections were not addressed.

Reine Francis Abdul 10:55 · 1:21 9/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and confirmed the lead's name, establishing a polite and professional tone. They successfully locked in a specific callback time and offered to send information via email or WhatsApp, showing good intent to follow up.

What went wrong

The caller missed many key qualification questions such as the lead's citizenship, immigration goals, and work experience, which are essential for assessing eligibility. There was no summary of agreements or confirmation of contact details, and the call ended abruptly without progressing the sales process beyond scheduling a callback.

Reine Francis — 11:01 · 0:57 0/0

What was good

The caller clearly identified themselves and the company in the voicemail message, stating, "This is Frances, team leader at Evernorth."

What went wrong

This call was a voicemail with no live conversation, so no selling or engagement occurred. The caller did not leave a full message or next steps for the lead, which missed an opportunity to encourage a callback.

Reine Francis Ash 11:02 · 0:31 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message referencing the lead's prior application and inviting a callback to discuss next steps.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, no live interaction occurred and no selling or qualification could take place. The message could have been slightly more specific about how to respond or what to expect next.

Reine Francis Marshall 11:09 · 0:35 0/0

What was good

The caller left a polite and clear voicemail message addressing the lead by name and referencing prior contact, which helps maintain engagement.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, there was no opportunity to conduct a live conversation or advance the sales process beyond leaving a message.

Reine Francis Anand 11:40 · 7:15 19/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and the company, confirming Anand's current immigration status and explaining the next steps thoroughly. They presented relevant programs and offered a paid consultation with clear details about the process and fees. The caller avoided making any illegal promises and summarized the agreements well at the end.

What went wrong

The caller missed asking for Anand's age and language proficiency, which are important for eligibility assessment. They also did not confirm contact details or lock a specific date and time for the consultation, which could improve commitment and follow-up effectiveness.

Reine Francis Amir 11:52 · 0:37 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message identifying themselves and the company, and referenced the lead's application. The message invites the lead to respond when convenient, which is appropriate for a first contact attempt.

What went wrong

No message was left beyond the initial voicemail greeting and brief introduction. The caller could have left a more detailed message including a suggested next step or contact details to encourage a callback.

Reine Francis Raj 12:01 · 0:40 3/26

What was good

The caller introduced himself and the company clearly, saying 'this is Raj, team leader at S North.' He was polite and respectful when the lead said they were still deciding, responding with 'not a problem' and ending the call courteously.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the client's name or any qualifying questions such as citizenship, immigration status, or goals. No attempt was made to assess eligibility, present programs, handle objections, or offer a next step like a paid consultation. The call ended without locking a follow-up date or confirming contact details, missing many key sales opportunities.

Reine Francis Shiroh 12:04 · 0:31 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and explaining the reason for the call. The message included a call to action, inviting the lead to get back if interested.

What went wrong

There was no opportunity to engage in a conversation or gather information, so no selling or qualification could take place. The caller did not leave detailed contact information or next steps beyond a general request to call back.

Reine Francis — 12:06 · 5:16 11/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves and the company clearly, saying "Ren, team leader at Evernorth," and explained the consultation process and costs well. They also mentioned the RCIC license and discussed relevant program options, showing good product knowledge.

What went wrong

The caller missed several key qualification questions such as the client's name, citizenship, age, education, and language skills. They did not confirm contact details or lock in a consultation date, and the call ended without summarizing agreements or handling objections like 'I'll think about it.' These missed opportunities could reduce conversion chances.

Reine Francis — 12:13 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The call reached a voicemail that was not initialized, so no conversation was possible. The system message clearly informed the caller about the voicemail status.

What went wrong

No message was left on the voicemail, so the opportunity to engage the lead was missed.

Reine Francis — 12:18 · 0:29 0/0

What was good

The caller left a polite, clear voicemail message identifying themselves and the company, and requested a callback.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no selling or qualification could take place. The message was brief and did not include a next step or consultation offer.

Reine Francis — 12:20 · 0:31 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, identifying himself and the company, and inviting the lead to respond if interested.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message was brief but could have included a call to action or next steps to encourage a callback.

Sara Habchi Sarah 12:46 · 1:31 5/26

What was good

The caller successfully rescheduled the appointment and locked in a specific date and time, saying, "Tomorrow 11:30 until 12, okay?" This shows good time management and respect for both parties' schedules.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they gather any client information or discuss the immigration services. The call ended quickly without any assessment or explanation, missing many opportunities to engage the lead effectively.

Sara Habchi Jagadish 13:01 · 9:37 21/24

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough needs assessment with Jagadish, confirming key details such as status, education, and language scores. They clearly explained the eligibility criteria and presented a suitable pathway involving trades employment, which matched Jagadish's interests. The caller also offered a paid consultation and shared payment details, demonstrating professionalism and clarity.

What went wrong

The caller did not lock in a specific date and time for the consultation despite the lead's interest, which could risk losing the booking. Additionally, the call ended without a clear summary of the agreements made, missing an opportunity to reinforce next steps. There was some audio clarity issue noted by the lead, which the caller could have addressed more proactively.

Sara Habchi Monsieur Jamal 13:30 · 15:17 6/26

What was good

The caller successfully engaged the lead, confirming the lead's name and immigration status clearly, such as "j'ai un work permit" and the expiry date. The caller also adapted language to the lead's origin, speaking Arabic when appropriate.

What went wrong

The call was overly repetitive and did not progress beyond confirming basic status details. Important qualification questions like goals, education, and work experience were not asked, and no program or next steps were presented. The call lacked a clear summary or closing agreement, missing opportunities to advance the sale.

Sara Habchi — 13:47 · 0:43 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, explaining the purpose and requesting an update.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead during this call.

Sara Habchi Christian G. Zupa 13:50 · 0:40 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, identifying themselves and referencing previous consultations. The message invites the lead to respond with an update, which is appropriate for a follow-up call.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, there was no opportunity to engage in a live conversation or address any checklist items. No issues with the voicemail content itself.

Sara Habchi Jane 13:55 · 0:56 3/26

What was good

The caller was polite and responsive, checking if the lead had any questions and acknowledging the lead's responses. The caller maintained a friendly tone throughout the brief exchange.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, which is important for professionalism and trust. No immigration details or goals were discussed, and no next steps or consultations were offered, missing an opportunity to advance the sales process.

Anshuman Mishra Al 17:11 · 6:37 9/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and confirmed the lead's name and location, showing good initial engagement. They also carefully gathered details about the lead's immigration status, education, and work experience, demonstrating thorough fact-finding.

What went wrong

The call suffered from poor audio quality, which hindered effective communication and prevented progressing to discussing goals or presenting programs. The caller did not handle objections or offer next steps like a paid consultation, and no summary or closing was done before ending the call. The lead had to be transferred to WhatsApp due to sound issues, indicating a technical barrier that limited the call's effectiveness.

data check · 17 calls not matched to a lead · 4 leads unassigned · reached counts every answered call, voicemail included