Maximizing the Opportunity of a New California Social Services Portal
By: Dave Guarino
Tags: UX, Social Services, Get Cal Fresh, California

Maximizing the Opportunity of a New California Social Services Portal

Thoughts and recommendations on user experience from 5 years of delivering GetCalFresh

Development of a new, statewide client-facing portal for California’s major social service benefits presents an incredible opportunity to improve the delivery of these services with a user-centered approach that drives better outcomes statewide. Code for America has been finding and iteratively meeting the needs of CalFresh-eligible users online since 2015 with GetCalFresh.org, an online application and enrollment assistance service. From this vantage point, we have a unique window into the path to successful user experience and better user outcomes as it relates to social services eligible populations. With the promise of a new client-facing portal we want to share thoughts and recommendations based on what we have learned so far.

This document provides context and seven recommendations on how user experience and engagement may be optimally leveraged to ensure that both the new client portal and CalSAWS systems more generally meet all users’ needs and maximally achieve the program goals that these systems support. Specifically, we are providing these ideas in the context of a presentation delivered on November 2, 2018 called ​“Approaches to User Engagement.”

1. Define the user so you can clearly consider stakeholder and client needs.

Effective user experience and user-centered design work need to clearly differentiate between “users” and “stakeholders” so that the needs of both parties can be clearly considered.

There are many users for a service as vast as the portal, but let’s not become so enthused by a user-centered approach that we mistakenly focus only on one type of user; or worse, merge their needs into one. Without clear definitions of the actual users and an understanding of their needs, software sometimes ends up like the potato peeler that also claims to dice vegetables, and as a result does neither task particularly well.

In the ​Approaches… ​document, both the words ​participants​ and ​users​ are used. This creates ambiguity of ​users​ vs. ​stakeholders​, which is an important and substantive issue​.​ In an effective user-centered design process, these two roles — and how they are engaged — differs.

Users​: ​Users are the actual users of the software, and are engaged via user research (such as shadowing use of existing software, conducting user testing of prototype ideas with paper prototypes, interviews, and surveys). In the context of the client portal, there are fundamentally three user groups:

Program applicants and beneficiaries, applying for benefits or renewing them via the online portals Eligibility staff who process online applications Application assisters who use the online portals

Stakeholders: ​Anyone who is not an actual day-to-day user of the system is a stakeholder, as their value comes not from directly using the system but how well the goals of the system are achieved by the software—making sure the various public social service safety net programs are implemented effectively and efficiently. Stakeholders should be engaged at the level of goals and needs rather than the details of software specifics. With internal and external stakeholders providing input to the goals (“what is the need?”), a user experience and design team conducts user research and user testing* to develop the best solution (“how does this software specifically meet that need?”).

For example, a goal for the client portal may be “as many clients as possible can submit the right documents for their program online and have them be quickly and easily processed by eligibility staff.” User research and design work would determine, for example, if the income documents language is succinct and clear so that users can successfully upload the correct documentation. The reason for this is that while which documents are required may be a policy question, how users can most effectively be supported in identifying and submitting these documents is a question primarily driven by the clients’ needs and situation, dimensions best assessed through user research and design. On the worker-user side, it would also be important that the uploaded documents get to the right place automatically to maximize the worker’s ability to quickly and easily process the documents and make an eligibility determination.

Recommendations:

Define a process that gathers input from stakeholders (internal and external) on the goals and perceived user needs to be accomplished in designing the systems, as well as information on perceived currently unmet needs.

Separately engage a process of professional user research with the key user groups (clients, eligibility staff, and assisters) to clearly understand and document user needs of the actual users.

2. Define what is already working well

The starting point for redesigning the client facing portals is a baseline of user research on the existing portals or a gap analysis: What meets the needs of users, and what needs are currently unmet? This will create a shared understanding of priorities for new work.

Beginning portal development with a strong foundational understanding of what is working well now, what is ​not working well now, and why will ensure this opportunity is used best.

User experience research should be done to assess where the three current client portals meet and do not meet the needs of applicants/clients, eligibility workers, and assisters. This might include:

Shadowing eligibility staff as they process online applications, documenting where they experience problems or have created cumbersome workarounds

Surveying eligibility staff about their experience with processing online applications and changes

Shadowing applicants, clients, and assisters, and documenting the problems they encounter in either applying for or renewing their benefits through the portals

Surveying assisters (CBOs) for consistent issues they have seen with client facing portals over the past few years

Analyzing data from the current portals on key metrics like utilization (e.g., %age of SAR7s submitted online), conversion/abandonment in application flows

Analysis of customer support requests related to the existing portals

This baseline foundation should help create an objective, shared understanding that allows stakeholders (consortium leadership, program leadership, advocates) to have the most productive discussions of goals and currently unmet needs.

Recommendation:

In starting to redesign a consolidated client portal, CalSAWS should begin by engaging an external user experience firm to provide a baseline user research assessment of the existing 3 portals’ capabilities and what needs are currently unmet or undermet.

3. User-centered design is not just for screens

The role of user experience and user-centered design should not be limited to the client-facing portal, but should extend into other components of the migration.

Taking a user-centered approach means taking responsibility for the whole user experience and their entire journey over time. The stated commitment to a user-centered design of the new client portal is a positive development, but UX can and should also inform other components of the SAWS migration.

While the most significant shift will be of eligibility staff currently using C-IV or CalWIN to using LRS**, a largely already-built system, and there may be limited value to user experience research here, user research could very significantly inform such critical decisions as those around ancillary systems. For example, conducting user research of the barriers and current benefits of the various existing document management interfaces, could significantly strengthen how an eventual consolidated document management system meets the needs of all eligibility staff.

Recommendations:

Provide information to stakeholders on what user experience and user-centered design work has been a part of the SAWS migration effort to-date.

Analyze which components of the migration would benefit from UX/user research efforts and engage support for those efforts.

4. Leverage existing resources to move further, faster

There are a number of existing resources that can help the CalSAWS process effectively integrate user-centered design and user experience approaches to maximize the success of both the SAWS internal-facing system. Some examples of such resources include:

Social Interest Solutions’ recent white papers on these topics The existing work encoded in​ ​GetCalFresh.org​ which takes a user-centered approach to the SNAP application and enrollment experience in the California-specific context Reviewing other states’ recently-implemented portals and apps that have taken UX and user-centered design approaches to understand their process, procurement, implementation, and continuous improvement strategies (Example: Massachusetts DTA )

5. Make this the start of a new way of working

The SAWS migration is an opportunity to institutionalize user-centered design and user experience practices as core capabilities that improve the program outcomes that the CalSAWS technology provides.

While external support may be most immediately practical as part of the SAWS migration and portal development, this could be coupled with a parallel effort to set up longer term increased capacity in both staffing and processes at CalSAWS that integrate user centered design and user experience as core capabilities.

Ongoing user research, user testing, and measurement driving continuous improvement of the client portal capabilities — on cycles of weeks rather than 6–12 months — will enable the value that the online portals provide towards program outcomes to continually increase, rather than decline, with time as users’ needs shift and evolve.

For example, text messaging or native smartphone apps may meet certain needs today but become less relevant as users’ technology options change. The prevalence of high quality cameras in standard smartphones have opened a fundamentally different opportunity to improve verification document submission. New opportunities will necessarily emerge, and increasing the rate of discovery of needs and delivery of new capabilities to meet them will continuously improve how the systems support participants and public servants.

Recommendation:

Establish a long-term plan to move away from external support and institutionalize user experience and user centered design into CalSAWS ongoing development practices.

Recommendations Summary

Define a process that gathers input from stakeholders (internal and external) on the goals and perceived user needs to be accomplished in designing the systems, as well as information on perceived currently unmet needs.

Separately engage a process of professional user research with the key user groups (clients, eligibility staff, and assisters) to clearly understand and document user needs of the actual users.

In starting to redesign a consolidated client portal, CalSAWS should begin by engaging an external user experience firm to provide a baseline user research assessment of the existing 3 portals’ capabilities and what needs are currently unmet or under-met.

Provide information to stakeholders on what user experience and user-centered design work has been a part of the SAWS migration effort to-date.

Analyze which components of the migration would benefit from UX/user research efforts and engage support for those efforts.

Establish a long-term plan to move away from external support and institutionalize user experience and user centered design into CalSAWS ongoing development practices.

Leverage existing resources on taking user-centered approach to designing a consolidated portal and app.

* “User testing” here is distinguished from “user acceptance testing” — the goal of “user testing” more generally being to gather information on usability and user experience of proposed software designs before those designs are implemented. One recommendation is to use cost-effective solutions such as paper prototyping or design prototyping software such as InVision.

** ​Recognizing that there is likely to be more impact to CalWIN users given stronger similarities of C-IV and LRS.