Veteran ID Card: removing the barriers to a benefit Veterans had already earned
The Veteran ID Card (VIC) lets Veterans prove their status at stores and restaurants to get discounts. The VA was hearing that the application itself was the barrier. We found out where people were getting stuck, and redesigned the flow in three weeks of rapid testing.
One of four human-centered designers. I facilitated the design studio, built the three high-fidelity prototypes, and helped run Rapid Iterative Testing and Evaluation (RITE).
4 designers, client product leadership
Heuristic analysis, usability testing, Veteran interviews, heat mapping, How Might We, design studio, RITE
Discovery through validated design, spring 2020. RITE: 6 cycles in 3 weeks.
A card meant to say thank you, behind an application that said "try again"
The VA had received feedback that the application process was keeping Veterans from getting the card and hurting how they felt about the program. My team was asked to understand the value of the VIC program, identify the usability issues in the application, and design solutions.
We ran a heuristic analysis and usability tests with current VIC users, along with interviews with Veterans. Participants completed four tasks:
- Learn about the VIC and decide whether they qualify
- Apply, then log out after submitting
- Check where their application stands
- Respond to a request for additional information
For many Veterans the card mattered less as a discount and more as recognition, a simple way to show they had served. That raised the stakes on getting the application right.Discovery insight
Most issues showed up after people started applying
Learning about the card went fine. Tasks two through four are where people struggled. The page flow shows why: the application passed through the agency website, two different login systems, the application system itself, and email, and each handoff was a place to get lost.
- A The link to apply was hard to find on the website.A
- C People who signed in through one login system hit an extra screen whose only button said "Review Request."C
- D, E People missed the evidence upload entirely, or didn't realize they needed both a photo ID and a profile photo.DE
- G, I The system never clearly confirmed a submission, and the status indicator was hard to find.GI
- K Error messages used low-contrast colored text.K
- M Clicking "Save" after updating an application put it on hold instead of resubmitting it.M
Plotting each issue against the system it lives in
A list of 15 issues doesn't tell a team where to start. So we built a usability heat map with tasks on one axis and systems on the other, colored by severity. It showed at a glance where the worst problems clustered, and it let us group issues that one prototype could solve together. Minor issues with obvious fixes were marked to handle later, so the design studio could focus on the hard ones.
| Task | Website | Login | Application system | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Learn about the card | ||||
| 2. Apply | AB | C | DEFGH | |
| 3. Check status | J | I | J | |
| 4. Respond to a request for more information | KLMO | N |
- How might we give people everything they need to decide to apply up front, with one direct way into the application?ABCJ
- How might we make it clear where each document goes, and confirm each upload worked?DE
- How might we confirm a successful submission and make it easy to sign out?GH
- How might we keep people informed about where their application stands?I
- How might we show people exactly where to act on a request for more information and resubmit?LM
From there we researched form-design best practices and looked at analogous systems that had solved similar problems, then sketched low-fidelity ideas for each problem statement.
Getting leadership to agree on the highest-impact fixes
I facilitated a design studio with the client's leadership to present the inspiration and sketches and reach consensus on which solutions had the most impact and were feasible to build. To keep critique useful instead of political, I used Edward de Bono's Six Thinking Hats. Each round, I assigned every participant a hat, such as facts, benefits, risks, or feelings, so every idea got looked at from every angle. We then synthesized the critiques and combined similar ideas into what would go into the prototype.
Two five-minute rounds per problem statement: rough ideas first, then the flow a person would follow.
Each person presents. Everyone else critiques through an assigned hat.
Combine the strongest parts of each sketch into what goes into the prototype.
Six rounds of RITE testing in three weeks
I mocked up three high-fidelity prototypes, and we tested them using Rapid Iterative Testing and Evaluation (RITE). We tested with up to three participants, debriefed, changed the prototype, and tested again. We ran six cycles in three weeks, which let us fix problems while testing was still happening instead of in a report afterward.
- TestUp to three participants per cycle work through the prototype
- DebriefThe team reviews results together the same day
- SortEach note goes into "change now," "consider later," or "process improvement." We tested a multi-page and a one-page version side by side this way.
- IterateChanges go into the next version before the next cycle
What changed
- Clear instructions and interface design for uploading evidence and photos
- A photo check that asks whether both images are recent, so people catch mistakes before submitting
- A visible count of the remaining steps
- Confirmation messages and emails after a successful submission
- A clear application status page right after submitting
- Error messages that follow best practices, including readable contrast
- Step-by-step instructions for additional information requests, with an easy-to-find link to update the application
Veteran ID Card application
Your application status
SubmittedWe received your application.
AssignedSomeone will review it soon.
In reviewWe'll contact you if we need more.
Decision madeWe'll email you.
These are simplified wireframes I redrew for this portfolio. They show the design decisions, not the production screens.
The final designs followed the agency's design system. The redesign resolved 10 usability issues and cut application abandonment by nearly half.
What I took from it
The heat map was the turning point. It moved the conversation from "the application is confusing" to "these five problems live in these two systems," and that made it much easier for leadership to commit. I've used a version of it on almost every evaluation since.
RITE also changed how I think about testing. Fixing things between sessions meant the last rounds tested real improvements instead of confirming problems we already knew about.