DHS Job Tool (SSIS)
Making improvements to a Windows job tool used by the MN Department of Human Services
My role: Determining key findings and recommendations, prototyping, and client deliverable (prototype walkthrough video)
Collaboration: Research
Tools:
Figma
Google Sheets
Quicktime
Zoom
Methods:
Cognitive Walkthrough
Contextual Inquiry
The Problem
SSIS (Social Services Info System) is a program/job tool caseworkers for the Department of Human Services (DHS) use to create plans (OHPPs) for children who need to be temporarily or permanently removed from their homes for the purpose of maintaining their safety and wellbeing. According to our research, the program is disorganized and full of redundancy, causing issues for both caseworkers and anyone receiving an OHPP. Additionally, the UI has not been updated since the late 90’s when it was created.
The Solution
Interactive prototypes were created that demonstrate a recommended design system. This system works to improve the signal to noise ratio by asking sets of preliminary questions and customizing the form to include only relevant questions on a case-by-case basis.
What Surprised Me
Going into the contextual inquiries, I expected the caseworkers’ biggest complaints to be about how SSIS inconveniences them at work. However, it became clear during the research that there were bigger issues at hand. One participant explained, holding back tears, how many parents don’t even make it to the most important information in the OHPP packet because it is buried beneath pages of confusingly-worded, potentially irrelevant information.
The Client
The Minnesota Department of Human Services (MN DHS), in collaboration with various partners, assists individuals in fulfilling their essential needs, enabling them to lead a life of dignity and reach their full potential. MN DHS programs encompass a wide range of services, including those related to food, housing, income, healthcare, child welfare, and crisis management. This project focuses on the creation of Out-of-Home Placement Plans, which the MN DHS oversees.
The Users
People who use SSIS to create OHPPs are primarily caseworkers/case managers. Research showed that most of them have worked for MN DHS longer than two years, and have not had previous roles of a similar nature. From my personal observation, they are sensitive, patient, caring individuals who genuinely want to help people that are struggling and need additional support.
The Process
Assessing the Problem
Evaluation - First, my team conducted a cognitive walkthrough to evaluate and familiarize ourselves with the program. To do this, we watched a video demo, because of the program’s incompatibility with our computers, but also because it may contain sensitive information. Focusing on the “Document” portion of the plan creation process, we each focused on a quarter of the tasks and assessed their steps. We were looking to see whether or not each step demonstrated proper use of mental model, visibility, mapping, and feedback to the user. Documenting this gave us a good idea of the overall usability of the program to a new user.
View/download a PDF of the full Cognitive Walkthrough here.
Research
Planning - This project was challenging, because user research was our only chance to really explore the program. My team developed a script in order to discover as much as possible about the program, its context, and the subject matter.
View/download the full script here.
“[The parents] do not understand these questions. A lot of it doesn’t pertain to them.”
Research Goals:
Learn more about what workarounds are used, and what additional tools are needed to complete the task, and why.
Better understand how the program helps and hinders users in creating a plan.
Gain insights around what variables determine the questions caseworkers need to include in the OHPP.
Uncover the degree to which previous information currently can be or should be pulled into the plan.
Research method - We decided to use the interview method of contextual inquiry to give us insight on how SSIS is actually used by the users. The interviews, both an hour long, were conducted with caseworkers who shared their screens via Zoom. It turned out an hour was not nearly enough time to fully grasp a complex program such as SSIS, but the interviews gave us a really good idea of where improvements were most needed.
“These are more specific to specific types of cases. So this is an important page, but a lot of the time it doesn’t get used unless one of these scenarios is relevant.”
“[What’s important is just:] Why did we get involved? What are the worries? What’s the safety goal and how are we gonna get there?”
Synthesis - Next, I created scenarios and user stories to illustrate key user goals, documented key findings, and created low-fidelity wireframes to aid in the creation of prototypes.
Check it all out in my Findings and Prototype Plan document here.
Key Findings:
There are too many lengthy and redundant questions
Overall organization of the document is a priority
Important information is not prioritized using hierarchy
Caseworkers aren’t sure what data input is required/optional
Key Recommendations:
Condense information whenever possible (refer to subject matter experts to see how to organize information)
Use preliminary screening questions to determine future questions (reduce noise using conditional logic)
Use visibility of system status to show where the user is in the process
Use feedback to show users what they’ve done correctly/incorrectly
Final Solutions
Prototyping
Challenges - At this point I was overwhelmed with how much room for improvement there was. I didn’t fully understand the subject matter, how it should best be organized, or what was required in the plans. Progress finally came when I remembered I am not solving this problem all by myself. I decided to focus my prototyping on a few screens to show examples of good design practices. I made recommendations about info organization, but made sure to communicate to the client to refer to subject matter experts in order to implement my recommendations based on hierarchy of information.
Once I accepted my limitations, I created an interactive prototype to demonstrate a design system that takes into consideration design principles such as hierarchy, signal to noise ratio, feedback, and error prevention. My biggest focus was minimizing content on the page by adjusting the form on a case-by-case basis using preliminary questions to inform whether the program should show or hide related questions. For example, entering that ICWA is not applicable to a case will hide all ICWA-related questions in the rest of the form.
Client Deliverables:
I created a digital packet for the client that includes the full Figma file, interactive prototype, a video walkthrough of the interactive prototype, and an executive summary of the project.
View/download a PDF of the client deliverables packet.
View the walkthrough video here:
How I grew
I am honored and humbled to have worked on a project that directly impacts people in crisis all over the country. It is clear to me how crucial this program (SSIS) is in helping vulnerable people, but it was painful to see all the ways it failed users and their clients.
Narrow scope - Despite the specificity of this project, the vastness of the subject matter and complexity of the program was overwhelming. Not only that, but it was equally unfamiliar to me. Because of this, narrowing the focus of my recommendations to a manageable scope was extremely challenging. Because most of my findings were broad and systematic, and I was not familiar enough with the subject matter, I was unsure about how to give recommendations that were actually useful.
Communicate limitations - However, I was able to use relevant examples to show a better design system in use. The content may not have been organized or presented perfectly, but I specified to the client that subject matter experts would need to inform much of this process. I learned that it’s okay to communicate your limitations to the client so that they know what pieces of information to take from your prototypes, and what further research needs to be done.