Haven

Designed to provide LGBTQIA+youth with access to affirming environments

Focus:

UX Design

Role:

Solo Project

Role:

Affiliation:

CareerFoundry

Affiliation:

Overview

For many LGBTQ+ teenagers, finding a sense of belonging and acceptance can be a difficult and isolating experience. They may not have supportive communities at school or at home, leaving them without anyone who truly understands their unique challenges and perspectives. Haven aims to change this by connecting the user to affirming environments through the use of a native iOS application. This case study explores the first phase of Haven's development as an MVP and delves into the design journey that ultimately led to solutions that will shape and guide the next stage of Haven's evolution.

Context

The project in this case study was developed part-time over a span of 8 months, with the objective of creating a functional product tailored for a specific user group. While no particular topic or problem was presented, the ultimate goal was to incorporate a feature that would connect users with an "expert".

Overview

Context

Affirming
Environments

A space where people can find themselves represented and reflected, where they feel all people are treated with respect and dignity. It is a place to belong and feel supported.

Problem Discovery

Problem
Discovery

During the project, I was tasked with discovering a problem that could be addressed through an expert feature. I initially attempted to design a product that helped individuals work on their cognitive processing skills, but as I conducted initial research, it became apparent that there was limited interest in this type of application. This realization was crucial in my process as it led me to pivot my approach and redirect my research focus by starting with the individual. I realized that without a clear target demographic, it was impossible for me to define the problem.

I refocused on defining a more specific target demographic, which helped me ensure that my target audience was solid before attempting to define the problem. Through extensive research and analysis, I came upon the topic of high suicide rates among LGBTQ+ teenagers and found that there is no simple solution to this problem, but one of the key factors that consistently emerged across the data was the positive impact of an affirming environment on LGBTQ+ teenagers' mental health. This insight allowed me to define the problem and establish the new direction of the project, which ultimately had a significant impact on Haven's future development.

Suicide Rates

Non-Affirming Homes

Suicide Rates

Affirming Homes

Suicide rates are cut in half when LGBTQ+ teens live in an affirming home.

Non-Affirming Homes

Affirming Homes

63% of LGBTQ+ teens live in non affirming homes.

LGBTQ youth who live in a community that is accepting of LGBTQ people reported significantly lower rates of attempting suicide than those who do not.

The Problem

The availability of affirming environments for LGBTQ+ teenagers is limited, making it difficult for them to access these types of supportive spaces.

Why an MVP?

In order to accurately address the problem within the constraints of the project, I needed to adapt and create this product as an MVP. By doing this, I’ll ensure I’m able to address the most important aspects of developing an affirming environment.

Phase 1

Identity

Identity is at the core of the problem. The reason the user is experiencing the problem to begin with starts with identity. Each individual’s experience is unique and it’s important that we take that into consideration if we want to achieve a successful result.

Phase 2

Community

Communities provide social support that creates an affirming environment. That is how we will provide support to our users as well unless our research at some point leads us in another direction. Community can mean different things to different people. It's important to be careful not to define what that means and instead let our users decide.

Design Process

I take a humanistic approach to the design process by putting the user first. This means that while I follow a standard path through the design process, I am also flexible and open to revisiting earlier stages if new insights are gained. This approach allows me to create a solution that addresses the user's needs and enhances their overall experience. I achieve this by conducting extensive user research to gain a deep understanding of the target audience and their pain points, goals, and behaviors. I also continuously iterate on my design based on feedback received from users, to ensure that the final solution is intuitive and easy to use.

I achieve this by conducting extensive user research to gain a deep understanding of the target audience and their pain points, goals, and behaviors. I also continuously iterate on my design based on feedback received from users, to ensure that the final solution is intuitive and easy to use.

Empathize

Ideate

Test

Prototype

Define

Prototype

Ideate

Test

Empathize

Demographic Access

Demographic
Access

Our target demographic is young, between the ages of 13 and 18. Directly interviewing them may result in mental and/or physical harm to the participants. This would additionally skew results and provide insights only relevant to teens that are out of the closet and live in affirming homes.

User Interviews

User
Interviews

User Interviews

Demographic Access Solution

Demographic
Access Solution

To solve this dilemma, I looked to participants outside of the target demographic to provide a more diverse insight into the mind of our users and narrowed participants down into two groups. During the interviews, I kept in mind what category of insights would be most valuable to obtain from each group and let that knowledge guide but not lead each session.

Demographic Differences

Users need a product that is tailored to their diverse identities. A one-size-fits-all strategy may even could result in negative outcomes if not considered.

Scheduling Conflicts

It’s important to take time into consideration when designing for this user. Many of their schedules are busy. They may need to be able to set separate time aside when they know they will be alone.

Expert Interaction

There are specific concerns related to identity and privacy when it comes video or verbal interaction These include age and the potential discomfort some users may have with speaking aloud about sensitive issues or have never previously spoken about certain issues outloud.

Choosing an Expert

Users want to be able to know that the expert will be able to understand them. When choosing between experts they value elements that humanize them.

Diversity of Effect

As there are many benefits that an affirming environment can offer, the lack of a certain benefit that causes the most mental distress for a particular user may vary from one individual to another.

Privacy

Privacy
Concerns

Privacy

Many users of the app will have privacy concerns because they’re afraid of being outed, have unsupportive guardians or more. It may in some cases even cause them to hesitate from approaching use of the product all together.

6 Key Insights

Defining Community

It’s crucial to consider community alongside the identity to ensures that the foundation for Haven is built with the eventual integration of community in mind. Without considering community, it would be difficult to effectively design the identity components. During interviews, I kept that in mind and gathered insights on community when appropriate. Here’s one of the key insights I gathered on community during interviews.

"Community means different things to different teens. Some may use it to find acceptance, others as a way to organize and protest."

Kelly

Subject Matter Expert

How Might We?

After mapping out all of these insights and getting a better understanding of who the user is I was able to formulate several How Might We questions to use as a guide as I began to ideate.

How Might We

Integrate an expert feature that helps users access affirming environments?

How Might We

Ensure that users have confidence that the expert understands them based on their unique identity characteristics?

How Might We

Design a way for Haven to understand the unique identity of each user?

How Might We

Design a system that enables users to connect to experts they feel comfortable with?

How Might We

Create a product that prioritizes the user’s privacy?

Feature Prioritization Matrix

To prioritize the 12 features I designed for my UX case study, I used a matrix based on impact and effort required. Features with high impact and low effort were classified as "Fundamental" and high-impact, high-effort features were labeled as "Key Initiative". These categories were given top priority. Low-impact, low-effort features were designated for later development as "Enhancements", and low-impact, high-effort features were categorized as "Put Aside". This allowed me to focus on the most critical features and ensure they were implemented first.

Identity Features

Core Identity Quiz

Secondary Identity Quiz

Secondary
Identity Quiz

Scheduling Process

Lessons Feature

User Profiles

Expert Dashboard

Privacy Features

Media Suggestions

Confidante Enrollment

Chat Feature

Community Features

Private Communities

Public Communities

Note:

I've plotted two community features that are currently considered key to the MVP's community aspect based on insights obtained. Although priorities could change in the future, I included them in the matrix to highlight their impact and effort levels in the development of the MVP as a whole.

Expert Connect User Flow

Expert Connect
User Flow

The assumption at this stage is that the community aspect of Haven will be the main focus on the user's home/dashboard screen, and the expert will serve as a liaison to the community aspects of Haven. To connect the user with the right expert, they first take a quiz. With this in mind, I aimed to ensure that the user is guided through the process of getting set with up an expert from the moment they sign up, while still allowing them to explore the app if they prefer. The objective is to make the suggested flow clear to the user without explicitly stating it.

"Paper" Wireframes

Paper (digital) Wireframes

OOPS!

While working on the paper wireframes, I had initially planned to include a lesson/educational feature. This idea continued to be developed into later levels of wireframing. However, I realized I misjudged the amunt of effort needed for this feature and scrapped it so that I could focus my energy on more critical features. But not all was lost, as I was able to utilize concepts developed during this phase in the creation of the core features of Haven.

OOPS!

While working on the paper wireframes, I had initially planned to include an educational feature. This idea continued to be developed into later levels of wireframing. However, I realized I misjudged the amount of effort needed for this feature and scrapped it so that I could focus my energy on more critical features. But not all was lost, as I was able to utilize concepts developed during this phase in the creation of the core features of Haven.

Mid/High Fidelity Wireframes

You may notice above that some of the wireframes are stylistically different. This was due to them being developed at different phases of design. They represent a variety of key features that changed over the course of design as key research insights were uncovered.

Usability Testing

I used a similar logic during the user interview process to create my test participant pool, which consisted of both subject matter experts and LGBTQ+ college students. There were a total of 6 participants, split evenly between the two groups. I had three specific objectives for the test, and I presented each participant with two scenarios that were designed to test the intuitive nature of each flow.

Objectives

Observe the user completing Confidante match enrollment.

Observe the user selecting a Confidante.

Observe the user scheduling a chat with a Confidante.

Scenarios

You’re interested in being connected to a mentor through the Confidante Program that Haven has to offer. Using the prototype, find and go through the process of being matched with the right Confidante. Your Confidante match results are in. Select a Confidante and schedule your first chat. When you’re done, return to the home screen.

Testing Insights

After conducting the tests, I gathered all the information on a rainbow diagram to get an overall picture of the most important concerns that needed to be prioritized. The top 5 issues were given the highest priority in terms of usability and user satisfaction.

Issue 1

Participants expected to be able to scroll through the Confidante enrollment onboarding slides

Issue 2

Users were unsure of what mode of communication they would be chatting with the expert through.

Issue 3

Had issues understanding the duration section of the scheduling page.

Issue 4

User verbally mentioned the lack of anywhere to set a reminder for their scheduled chat.

Issue 5

Users wanted to know more about the Confidante in order to determine the right choice.

User Design Preferences

Since we didn't have direct access to our users for interviews to gain insights into their design preferences, I conducted independent research to better understand how teens use the web. I used this information to design the application to reflect typical behavioral patterns and preferences among teens. Two key findings stood out in terms of their importance and potential impact on the design.

User Design Preferences

Moodboard

Style Guide

Colors

Primary

#4321FF

Secondary

#0C0C14

Secondary

#EC4C99

Accent

#C300FF

Accent

#FF7272

Accent

#1AFBFB

Iconography

Colors

Primary

#4321FF

Secondary

#0C0C14

Secondary

#EC4C99

Accent

#C300FF

Accent

#FF7272

Accent

#1AFBFB

Iconography

Montserrat

Small Caps/SemiBold/14

k: .5 px

The Designs

The
Designs

The Designs

01

Onboarding Slides

Users may experience hesitation about using this app for a variety of reasons related to their unique experiences. To eliminate this hesitation immediately, I designed onboarding slides that address key stressors that could impact their decision to sign up and use Haven. My approach was to emphasize the app's focus on the user's identity and it’s the power that it gives them to use Haven in a way that best suits their individual needs. I also included a slide to alleviate privacy concerns by highlighting the chat-based nature of Confidante interactions.

02

Privacy Features

During the onboarding process, the user is given the option of utilizing the different privacy features the app has to offer. They are able to enable or disable these settings at any given time. The privacy features available at the launch of the identity phase are:

Email Disguise

All email titles and bodies will appear as an alternative name and message in the user’s inbox. The user will be given insight into how to identify these emails and access the true content.

App Name Disguise

The name of the app will be disguised on their phone in every area, including notifications if the user chooses to receive these.

Icon Disguise

This feature works similarly to the app name disguise and is a feature seen within several different applications on the market. It changes the appearance of the Haven app on the user’s mobile device.

03

Identity Quiz

Over time, Haven gets to know its users better and better through quizzes and interactions with the user’s Confidante. The first step in this process is the Primary Identity Quiz which helps the app get a better idea of who the user is based on 5 core identity factors:

Gender Identity

Race

Sexuality

Location

Religion

The app then uses their selections to match them to a Confidante. The Confidante has full access to the user’s quiz results and activity and is able to ask them clarifying questions to better refine the details of their identity. Based on the responses the user gives the Confidante may suggest another Confidante who may be able to more closely identify with the user. However, it is ultimately the user’s decision.

04

Confidante Selection

Based on the selections they made during their quiz, the app suggests its top 3 Confidante recommendations to the user. These matches are made based on what Confidantes share the most similarities with the user. This helps to ensure that the Confidante will have a strong understanding of the user’s personal experience.

Gender Identity

Race

Sexuality

Location

Religion

The selection process is meant to give the user control. They are not limited to the top 3 recommendations, they are just the ones most highly suggested. The user is able to meet with each Confidante for “Introduction Chats” which give the user an opportunity to chat with each Confidante before making the decision on which one they want to move forward with.

All chats are scheduled in advance to allow flexibility in the user’s schedule and allow them to prepare accordingly. This allows them to participate in the chats when they are in a safe and comfortable environment. There is no limit to the amount of chats that a user can schedule at a given time.

03

Identity Quiz

Gender Identity

Race

Sexuality

Location

Religion

04

Confidante Selection

06

The Confidante Program

The Confidante program is designed to be flexible in nature and it is up to the user what they want their relationship with their Confidante to look like. This seeks to in part address the Diversity of Effect insight that was discovered during the user interview process that reads “As there are many benefits that an affirming environment can offer, the lack of a certain benefit that causes the most mental distress for a particular user may vary from one individual to another.”

The Confidante has two main roles:

A liaison in connecting them to different people and communities. While we are still developing the community aspect of the app, the idea at this stage is that certain communities will be locked to ensure the privacy of the user, and the Confidante is the one who gives the user access to these locked groups.

A source of support, but t’s up to the user whether or not they want to take advantage of this aspect of the program, since not all users will be looking for the same thing out of the product.

The Confidante has two main roles:

Adaptive MVP Roadmap

With the identity phase complete, I created a roadmap that outlined it’s actual timeline as well as a projected timeline for the upcoming community phase. By intentionally allowing for side-by-side development when feasible, II have saved time for the community phase that allows flexibility in case that I uncover new insights that require more or less time to be spent on certain aspects of the community phase's development.

Going forward

Narrow the focus

Looking back, I now recognize that having a narrower scope from the start would have saved me a lot of time during the initial stage of the project. This is particularly significant when dealing with a project that has many different factors, which all have to be monitored closely in order to achieve the best results.

Finish first, clean up later

I realized that during the project there were moments where I spent too much time focusing on small details instead of making swift progress. These instances reminded me to prioritize finding a satisfactory balance in my work. Finishing a task to a satisfactory level is more important than aiming for perfection.

Haven

Overview

Context

Overview

Context

Affirming Environments

Affirming Environments

Problem Discovery

ProblemDiscovery

The Problem

The Problem

Why an MVP?

Why an MVP?

Phase 1

Identity

Phase 2

Community

Design Process

Design Process

Design Process

Empathize

Empathize

Ideate

Ideate

Test

Test

Prototype

Prototype

Define

Define

Demographic Access

Demographic Access

Demographic Access

User Interviews

User Interviews

User Interviews

Demographic Access Solution

Demographic Access Solution

Demographic Access Solution

Demographic Differences

Demographic Differences

Scheduling Conflicts

Scheduling Conflicts

Expert Interaction

Expert Interaction

Expert Interaction

Choosing an Expert

Choosing an Expert

Choosing an Expert

Diversity of Effect

Diversity of Effect

Diversity of Effect

Privacy

PrivacyConcerns

Privacy

6 Key Insights

Defining Community

Defining Community

Defining Community

Kelly

How Might We?

How Might We?

How Might We

How Might We

How Might We

How Might We

How Might We

Feature Prioritization Matrix

Feature Prioritization Matrix

Feature Prioritization Matrix

Identity Features

Identity Features

Core Identity Quiz

Core Identity Quiz

Secondary Identity Quiz

SecondaryIdentity Quiz

Scheduling Process

Scheduling Process

Lessons Feature

Lessons Feature

Affirming
Environments

Affirming
Environments

Problem
Discovery

Demographic
Access

User
Interviews

Demographic
Access Solution

Demographic
Access Solution

Privacy
Concerns

Secondary
Identity Quiz

Expert Connect
User Flow