01
Usability deficit
AACOG's System Usability Scale score was 21.25 compared with LIDDA's 70.42, indicating a severe usability gap.
AACOG · Optimization consulting
Optimizing IDD service usability for digital call deflection
Usability, accessibility, and competitive research translated a severe service-navigation problem into strategic recommendations for a clearer digital experience.
Challenge
Reducing operational bottlenecks through better digital self-service.
The Alamo Area Council of Governments (AACOG) operates an Intellectual & Developmental Disability (IDD) Services division dedicated to helping individuals with disabilities find stable employment. Historically, the agency faced severe operational bottlenecks, taking up to 12 months to process member applications. This delay was heavily exacerbated by a massive volume of support calls from prospective applicants seeking basic information, which overwhelmed intake caseworkers and crushed productivity. Leadership set an aggressive target to slash this processing backlog down to 6 months.
Partnering directly with the IDD Services leadership team, my research team launched a comprehensive usability and accessibility audit of the agency’s web platform. The strategic goal was to identify critical user friction points, optimize self-service information discovery, and improve digital accessibility. By designing a clearer web experience, we aimed to drive digital call deflection—eliminating redundant support inquiries so caseworkers could focus more of their time on application processing.
Approach
Benchmark the experience, then test the workflows that mattered.
Heuristic Evaluation & Competitive Analysis
We evaluated platforms across five core usability dimensions, discovering that the primary agency website suffered from significant layout violations:
- Aesthetic and Minimalist Design — cluttered interfaces
- Consistency and Standards — disjointed navigation
- Flexibility and Efficiency of Use — rigid workflows
- Help and Documentation — hard-to-find support
- Match Between System and Real World — confusing terminology
Outcome: We chose Dallas's IDD services site (LIDDA) because it had the fewest heuristic violations compared with the other competitor sites reviewed.
Measures & Study Tasks
Methodology
Moderated Usability Testing: Conducted 6 semi-structured interviews utilizing the concurrent think-aloud method to capture real-time user frustrations. We deployed a dual-moderator model to maximize data collection.
- Primary Facilitator: Acted as the sole participant interface to guide them through the test script.
- Silent Observer: Documented user remarks, physical body language, and non-verbal cues directly into a centralized tracking matrix.
- Participant Core Tasks: Narrated their actions aloud while documenting their precise task start and end times.
Core Study Tasks
- Orientation: “Please indicate to your facilitator where the Intellectual and Developmental Disability Services home page is.”
- Information Architecture: “Find the organization's contact information (phone number, email, physical address).”
- Core Workflow: “Please indicate to your facilitator where you can find information on intake and enrollment.”
Quantitative Benchmarking
Post-test, participants completed the System Usability Scale (SUS) to give us a standardized metric for comparison. This revealed a staggering usability gap: AACOG scored 21.25, compared with the competitor’s 70.42.
Findings
Three patterns explained the service breakdown.
02
Funnel friction
While users located the homepage at similar speeds on both sites, AACOG users stalled significantly or failed entirely on complex workflows like finding intake and enrollment information.
03
Qualitative friction
The quantitative metrics were mirrored by intense qualitative frustration. Users felt penalized by AACOG's confusing information architecture and dense layout.
About AACOG
“Makes me feel like an idiot.”
“If I were trying to apply for services, I would not know where to begin.”
“Nothing is presented in a logical manner, everything is hidden behind arbitrary walls.”
About LIDDA
“I didn't feel like I was going around in circles the whole time.”
“Everything was where it should be.”
“This website was much better, and [the information was] easier to find.”
Recommendations
Strategic recommendations
01
Validate the Information Architecture
Conduct a card sorting test to align navigation with user mental models and improve important tasks like finding the IDD Services homepage and determining eligibility.
02
Cultivate Behavioral User Personas
Using this study as a baseline, track user activity to understand behaviors and make improvements.
03
Establish Visual Anchoring
Standardize monochromatic iconography and increase font scale to improve scannability and reduce cognitive load.
04
Democratize Core Content
Instead of having a link to the brochure in a nested page, redistribute information across the site for enhanced comprehension and a cleaner design.
Lessons
What I carried forward
Agile Leadership
Developed strong project management foresight by successfully pivoting our participant recruitment strategy mid-project without losing momentum.
The Power of Mixed Methods
Proved the massive usability gap between the AACOG and LIDDA sites by pairing hard quantitative metrics with high-impact qualitative quotes.
Team Empowerment
Demonstrated foresight and communication to fortify adaptive, agile faculties within the project team.