I kicked off the project by conducting an audit of the existing NAMP platform and reviewing training guides, walkthrough videos, and platform documentation.

This helped me to understand how the system was intended to function and where friction might exist in the structure alone.

From there, I used these insights to scope the research plan, organizing interviews into two tracks:

user research with field staff who use the tool daily,  and stakeholder research with program managers and leadership who relied on the platform for tracking and reporting.

This distinction allowed us to capture the full range of needs and expectations across the system.

What I did:

After completing interviews with both day-to-day users and program stakeholders, I synthesized the findings through affinity mapping to surface themes in workflow friction, cognitive load, and unmet needs.
‍
These insights then grounded the creation of user personas.

What I did:

After conducting and synthesizing user research, I translated the research insights into detailed user flows that clarified where users struggled and where handoff flows broke down.

These flows mapped both current pain points and ideal journeys for key tasks in the Infrastructure Projects and Project Submissions modules.

We then shared these flows, along with all of our research and design direction thus far, during our mid-point check-in with stakeholders.

Their feedback helped validate our approach and align the team around priorities for the second half of the project.

What I did:

Following alignment at the midpoint, I began translating product strategy into wireframes.

I led our transition into design with a focus on the Infra Projects Module, which is one of the most complex and widely used parts of the platform. My goal was to translate core flows into intuitive interfaces that streamlined task creation, tracking, and reporting across roles.

We created lo-fidelity wireframes for prioritized workflows, rethinking layout and navigation patterns to reduce friction. I also established team design principles around modularity, clarity, and accessibility.

What I did:

In the next phase of the project, I led design work on the Project Submission Module, a critical part of the platform where users formalize and submit infrastructure projects.

Based on prior user research, we knew this flow was especially confusing; the forms were dense, guidance was limited, and users often relied on outside documentation to complete submissions correctly.

We redesigned the submission experience to better guide users through key steps, clarify required fields, and improve the overall architecture of the form. 

I also scoped design components that could be used across other modules to support long-term consistency.

What I did:

We spent these final weeks running usability testing sessions and rapidly iterating on our high-fidelity designs. We tested key flows from the Infrastructure Projects and Project Submission modules.

Based on the feedback, we made adjustments to labeling, navigation hierarchy, and guidance elements to reduce confusion and ensure the platform was intuitive.

I focused on applying a consistent visual system across both the Infra Project Module and Project Submission Module, including layout, spacing, and typographic hierarchy.

What I did:

To close the project, I prepared documentation and prototypes that could support ongoing development and internal use.

I also led our final stakeholder presentation, walking through user research, design strategy, user flows, and product strategy. This worked to create alignment and momentum for future implementation.

What I did: