User Experience Task Force
Section 4.0 – User Experience
Directive
The User Experience Task Force (UETF) Work Plan includes the directive to determine and subsequently recommend
options to provide the most cohesive and intuitive website presentation.
Approach
Step 1 - A review of the website development best practices * and industry standards for web site presentation was
conducted. This review resulted in the following recommendations that are important to note for the User Experience
Task Force:
•
Analytics - Collect metrics on: customer focus and experience; quality and compliance; and recognition, in
accordance with privacy and other policies. Make changes to your website based on data, not opinion or
"executive whimsy".
•
Mobile - Design your site with mobile users in mind, and test your site on mobile browsers to ensure the public
can access your information on the go.
•
Usability and Design - Do regular user testing on your site with real customers, to ensure they can easily and
successfully complete their tasks. Design and develop your site for a broad range of visitors and browsers,
including mobile devices and those with lower-end hardware and software capabilities Implement a coherent
information architecture (IA) and navigation scheme (including common labels), and use it consistently
throughout your site.
•
Managing Content - Regularly review your content (at least annually, and more often for popular content), and
update or archive as appropriate. Ensure content is written for the web, using words familiar to the intended
audience, so people can easily find what they need (usually via search), and understand what they need to do.
•
Social Media - Include links to official social media channels
•
Site Policies Page - Create a page entitled “Site Policies” that includes links to required information and
important policies.
* Web Technology Best Practices for Federal Agencies
User Experience Task Force
See Appendix A – HowTo.Gov
Page 1
1/9/14
User Experience Task Force
Step 2 - The review of other public sector sites and other state’s transparency sites was conducted in the following
manner. The US PIRG report “Following the Money 2013” dated March 2013 is the fourth annual report that provides an
assessment of each state’s online spending transparency. The Sunshine Review report “2013 Transparency Report Card
– Bringing state and local government to light” examines the websites of each state government, the five largest
counties and cities in each state, and the ten largest school districts in each state. These two independent reports were
reviewed to identify a short list of public sector websites to be reviewed in detail. The 16 websites selected for in depth
review were:
Entity
Website
U.S.PIRG March 2013
report on access to
government spending data
Sunshine Review 2013
Transparency Report Card
Overall Grade
Texas
www.texastransparency.org
A
B+
Illinois
http://accountability.illinois.gov/
A-
B+
Oregon
http://www.oregon.gov/transparency/
B+
B
Utah
http://utah.gov/transparency/index.html
B+
B
Louisiana
C
C+
New York
http://wwwprd.doa.louisiana.gov/laTrac/p
ortal.fcm
http://www.openbooknewyork.com
C
B
Colorado
http://tops.state.co.us
D+
B
N. Carolina
http://www.ncopenbook.gov/
D
B
N. Dakota
http://data.share.nd.gov/pr
F
C
Wisconsin
http://sunshine.wi.gov
F
B
Michigan
https://www.michigan.gov/openmichigan
A-
C+
Pennsylvania
www.pennwatch.pa.gov
B
B+
Massachusetts
www.mass.gov/transparency
A-
B
New York City
https://data.cityofnewyork.us
n/a
B
UK
Government
Virginia
Schools
https://www.gov.uk.
n/a
n/a
http://www.doe.virginia.gov/statistics_rep
orts/school_report_card/index.shtml
n/a
B+
User Experience Task Force
Page 2
1/9/14
User Experience Task Force
The selected sites were reviewed by three individuals with various professional backgrounds and technology experience
to obtain different perspectives. The sites were reviewed focusing on two major categories: Data contained on the site
and the functionality provided by the site. The information gathered is listed in Appendix B.
Step 3 – The detail results of the review are contained in a separate spreadsheet supporting this report.
Step 4 – The Usability standards to provide consistent and intuitive navigation should include:
 Responsive Design - Designing websites “responsively” is the best way to ensure that the data we present will
look as good as possible in whatever browser our citizens choose.
 Conduct User Testing - Before any new website is launched, user testing should be conducted with a sample of
citizens that represent the larger population who will be accessing this data.
 Install Analytics - We can make all of the assumptions we want about how citizens will engage with the data we
present, but ultimately, the data will give us the most honest and thorough picture of how citizens are actually
accessing this materials. Free products like Google Analytics should be installed on all websites and reviews of
pre-determined metrics should be conducted regularly.
 Browser Compatibility - Websites should be compatible with the following browsers: Google Chrome versions
24-current, Internet Explorer versions 8-current, Firefox versions 21-current and Safari versions 5.1-current.
 Consistent Navigation - Top navigation throughout the website where this data will be presented should remain
consistent as citizens navigate from page to page.
 Professional Copywriting - Well thought-out copy will go a long way in ensuring that citizens understand the
information we are presenting. Copywriting plays a critical role in the presentation of any website and should be
done by the best writers we can find.
 Content Management - All copy should be regularly reviewed, updated and archived as appropriate.
 Feedback Forms - Wherever this data is presented, citizens should have the option to fill out a form to provide
feedback on their experience using the website.
Step 5 – In order to obtain input from the public, the User Transparency Task Force main page provides the option for
public comment. In November, an email account was activated and the opportunity to comment was communicated to
the public and through other open government organizations such as the First Amendment Foundation. After
approximately 6 weeks, there have been no public comments received. See Exhibit C.
User Experience Task Force
Page 3
1/9/14
Analysis
User Experience Task Force
In analyzing the 16 websites, there were several differences in the evaluations of the same site by different reviewers.
This should be expected as the user experience is unique to each person and is subjective. Given this consideration, the
review of best practices and industry standards, below are the recommendation obtained from the data.
Recommendations and Lessons Learned
1. Audience – The purpose of the design is to provide state operational and financial information for a specific
audience – the public. This consideration requires the design to be focused, clear and concise.
2. Navigation – There are several considerations in this area:
a. Depth – The user should not have to drill down into the site more than 6 clicks from the main page on
any topic.
b. Web Portal Boundary – The user should be notified if the selected link will transfer them to another site
and be provided the option to return to the portal.
c. Grouping – Identify like information and group it accordingly in one area.
d. Consistency – All of the headings, lists, graphics and other design considerations such as color schemes,
fonts and spacing should be consistent throughout the portal. There should be a consistent layout from
page to page related to the function and location on the page.
e. Breadcrumbs – Should be provided throughout the navigation of the portal.
f. Content map – The organization of the website should be provided.
3. Data
a. All data should be provided on the website in a uniform format.
b. All data should be provided in a download standard format such as csv.
c. All data should be provided in a browser readable format such as pdf.
d. All data should be searchable on the site.
e. All data should be displayed in graphic format relative to a topic.
4. Options
a. HELP – HELP options should be available on the main page.
b. Contact information, site ownership, and last update date should be provided as appropriate.
c. Feedback on the all pages should be provided.
d. Social media resources should be accessible.
e. Consider subscription-based alerts.
5. Technical considerations
a. Websites should be compatible with major browsers and the list of supported browsers should be
published and readily accessible.
User Experience Task Force
Page 4
1/9/14
User Experience Task Force
User Experience Task Force
Page 5
1/9/14
User Experience Task Force
Exhibit A
User Experience Task Force
Page 6
1/9/14
User Experience Task Force
Exhibit B
UETF Section 4.0
User Experience
Evaluation of
Transparency
Review of public
sector transparency
sites and initiatives
External review
#
Information available on the site
State Agencies
Cities
Counties
U.S.PIRG
Sunshine
March 2013 Review 2013
report on Transparency
access to Report Card
Budget Budget
government Overall
Budget Financial Financial
Spending Funding Data
Grade
Entity Website spending
and Report Report
data
Data Center
data
Finance Check Check
Register Register
User Experience Task Force
Functionality Supported by the site
School
Special
Courts Universities
Districts
Districts
Budget Budget Budget
Financial Financial Financial
Report Report Report
Check Check Check
Register Register Register
Is Data Sortable?
Budget
Tracking
Data
Social
Single
One-click
Financial
feature
By
By
Export/
Media Website or User
research
Report
Other
with e-mail
Comments
Agency Category
Download?
Sharing? multiple Friendly? answers?
Check
alerts?
(Y/N)
(Y/N) websites?
(Y/N)
Register
(Y/N)
Page 7
1/9/14
User Experience Task Force
Exhibit C
User Experience Task Force
Page 8
1/9/14