Hunger Helpers
Project
Sarah Karney
Sydney Miller
Table of Contents
Executive Summary………………………………………………...……....3
Strategy…………………………………………………………...………….....5
 Goals...................................................................................................5
 Obstacles We Encountered…………………………………………....5
 Finding Project Partners...................................................................6
Hunger Helpers Website......................................................................8
 Usability Testing Research Plan......................................................8
 Site Design 1 and Testing Results.............................................…10
 Site Design 2 and Testing Results.................................................24
 Final Site Design…..........................................................................35
GroundCntrl App Testing..................................................................38
 Research Plan..................................................................................38
 Data Collection Results…...............................................................39
 Research Summary.........................................................................44
Marketing Plan.......................................................................................49
Recommendations...............................................................................56
 Illinois Public Media........................................................................56
 GroundCntrl…..................................................................................56
 Moving Forward...............................................................................57
Sources....................................................................................................59
2
Executive Summary
The goal of the Hunger Helpers project is to create and market a mobile
application and website that will inspire citizens to volunteer to end hunger in their
community. The mobile app and website are pioneering tools that encourage civic
participation and redefine the role of journalism in communities.
Our clients for this project are Illinois Public Media/WILL and GroundCntrl. Illinois
Public Media is a non-profit media outlet that airs both local and national programs on
its public radio and television stations (WILL-TV, WILL-AM and WILL-FM), as well as
publishes content online. GroundCntrl produces the platform our future mobile
application will be hosted on. The target audience of this project is the ChampaignUrbana metro area community, starting with current listeners and viewers of WILL’s
media.
Secondary research included readings on usability testing and reports from
former capstone students previously working on this project. We also conducted much
of our own research. We designed and held two usability testings for the versions of the
Hunger Helpers mock website we coded. We also designed and ran a weeklong trial
testing the functionality of the GroundCntrl mobile app.
Our strategy is to launch a product that we can be certain intuitive, attractive and
easy to use for potential volunteers. We want to offer a way to volunteer that increases
options for participants based on how much time they have to volunteer, as well as
making it fun and rewarding by incorporating a social aspect and reward system. We
intelligently designed a website based on our research findings. We also recommend
changes to the GroundCntrl app platform so that the project can be a success. We
designed a marketing plan to use as a guide when promoting the project both within the
Illinois Public Media viewership/listening area and the journalism community. Our
project has created a sturdy framework from which a successful launch of the final
product can be made possible.
3
The findings from this project present multiple opportunities for future capstone
students going forward with this project. We propose that RJI continue funding the
Hunger Helpers project and working with Illinois Public Media, contingent on some
changes that we will recommend be made by Illinois Public Media and GroundCntrl.
The findings from this project will also ideally encourage a discussion about the
role newsrooms should play in their community and force a reexamination of the
definition of civic journalism.
4
Strategy
Goals
● To create a mobile application and website that makes it easy to volunteer in the
community, is intuitive and actively encourages Illinois Public Media listeners and
viewers to volunteer on behalf of the project
● To open discussion about the role of newsrooms in communities and civic
engagement/participation journalism
● To successfully complete research that provides a clear foundation and indicates
what needs to happen next for the project to be a success
Obstacles We Encountered
The objective of this project changed as time went on. Initially, our goals were to
find and confirm project partners, design the app and website, market the app, launch
the app and analyze how the project was going after the launch. Due to unforeseen
changes in newsroom staff at Illinois Public Media, we were forced to push back the
launch date of the app from March 2013 to August/mid-September 2013.
This shifted the focus of the project. The importance moved instead to providing
research that would be useful to both Illinois Public Media and GroundCntrl, should they
choose to move forward with the project. We found this shift of focus to be for the better
rather than detrimental to the project. We were able to design multiple research trials
that allowed us to find out more about how to design the app and website to be the most
intuitive and user-friendly. We created a strong framework supported by research to
ensure this project can be a success when launched.
5
Finding project partners
This project could not be successful without community food pantries and soup
kitchens working directly with Illinois Public Media to promote and manage the project.
We identified 34 food pantries and soup kitchens in the Champaign-Urbana area
that could potentially partner with Illinois Public Media on the Hunger Helpers project.
Each partner needed to fulfill a number of agreements in order for us to successfully
implement the program. We created a handout for each partner detailing its
responsibilities and what they would receive in return:
PARTNER AGREEMENT
What is the Hunger Helpers pilot project?
WILL has partnered with the Eastern Illinois Foodbank, and the Central Illinois
Foodbank to pilot a new volunteer matching program known as “Hunger Helpers.”
The Hunger Helpers pilot project is an engagement initiative that uses the power of
social media to mobilize and reward volunteers for making a difference in their
community around the issue of hunger.
Volunteers go to the project website or app and sign up to volunteer at one of our
partner soup kitchens or food pantries in their area. As they volunteer, complete
challenges, share their experiences online, and recruit others to become volunteers,
they can earn badges. Examples of challenges may be donating money, completing
volunteer orientation, or spreading the word about your agency on Facebook. We will
work with each partner to come up with the challenges that will best fill your agency’s
needs. The more a person volunteers, the more badges they can earn. There are no
monetary incentives with our system. People are volunteering because we ask them,
we make it simple, and they make it social.
What do we need from our partners?
Our project partners must be willing to:
○
Commit to the pilot project for six months (March – August)
○
Designate a point person to work with WILL
6
○
Have a volunteer coordinator to absorb and orient new volunteers
○
Promote the Hunger Helpers project website
○
Participate in a videotaped exit interview for possible use on TV, radio and online
What can our partners expect from us?
WILL will be the bridge between you and potential new volunteers. With our
project partners, The Reynolds Journalism Institute and GroundContrl.com, we will work
with each partner to identify your volunteer needs and design challenges that fit these
needs. We will promote the project website as well as your agency, track participants’
progress, and give you feedback after the pilot program ends. We are also there to
monitor any problems and questions you or your volunteers may have throughout the
course of the project.
After contacting and working with the food pantries and soup kitchens in this
community, we confirmed 14 committed partners to the project. We also updated the
project partners on the changed timeline of the project. When we initially contacted
them, they believed the project would be launching in March; now, it is slated to launch
in September or later.
7
Hunger Helpers Website:
We designed and coded a website viewers and listeners of WILL could turn to as
a source of information for the Hunger Helpers project, as well as a platform through
which users could download the program using their desktops or laptops rather than
their mobile devices. We tested the site, then an updated version, to ensure the site is
easy to understand and navigate.
Usability Testing Research Plan
I. Research Questions
The overarching goal of the research is to determine whether or not the Hunger Helpers
website is easy to navigate and understood by our target audience. Specifically, there
are multiple facets of the website we are testing for this goal:
1. Does the user understand the purpose of the site?
2. Can a user sign-up/log-in easily?
3. Can the user navigate through the page easily, and find what information they are
looking for?
4. Does the site leave the user with unanswered questions?
II. Background and Significance
According to Jeffery Rubin, testing at least four to five participants will expose the
majority of usability problems, although testing more participants will ensure more
statistically valid results.
Internal participants are valuable for explorative usability testing, as long as they
fit the user profile and are unfamiliar with the product (Rubin 133). We will use
8
participants from the Missouri School of Journalism and RJI that fit the audience profile
of Illinois Public Media. A survey from WILL in 2012 shows the Illinois Public Media
audience profile breakdown accordingly:
Station
Weekly Cumulative
Age Range
Top Income Bracket
Audience
(majority)
TV
83,000
25-65 (45-64)
$75,000-$149,000 (26%)
AM
24,500
18-65 (18-34)
>$75,000 (50%)
FM
24,600
18-65 (>65)
>$75,000 (31.2%)
As you can see, Illinois Public Media has a wide age range of audience members,
with older members tuning into WILL-TV and FM radio, and a younger audience tuned
into WILL-AM radio. Therefore, we are looking for participants between 18 years old to
65 years old or older, and of a variety of economic backgrounds.
III. Research Method, Design and Statistical Analysis
We will employ a method of explorative usability testing. This type of usability
testing is used early in product development to assess the effectiveness and usability of
preliminary designs.
We will find participants by contacting multiple volunteer organizations on
campus, as well as students and professors from a variety of schools.
The first testing was held from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. on March 21st in the Journalism
Library in RJI. The second testing was held from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. on April 25th in the
Journalism Library in RJI. Participants came at the time that best fits their schedule.
IV. Potential Risks
9
Because our testing pool is mostly made up of students and university
employees, they likely use technology more than the average citizen. This could skew
the results. We served as moderators, which may have biased the results as well.
V. Potential Benefits
This research will provide a better understanding of how our final website design
should look. Furthermore, it gives a general sense of what components of web sites in
general are easy to understand and what are more difficult to understand. It will also be
useful to GroundCntrl in knowing what does or doesn’t work on their sites.
Site Design 1
The first version of the site contained four different pages: “Get Started,” “How It
Works,” “About the Project” and “Faces of Hunger.”
10
“Get Started” was the landing page potential participants would start on after
being directed to the site. The goal of this page was to give users just enough
information to pique their interest and inspire them to read more into the project’s site.
11
“How It Works” gives users an overview of how the Hunger Helpers GroundCntrl
interface works. Participants join the team of the pantry where they want to volunteer
when signing up for an account. They then can complete challenges related to helping
the pantry and earn badges for their efforts.
12
“About the Project” gives background on Illinois Public Media and why they
started the Hunger Helpers project.
13
“Faces of Hunger” shows real-life examples of people who volunteers would be
helping when they participate in this program. By showing the real faces of people that
struggle with hunger in the community, we hope this page would further inspire viewers
to get involved with the project. An issue like “hunger” is a vague concept; identifying
individuals affected produces an emotional element to draw viewers in.
After completing the first round of usability testing, a few issues with the site
became apparent. We recoded the site to deal with these errors and to make the site
easier to use and understand.
14
Usability Test 1 Data Collection
Task One: Find out what the Hunger Helpers project is.
How easily does the user find the information on the page?
● 9 out of 11 participants had no problem
● 1 out of 11 participants had one wrong turn, but completed without assistance
● 1 out of 11 participants needed prompting
● 0 out of 11 participants needed specific instructions
Where did the user get stuck or confused?
● 6 out of 11 participants N/A
● 1 out of 11 participants wasn’t sure where to click first.
● 1 out of 11 participants was confused about what rewards the About page spoke
of.
● 2 out of 11 participants were confused by what the paragraph on the landing
page meant,
● 1 out of 11 participants was confused about the challenges the About page
spoke of.
What surprised the user?
● 7 out of 11 participants N/A
● 3 out of 11 participants were surprised to learn it was an app, and did not come
to this conclusion without the moderator telling them.
How well did the user understand the information they got from the system?
● 3 out of 11 participants had no problem
● 7 out of 11 participants had questions
● 0 out of 11 participants needed help
● 1 out of 11 participants needed to be told specifically the meaning of the
information they got
Completed successfully?
● 0 out of 11 participants completed the task successfully.
● 11 out of 11 participants did not complete the task successfully.
15
Success Criteria:
● 9 out of 11 participants clicked on About tab.
● 8 out of 11 participants read and understood information on page.
● 0 out of 11 participants mentioned app is mobile-based.
● 4 out of 11 participants mentioned the concept of activities and earning badges.
● 5 out of 11 participants mentioned the choice of choosing a team.
Notes:
● 3 participants were confused about how to complete activities.
● 6 participants said they did not know it was a program/app after completing task
until told by moderator.
● 2 participants said “They want to go beyond awareness and they’re doing it
through social media, but I don’t understand exactly how.”
● 1 participant said “IPM is acknowledging hunger in the area and is trying to
motivate people to act.”
● 1 participant said they don’t understand what an “engagement program” is.
● 1 participant said “It uses social media to make volunteers more involved.”
● 1 participant said purpose of site is “You want teams to become more involved.
This is extra encouragement to challenge people.”
● 1 participant said there are too many words to read on About page.
● 1 participant said the purpose of the project is “getting people involved and
making it easier and there are incentives.”
● 1 participant said the page is about “a few groups working together to fight
hunger in Illinois.”
● 1 participant said the purpose of the page is “a way to encourage people to sign
up for food banks and there is a competitive element to it.”
Task Two: Sign up for an account.
How easily does the user find the information on the page?
● 7 out of 11 participants had no problem
● 1 out of 11 participants had one wrong turn, but completed without assistance
16
● 3 out of 11 participants needed prompting
● 1 out of 11 participants needed specific instructions
Where did the user get stuck or confused?
● 7 out of 11 participants N/A
● 2 out of 11 participants got confused about hours page pop-up, and asked “What
is this?”
● 3 out of 11 participants got confused on where to click to sign up.
What surprised the user?
● 11 out of 11 participants N/A
How well did the user understand the information they got from the system?
● 9 out of 11 participants had no problem
● 2 out of 11 participants had questions
● 0 out of 11 participants needed help
● 0 out of 11 participants needed to be told specifically the meaning of the
information they got
Completed successfully?
● 10 out of 11 participants completed the task successfully.
● 1 out of 11 participants did not complete the task successfully.
Success Criteria:
● 10 out of 11 participants clicked the sign up box.
● 11 out of 11 participants entered information.
● 10 out of 11 participants chose the correct food pantry/soup kitchen given to
them.
● 10 out of 11 participants completed creating an account.
Notes:
● 2 participants had trouble finding where to sign up.
● 1 participant said “What is an account; what does that get you?” and did not
realize it was an app until told.
● 2 participants said the process was “very straightforward.”
● 1 participant said they think having a sign up box next to the login sidebar box
would be easier to find.
17
● 1 participant said they would not have been able to complete the task if they had
not been given a team and info to use.
● 2 participants suggested putting “Create account” higher up on page.
● 1 participant tried to sign up by putting information into login box, but then found
the correct box after realizing their mistake.
Task Three: Log in.
How easily does the user find the information on the page?
● 11 out of 11 participants had no problem
● 0 out of 11 participants had wrong turns, but completed without assistance
● 0 out of 11 participants needed prompting
● 0 out of 11 participants needed specific instructions
Where did the user get stuck or confused?
● 11 out of 11 participants N/A
What surprised the user?
1 11 out of 11 participants N/A
How well did the user understand the information they got from the system?
● 11 out of 11 participants had no problem
● 0 out of 11 participants had questions
● 0 out of 11 participants needed help
● 0 out of 11 participants needed to be told specifically the meaning of the
information they got
Completed successfully?
● 11 out of 11 participants completed the task successfully.
● 0 out of 11 participants did not complete the task successfully.
Success Criteria:
● 11 out of 11 participants found one of the two designated login areas.
● 11 out of 11 participants entered username and password they created.
Notes:
● 7 participants used the sidebar login option.
18
● 1 participant said the login option at the bottom of the landing page is not easily
visible.
Task Four: Determine information about project partner.
How easily does the user find the information on the page?
● 6 out of 11 participants had no problem
● 2 out of 11 participants had wrong turns, but complete without assistance (One
participant had 1 wrong turn; one participant had 9 wrong turns)
● 2 out of 11 participants needed prompting
● 3 out of 11 participants needed specific instructions
Where did the user get stuck or confused?
● 6 out of 11 participants N/A
● 3 out of 11 participants were confused about which partner to click
● 1 out of 11 participants did not realize the icons in the right sidebar were clickable.
● 1 out of 11 participants could not find any information about partners at all
What surprised the user?
● 8 out of 11 participants N/A
● 2 out of 11 participants said they did not know WILL was main partner
● 1 out of 11 participants was surprised the header is not clickable
How well did the user understand the information they got from the system?
● 5 out of 11 participants had no problem
● 4 out of 11 participants had questions
● 1 out of 11 participants needed help
● 1 out of 11 participants needed to be told specifically the meaning of the
information they got
Completed successfully?
● 5 out of 11 participants completed the task successfully.
● 6 out of 11 participants did not complete the task successfully.
Success Criteria:
● 8 out of 11 participants found the link to WILL’s/Illinois Public Media’s website.
19
● 8 out of 11 participants clicked the link.
● 5 out of 11 participants distinguished the project as an Illinois Public Media
project.
Notes:
● 4 participants did not think it is clear it is a WILL project.
● 3 participants did not know which partner they were meant to click on.
● 1 participant said they do not know why IPM is affliated with the project.
● 1 participant found IPM’s page by clicking the icon in the right sidebar.
● 1 participant thought the Eastern Illinois Food Bank was our main partner.
● 1 participant said the IPM logo is not prominent enough.
“Hunger Helpers” Usability Testing: Round 1
Research Summary
Demographics: Eleven people participated in usability testing and 8 participated in the
survey. Our participants ranged from 18 years old to 63 years old.
Additional participant information: Four of our survey participants currently volunteer.
Out of the participants that currently volunteer, three say they would be “likely” to
volunteer in the Hunger Helpers project, with one participant remaining neutral.
From responses to our survey and testing, we identified problems that were consistent
throughout the usability testing and survey process. We have also identified qualities of
the site that are working. We have summarized the problems and positive aspects of
the site and our recommendations to fix these problems below.
Positive 1: Users responded well to “Faces of Hunger” page
There was unsolicited positive response from survey and testing participants
regarding the “Faces of Hunger” page. One participant said, “I like the faces of hunger
tab—very motivating.” Another mentioned, “I liked the stories about people who use
20
Food Banks because it makes it more personal.” Moving forward, we should plan to
include, expand and improve upon the “Faces of Hunger” page, making it a critical
element in our site design rather than an afterthought.
Positive 2: Users like the design of the site
Seven respondents liked the design of the website; only one person disliked it.
The design made it easy for participants to gather information about certain aspects of
the project. Nine participants said they had “no problem” finding information and all 11
participants had no problem logging in to the site.
Positive 3: Users find the site easy to navigate
Overall, 5 participants found the site “easy” to use and two said the site was
“extremely easy” to use. In addition, participants had “no problem” completing activities
during usability testing 70 percent of the time. They had some questions 11 percent of
the time and had serious hesitations only 5 percent of the time.
Problem 1: Users don’t recognize the app is mobile-based
During the usability testing, when asked to describe the website and app, not a
single user conveyed that the bulk of activity is done on a mobile app. One user
responded in the survey, “I didn't originally know it was an app, but after clicking on a
few tabs I was clear. Maybe make it on the home page?” This theme continued through
the survey. Two more participants stated that making the fact it is a mobile app “more
prominent” and giving “more explanation” about the fact it is an app would improve the
quality of the site.
Recommendation 1: Use the words “mobile app” throughout the page so that
there is no mistaking how the app is to be used.
Recommendation 2: Re-write the “How it Works” and Home pages to
emphasize that the bulk of activity is done via mobile app.
21
Problem 2: Users don’t fully understand the purpose of the app
While participants usually got the gist of the app, they still expressed hesitation.
One participant said, “I guess I'm not entirely sure what the purpose of the app is. Does
it locate Food Banks for you? Or are you just keeping track of your accomplishments so
you can make your team win points?” Another said, “Nothing was confusing, the layout
was simple enough to navigate and had enough color/pictures to catch and keep my
attention. “
Recommendation 1: Re-design the landing page to emphasize the purpose of
the app but also the nature of the app.
Recommendation 2: Add more references to Illinois Public Media’s work on
hunger in the state and their desire to help end the problem.
Problem 3: Users don’t fully understand the concept of activities and badges
Seven participants mentioned the concept of being rewarded for completing
activities and understood this concept in varying degrees, while others did not mention
this aspect of the project at all. However, one participant believed participating in the
project meant the user was in a competition to win something extrinsic (other than a
badge). On the other hand, most participants had trouble understanding the purpose of
the app. On the survey, responses ranged from “to encourage citizens to get more
involved in the food bank. What do "Hunger Helpers" do?” to “To help get people
involved in the food crisis, to make it easier for volunteers to sign up and find locations
in which to help, and to give social media incentives for volunteering.”
Recommendation 1: Re-write the “how it works” page to clarify how badges
work and what it means to “reward” participants.
Recommendation 2: Emphasize rewards are not tangible things of value.
Recommendation 3: List available badges to earn (We can list general badges
for the second testing).
22
Recommendation 4: Have screenshots available to demonstrate what the
GroundCntrl interface looks like and how users will navigate it.
Problem 4: Users are confused about how to register for an account
The most surprising discovery during the usability testing was that participants
were consistently confused about how to register for an account on the website. The
“Already a member?” login is prominent on every page; it is at the top left corner of the
sidebar. However, the registration button is at the bottom of the page, hidden from view.
Three participants suggested moving the “create an account” link higher on the
page and making it more visually prominent. Users were easily able to identify both of
the login places for already-registered members, but the “create an account” link got lost
in the shuffle.
Recommendation 1: Create a visually prominent (colorful and large) “create
account button” at the top of the landing page. If users have to scroll to find the
button, it is not prominent enough.
Recommendation 2: Have a visually prominent link to create an account on
each page.
Problem 5: Users don’t always recognize Illinois Public Media as the main project
partner
When asked to navigate to the project partner’s site, six participants did not
choose Illinois Public Media. When asked why they did not identify Illinois Public Media
as the main project partner, they said there were no cues on the website that it was
more significant than the other listed project partners. Two participants selected another
project partner’s link, such as Eastern Illinois Food Bank. Other participants declined to
choose a partner saying they did not know which partner was the “main partner” and
others still were able to identify Illinois Public Media as the main project partner through
the header.
23
One respondent said, “The partnership-- It wasn't clear that that was too
important. And the home page-- maybe would have been better if what the website/app
is was on the first page that pops up.” Another expressed “finding the project partners
section of the website” as a difficult task.
Recommendation 1: Although the Illinois Public Media logo is featured next to
the “Hunger Helpers” logo, it should be made more visually prominent.
Recommendation 2: Illinois Public Media’s logo should be singled out on the
sidebar. For example, Illinois Public Media’s logo can be under “Project Partners”
with text below that says, “With additional partners…” and a continuation of other
partner logos.
Site Design 2
On the “Get Started” page, we moved the account registration link to the top of
the page, and made it stand out by making it a red button. We hoped this would allay
confusion about how to register for an account. We also re-wrote the “Get Started” page
to provide a more detailed description of what the project is about right off the bat. One
of the most troubling problems we encountered during usability testing one was that
participants had difficulty understanding the purpose of project. All of the respondents
were unable to accurately describe the purpose of the site during usability testing one.
24
We also got rid of the “Already a member?” sign-in box at the bottom of the home
page because people seemed to have no trouble finding where to sign in during
usability testing one. Having a sign in location in two places was unnecessary.
25
We continued the theme of a registration button on every page so that there
would be absolutely no chance of confusion about where to register for an account.
During the first usability testing, respondents had difficulty identifying Illinois Public
Media as the main project partner. We thought adding “A project by” in the header
(where the Illinois Public Media logo is) would help solve this problem.
26
We re-wrote the “About the Project” in layman’s terms so that people unaffiliated
with a media organization could understand what we were trying to accomplish with the
project and who was behind it.
27
Usability Test 2 Data Collection
Task One: Find out what the Hunger Helpers project is.
How easily does the user find the information on the page?
● 6 out of 7 participants had no problem
● 1 out of 7 participants had one wrong turn, but completed without assistance (1
wrong turn)
● 0 out of 7 participants needed prompting
● 0 out of 7 participants needed specific instructions
Where did the user get stuck or confused?
● 5 out of 7 participants did not get stuck or confused.
● 1 out of 7 participants clicked the How It Works page first, then clicked the About
page
● 1 participant thought the explanation of badges and challenges was vague
What surprised the user?
● 7 out of 7 participants were not surprised by anything.
How well did the user understand the information they got from the system?
● 6 out of 7 participants had no problem
● 1 out of 7 participants had questions
● 0 out of 7 participants needed help
● 0 out of 7 participants needed to be told specifically the meaning of the
information they got
Completed successfully?
● 6 out of 7 participants completed the task successfully.
● 1 out of 7 participants did not complete the task successfully.
Success Criteria:
● 7 out of 7 participants clicked on About tab.
● 7 out of 7 participants read and understood information on page.
● 7 out of 7 participants mentioned app is mobile-based.
28
● 7 out of 7 participants mentioned the concept of activities and earning badges.
● 6 out of 7 participants mentioned the choice of choosing a team.
Notes:
● 2 participants said the challenges description was vague/confusing
● 1 participant thought you had to sign up for two accounts: one with IPM and one
with Hunger Helpers
Task Two: Sign up for an account.
How easily does the user find the information on the page?
● 7 out of 7 participants had no problem
● 0 out of 7 participants had one wrong turn, but completed without assistance
● 0 out of 7 participants needed prompting
● 0 out of 7 participants needed specific instructions
Where did the user get stuck or confused?
● 4 out of 7 participants did not get stuck or confused
● 1 out of 7 participants was confused by multiple sign-up/don’t have an account
options
● 2 out of 7 participants was confused on how to pick the right food pantry
What surprised the user?
● 6 out of 7 participants N/A
● 1 out of 7 participants was surprised there was no sign-up box
How well did the user understand the information they got from the system?
● 7 out of 7 participants had no problem
● 0 out of 7 participants had questions
● 0 out of 7 participants needed help
● 0 out of 7 participants needed to be told specifically the meaning of the
information they got
Completed successfully?
● 7 out of 7 participants completed the task successfully.
● 0 out of 7 participants did not complete the task successfully.
29
Success Criteria:
● 7 out of 7 participants clicked the sign up box.
● 7 out of 7 participants entered information.
● 7 out of 7 participants chose the correct food pantry/soup kitchen given to them.
● 7 out of 7 participants completed creating an account.
Notes:
● 1 participant used the “Don’t have an account” link to sign up
● 2 participants said there should be a page with information on each food pantry.
They said if we had not given them a designated pantry they would be confused
on how to choose which one to volunteer with.
Task Three: Determine information about project partner.
How easily does the user find the information on the page?
● 6 out of 7 participants had no problem
● 0 out of 7 participants had wrong turns, but complete without assistance
● 1 out of 7 participants needed prompting
● 0 out of 7 participants needed specific instructions
Where did the user get stuck or confused?
● 4 out of 7 participants did not get stuck or confused
● 3 out of 7 participants were confused about which partner to click because of the
sidebar on the right
What surprised the user?
● 7 out of 7 participants were not surprised by anything
How well did the user understand the information they got from the system?
● 4 out of 7 participants had no problem
● 2 out of 7 participants had questions
● 1 out of 7 participants needed help
● 0 out of 7 participants needed to be told specifically the meaning of the
information they got
Completed successfully?
30
● 6 out of 7 participants completed the task successfully.
● 1 out of 7 participants did not complete the task successfully.
Success Criteria:
● 6 out of 7 participants found the link to WILL’s/Illinois Public Media’s website.
● 6 out of 7 participants clicked the link.
● 6 out of 7 participants distinguished the project as an Illinois Public Media project.
Notes:
● 3 participants clicked the link in the header to IPM’s page
● 1 participant asked “So these are just other partners?” when viewing the sidebar,
but still clicked the correct link in the header
● 1 participant suggested we make it bolder and more obvious IPM is our partner
“Hunger Helpers” Usability Testing: Round 2
Research Summary
Demographics: Seven people participated in the second round of usability testing, and
five people participated in the survey. Participants in the usability testing ranged from
22 years old to 61 years old.
Additional participant information: Two of the survey participants currently volunteer.
One of these participants said the site would “likely” inspire them to volunteer while the
other remained neutral. The other three survey participants who do not volunteer
seemed uninspired by the site; they remained “neutral” when asked if they would be
likely to volunteer in the Hunger Helpers project.
Similar to responses from usability testing one, all survey respondents said the site was
either “easy to use” (3) or “extremely to use (2).” In addition, all survey respondents
either said they “like” (4) the design or “strongly like” (1) the design.
31
After reviewing responses to the survey and testing in Round One, we identified several
problems that were consistent in responses. The most critical issue was that many of
the participants from round one of usability testing were unable to accurately describe
the purpose of the project. We have since identified areas that have been improved
upon since the first testing, and areas that still require some work.
Positive 1: Marked improvement in participants understanding the purpose of site
All seven participants in the second round of usability testing had “no problem”
understanding the purpose of the site. Each participant recognized that the bulk of
activity in the Hunger Helpers project was done via mobile app, which is a vast
improvement from the first round of usability testing, in which none of the participants
acknowledged this fact.
A 61-year-old participant picked up that the project was done via mobile app
immediately saying, “Well I don’t have a smartphone so I can’t do this project,” and
asking if he “gets a badge” for completing the testing.
Positive 2: Improvement in recognition of Illinois Public Media as main project
partner
Participants had an easier time identifying Illinois Public Media as the main
project partner during this usability testing, although it is still not at the level of
confidence we are comfortable with. Only one participant could not identify Illinois Pubic
Media as the main project partner, compared to six out of 11 participants in the first
round of testing.
Three of the respondents who correctly recognized that Illinois Public Media was
the project’s main partner immediately identified this by click on the link in the header.
Although two other respondents correctly identified the project partner, they were more
hesitant because of the list of partners in the sidebar.
Positive 3: Marked improvement in ability to register for an account
32
All seven participants had “no problem” registering for an account, a large
improvement over the seven out of 11 participants that completed the task with similar
ease during the first round of testing. However, some of the participants did offer some
suggestions for improving the process, described below.
Problem 1: “Signing up” for an account is not as intuitive as it should be
Although all of our usability testing participants were able to easily sign up for an
account, there are ways that the process can be made easier. One participant said that
at first they believed there was no “sign up box” because the button did not actually
have the words “sign up” on it. Another said they were confused because there were
two red buttons that each allowed you to register for an account. A survey respondent
said , “Too many registration buttons on the same page (they all say something
different). I think one “Register Here” button would’ve sufficed.”
Recommendation 1: Only have one “Register” button
Recommendation 2: Change the wording of the button to “Sign Up Here”
Problem 2: Users are not sure how to choose a partner organization to team with
Participants had no trouble registering with a team when given the team name
they would be signing up with. However, participants acknowledged that they would
have been at a loss as to which team to pick if they had been left to their own devices.
One participant said it would have been “a game of eanie-meanie-minie-moe”
because he did not have information to decide between the teams. That same
participant also suggested that the website should suggest a team nearest to the user,
implying use of geolocation technology.
Another participant had a suggestion along the same lines, and advised us that a
user “should be able to click on a link that gives you more info on each of those
particular food banks. How would I be able to know what team I would want to be in?
You should sort by location.”
33
Recommendation 1: Provide a geolocation tool that allows participants to find
the nearest participating organization.
Recommendation 2: Provide information for participants selecting a team such
as times the organization is open and level of involvement required.
Problem 3: Users still find the explanation of challenges and badges to be “vague”
Users understand the concept of completing tasks and earning badges, but have
requested more information on the website about specific badges they could earn or
tasks they would complete. One participant called the “How it Works” page “vague.”
One survey respondent said they’d like to see “better instructions about app navigation,”
and another asked for more “examples of challenges and badges you can get.”
Recommendation 1: Provide screenshots of team badges/individual badges
from GroundCntrl testing
Recommendation 2: List specific examples of activities based on conversations
with partners
Recommendation 3: Explain level of involvement can vary by team
Problem 4: Users don’t always recognize Illinois Public Media as the main project
partner
This continues to be a problem from usability testing one to round two, although it
has improved. During testing one, when asked to navigate to the project partner’s site,
six participants did not choose Illinois Public Media. When asked why they did not
identify Illinois Public Media as the main project partner, they said there were no cues
on the website that it was more significant than the other listed project partners.
We attempted to solve this issue by adding “A project by” and the Illinois Public
Media logo in the header so that people affiliated the project with IPM. We also re-wrote
several pages to include Illinois Public Media’s name. However, one participant still was
unable to identify Illinois Public Media as the main project partner. This participant
34
guessed that Central or Eastern Illinois Food Bank were leading the project. He said,
“I’ve got five choices here, how do I know which one is the main?” And suggested we
“put the main partner first,” which it is. Obviously we need to find another way to
differentiate Illinois Public Media from other partners.
However, it is worth mentioning that the usability test’s word choice may have
contributed to confusion. We asked participants to “navigate back to the main partner’s
website” to see if they correctly identified IPM by clicking on the logo. However, if a
participant believes IPM has launched and designed the project, they may distinguish
IPM as separate from a “partner.” We believe the participant (and earlier participants)
may have believed that they were looking for the main partner other than Illinois Public
Media.
Recommendation 1: Fix header image so that Illinois Public Media logo is
equally prominent to “Growing Hope Against Hunger” logo.
Recommendation 2: Illinois Public Media’s logo should be singled out on the
sidebar. For example, Illinois Public Media’s logo can be under “Project Partners”
with text below that says, “With additional partners…” and a continuation of other
partner logos.
Final Site Design
After analyzing the results of the second usability testing, we once again revised
parts of the site to reflect our findings. Here are the final site designs:
35
36
37
GroundCntrl App Testing
The final version of the Hunger Helpers app will be its own branded app, but will
use the GroundCntrl interface and software. Therefore, we found it important to find out
how people use the app and what they thought of the app to know how to best design
the Hunger Helpers app around the software.
GroundCntrl App Testing Research Plan
I. Research Questions
The overarching goal of the research is to determine whether or not the GroundCntrl
app is easy to navigate and understood by our target audience. Specifically, there are
multiple facets of the app we are testing for this goal:
1. How easy is it for participants to complete tasks, including: Q&A, poll, check in,
take a photo, and enter an amount?
2. What problems do participants encounter while using the GroundCntrl app?
3. What do participants like/dislike about the app?
4. Would participants use the app in a volunteer setting?
II. Research Method, Design and Statistical Analysis
We will find participants by contacting multiple volunteer organizations on campus, as
well as students and professors from a variety of schools. Each participants was given a
$5 Starbucks giftcard in return for participating in the testing.
The test was held over a span of five days, from May 1, 2013 to May 5, 2013.
III. Potential Risks
38
Because our testing pool is mostly made up of students and university employees, they
likely use technology more than the average citizen and are more familiar with how
mobile apps work. We did not have any participants older than 45, leaving out the older
demographic’s opinion. This could skew the results.
Post-Research Note: In addition, we cannot with certainty generalize the results
of the app testing. At the time of our app testing launch (May 1), GroundCntrl was
in the process of launching a new platform system. We know of at least two
participants who downloaded the older version of the GroundCntrl app, while it is
believed the others have downloaded the newer version. Therefore, some of the
problems encountered may have been due to discrepancies in the version of
GroundCntrl downloaded.
IV. Potential Benefits
This research will provide a better understanding of how participants use GroundCntrl
and what type of challenges would be appropriate for participating food pantries to
provide. It will also be useful to GroundCntrl in knowing what does or doesn’t work
correctly on their application.
GroundCntrl App Testing Data Collection
General Task Feedback
1.) Which task was easiest to complete and why?

“Uploading a photo. The way to do it was similar to other apps I have used before,
like Facebook.”

“Upload picture Process was convenient and easy”

“Checking in on the quad”

“The ones that required entering text into a box and taking a picture in order to
complete. They were easiest because it was very clear what exactly we had to
do in order to complete the task.”
39

“Checking in was the easiest because it had the least amount of steps”

“Upload a picture, the process was the most convenient”

“the survey, it was very brief”
2.) Which task was hardest to complete and why?

“The task where we had to read an article then answer a question about the
media group. I could not get answer box to activate.”

“Checking in to the quad, was not working”

“Reading the prompt and answering a comprehension question”

“I wasn't able to complete some tasks because the App didn't make it clear how
exactly to go about completing them. For example, one said to fill out a survey
before checking in. It didn't say how to get to the survey, so I wasn't sure if I
actually completed it before checking in. Also, another activity required entering
text into a box, but I couldn't enter text into the box.”

“The one where you read a story and answer the question was hardest because
the answer box wouldn't let me type anything in it so I couldn't complete the
challenge”

“Checking into the Quad because it didn't work”

“just having to do one task a day was hard to remember versus just doing all the
tasks in one day”
3.) Please list any problems you encountered while using the app.

“1. I kept registering as in Fulton, even when I followed the GPS map to check in
at right place at the quad. 2. I did not see any instructions or link to complete the
day 2 challenge - complete the poll. I just confirmed I did it and moved on. 3. I
used the app to send a message to the team leader, but there was no way to
know if it had been received or to get a reply. 4. I could not activate answer box
in one challenge.”

“Checking into the quad didn't work”

“In the Illinois Public Media prompt, I couldn't activate the text box to write in my
40
answer. Also, it was hard to tell if I had really completed a task once I did it”

“Not being able to enter text into a box, the app crashing (especially after
finishing all of the activities at the end) and not being clear how to work things.”

“Poll didn't show up on my challenge; wouldn't let me type in an answer on the
read and answer one”

“The checkin to the quad didn't work”

“signing up for the app, it wouldn't let me sign in the first time and I had to request
a second invitation even though the person who sent me the invitation did it right
the first time”
Detail Task Feedback
4.) How would you rate the difficulty of each task?
Extremely
Slightly
Very Rating
Easy Manageable Neutral
Difficult
easy
difficult
difficult Average
Task 1
(Check in at
3
0
0
0
2
0
1
3.33
the Quad)
Task 2
(Complete
2
1
0
0
0
1
2
4.00
the poll)
Task 3
(Upload a
3
2
0
0
0
0
1
2.33
photo)
Task 4
(Click the
link, read the
0
1
0
2
0
2
1
4.83
story and
respond)
Task 5
(Upload
photo, count
items)
1
1
1
0
1
2
0
3.83
Task 6 (Q&A
and Poll)
1
1
0
2
0
1
1
4.00
5.) What would make it easier to complete any task you thought was difficult?

“Quick feedback and replies, more detailed instructions.”
41

“Doing a "test" task where the user is shown how to submit a task, upload, etc.”

“Clearer instructions on how to access things like a Poll, or a Q and A session.”

“if it worked”

“not having to upload photos, in the above portion you can't pick the same level
of difficulty for more than one item so the answers are incorrect :(“
Engagement and Usability
6.) What do you like about this app?

“The layout was nice. The ability to use the GPS in app to navigate worked well.”

“Simple to use”

“The feature of being able to see where your team is.”

“The "teamstream" feature is great in that it allows you to check your other team
members' progress.”

“it reminds me of foursquare because of the challenges and badges so that
makes people want to do it”

“user friendly”
7.) What do you dislike about this app?

“Inability to obtain answers or directions when something wouldn't work.”

“I don't understand how it helps the food bank”

“The organization of how to access certain features.”

“It's a little plain and hard to tell if I've completed a task.”

“a lot of the challenges didn't work; design doesn't make things clear, you have to
mess around with it to figure it out”
8.) Now that you have seen how the system works, how would you like to see it
used in relation to volunteer activity?

“It would be very useful to coordinate locations.”
42

“Make tasks more relevant to the volunteer activity and the food bank”

“Only if it had improvements to make it more functional and intuitive.”

“if it had challenges like checking in at volunteering places to earn badges that
would work”
9.) What ideas do you have that could make this even better?

“A way to contact team leader and receive responses to questions or difficulties.”

“Make the tasks more relevant to the purpose of the app”

“Clearer explanation of how to complete certain tasks. Also, a clearer explanation
of what this app is designed for.”

“More testing of the app, more engaging tasks and livelier colors!”

“more attractive design and fix the errors”
10.) How likely would you be to recommend this app?





Very Likely : 0
Likely: 1
Neutral: 1
Probably would not: 2
Definitely would not: 2
Demographics
Do you currently volunteer?
 Yes: 4
 No: 2
Do you listen to public radio?
 Yes: 5
 No: 1
What is your age?
 Respondent 1:
 Respondent 2:
 Respondent 3:
 Respondent 4:
 Respondent 5:
41
21
22
21
45
43

Respondent 6: 21
What is your gender?
 Male: 1
 Female: 5
9 App testing participants, 6 survey respondents (1 partial survey respondent)
GroundCntrl App Testing Research Summary
Demographics: Nine people participated in the weeklong app testing and 7
participated in the survey. Our participants ranged from 20 years old to 45 years
old.
Additional participant information: Four of the survey participants currently
volunteer. Five of the survey participants said they listen to public radio.
We summarized both the problems and positive aspects of the GroundCntrl
mobile app for iPhone and our recommendations to fix these problems below.
Positive 1: Users thought uploading photos to the app was easy
When asked what task was easiest to complete, three of the survey
participants said uploading photos was the easiest task. One participant said the
“process was convenient and easy.” Another also used “convenient” to describe
the photo uploading process. A participant stated the easiest tasks were “the
ones that required entering text into a box and taking a picture in order to
complete. They were easiest because it was very clear what exactly we had to
do in order to complete the task.”
Positive 2: Users liked the “Teamstream” feature
44
Some of the participants brought up the Teamstream feature without being
prompted. This feature allows users to post and view other teammates’ posts.
One participant said that the Teamstream feature was what they liked about the
app. Another added: “The ‘Teamstream’ feature is great in that it allows you to
check your other team members' progress.
Positive 3: Users thought the GPS challenge was easy
Overall, most participants thought the check in task was the easiest. One
participant said “checking in on the quad” was the easiest task to complete.
Another expanded by stating “checking in was the easiest because it had the
least number of steps.” This task was chosen by most as the easiest when they
were able to complete it. However, this task did not always work (see problem 1
below).
Problem 1: Users could not complete some of the tasks due to system
problems
Many of the participants reported having problems completing some of the
challenges due to errors in the software. Five of the seven survey participants
said they could not get one or more of the challenges to work. Two participants
said they could not check in and four participants said they encountered
problems with not being able to type in text boxes. Two participants said they
could not complete the poll challenge because the poll did not show up. One
participant said “I did not see any instructions or link to complete the day 2
challenge - complete the poll. I just confirmed I did it and moved on.” One
participant said the problems they encountered were “not being able to enter text
into a box, the app crashing (especially after finishing all of the activities at the
end) and not being clear how to work things.”
45
It is difficult to determine whether this is due to differences in how different
iOS versions behave with the app platform, the version of GroundCntrl
participants downloaded or errors in the GroundCntrl system. It is likely that it is a
mixture of the last two. We know of at least one participant who downloaded the
GroundCntrl app instead of the newer version, listed in the Apple store as
GroundCntrl3. However, we also know that many of the other participants did
download the correct version and still experienced difficulties.
Recommendation 1: We recommend the GroundCntrl team continue to
work on fixing bugs in the new system, and testing it on multiple types of
iPhones (4, 4S, 5, etc.) and multiple versions of iOs, as this may affect how
the app works.
Recommendation 2: We recommend the description of the app in the
Apple store states that users should update their iPhone’s software before
downloading the app.
Problem 2: Users did not like the design of the app
Some did not like the design of the app. One participant said “it’s a little
plain,” while another participant said the “design doesn’t make things clear.”
When asked what ideas they have to improve the app, one participant said they
wanted “more engaging tasks and livelier colors!” Another participant answered
they wanted a “more attractive design.”
Recommendation 1: Re-design the “Tasks” panel to make it more
attractive and less “wordy.” Currently, the tasks are in a list form with no
icons or pictures. By adding color or turning each challenge into a small
icon, it would add interest to the panel.
Recommendation 2: Add at least one brighter color in the design to add
interest.
46
Recommendation 3: Make the badges different colors from one another.
Currently, they are all the same color.
Problem 3: Users said they would likely not recommend the app
Four of the survey participants said they either “probably would not” or
“definitely would not” recommend the app to others. Only one participant said
they “likely would” recommend the app. When asked what they dislike about the
app, two participants mentioned the problem they had completing certain
challenges as discussed above. Three participants mentioned that they disliked
the organization of the app, and how hard it was to figure out how to work it
(discussed further in Problem 4).
Recommendation 1: Fix bugs and errors with some of the challenges, as
explained in Problem 1.
Recommendation 2: Reward users for recommending the app to others.
This could be in the form of giving users a badge for referring new users to
the app, or for talking about the app on Facebook or Twitter.
Problem 4: Users did not think the app was intuitive or easy to understand
Many users reported being confused by how to use the app and the lack of
directions within the app. When asked what would make the app easier to use, a
participant answered “quick feedback and replies, more detailed instructions” and
another answered “clearer instructions on how to access things like a Poll, or a Q
and A session.” One participant said “you have to mess around with it [the app]
to figure it out.” One participant stated they disliked “the organization of how to
access certain features.”
Some participants said they would have liked the option to ask someone
for help with the problems they encountered. One participant said they disliked
47
the “inability to obtain answers or directions when something didn’t work.”
Another participant said the app would be better if there was “a way to contact
team leader and receive responses to questions or difficulties.” One participant
suggested “doing a "test" task where the user is shown how to submit a task,
upload, etc.” When asked which task was the hardest to complete, one
participant stated, “I wasn't able to complete some tasks because the App didn't
make it clear how exactly to go about completing them. For example, one said to
fill out a survey before checking in. It didn't say how to get to the survey, so I
wasn't sure if I actually completed it before checking in.”
Recommendation 1: Create a Frequently Asked Questions or Help
section within one of the existing panels.
Recommendation 2: Create a messaging feature within the app that
would allow team members to message the team leader directly on the
app.
Recommendation 3: Give users the option to complete a tutorial upon
downloading the app. This would include a few practice tasks that would
teach users how to complete the various types of tasks before joining a
team and actually doing it.
48
Marketing Plan
Target Audience
Based on previous research completed on this project, the volunteer
demographic ranges in age from 35-44, is more female than male, is married with
children, is college-educated and employed, spends approximately 32 hours a year
already volunteering, and is primarily interested in religious and youth-related
opportunities. The ideal volunteer is a homeowner and feels they have a stake in their
local community.
(1) Spreading the word in WILL’s listening/viewing area
SUMMARY: Our approach to increase awareness of the project within WILL’s
listening and viewing area is two-pronged. We would largely encourage viewers
and listeners to become volunteers through an on-air blitz of “advertisements,”
which would then lead interested people to the website where they could learn
more about the project and download the app. Some of the advertisements
would direct people to the Hunger Helpers website, while others would give
instructions on how to directly download the app from the Apple Store. People
would not be downloading the Groundcntrl app, but rather the app would be
branded in the Apple Store as a “Hunger Helpers” app by Illinois Public Media,
using GroundCntrl’s software. Therefore, we need to provide as much
information about the app in the Apple Store’s description as we do on the
Hunger Helper’s website.
In addition, we will also reach listeners and viewers online by providing an
advertisement on Illinois Public Media’s website linking to the Hunger Helpers
site. Because advertisements don’t allow much space, our goal is to attract the
49
viewer’s attention while providing just enough information to make them want to
click through to the site.
On-Air
On-air spots are one of the most important facets of the Hunger Helpers
marketing plan. Because Illinois Public Media has both radio and television outlets, this
is the easiest and most effective way to target and reach the audience most likely to
participate in the program.
Radio:
Here are three examples of :15 to :30 radio ads that could be played on WILL
Radio:
1. ) “An estimated 1.9 million Illinois residents do not have enough to eat. You can be
part of the solution and you can do it all on your iPhone. Go to W-I-L-L.illinois.E-D-U to
join the Hunger Helpers team.”
2.) Someone who is profiled in the “Faces of Hunger” page on the Hunger Helpers site
can voice their experience and encourage listeners to go to WILL’s site to learn more
about the project.
3.) “At W-I-L-L TV and Radio, we have consistently covered the issue of hunger in
central and eastern Illinois. Now we want to do more than cover it. We want to be part of
the solution. Become a hunger helper today and join us in being part of the solution. Go
to W-I-L-L.illinois.E-D-U to learn more.”
Based on previous research by Daniel Maxson, those who do not volunteer
choose not to do so due to perceived time constraints. Therefore, an effective marketing
plan would address these concerns and emphasize how the Hunger Helpers project can
fit into any schedule.
50
4.) “Think you don’t have time to volunteer? Think again. The Hunger Helpers app
makes volunteering easy. We help you find ways to volunteer that fit into any schedule
and budget, and it all starts with your iPhone. Visit W-I-L-L dot Illinois dot E-D-U today
to learn how you can make volunteering part of your life.”
Television:
Here is an example of a :30 ad that could be played on WILL-TV:
1.) A 30-second spot following a person who struggles to find enough food: b-roll of
going to a soup kitchen, food pantries, and brief “talking head” segments
Online
In order to direct people to the site in order to download the app, we recommend
there be a small picture link to the Hunger Helper’s site in the sidebar of WILL’s main
site. The ad should not be distracting, but should be prominent enough that visitors to
the site understand it is an important project affiliated with Illinois Public Media. Below
are several examples of ads that could run on the site’s sidebar. In addition, we have
included a banner ad that links to the Hunger Helpers’ site:
51
We also recommend that WILL expand “Faces of Hunger” into a multimedia
project featured on WILL’s main site, explained in greater detail below.
Social Media
We recommend that IPM make a concerted effort to market the Hunger Helpers
project through their already-existing social media accounts. We do not see the need to
create separate social media accounts for the Hunger Helpers project during the initial
stages of raising awareness about the project. However, it may be helpful in the future
to do this to keep participants up to date.
“Liking” the Illinois Public Media group on Facebook and following the Twitter
account could even become two of the challenges users can complete to earn badges,
should GroundCntrl begin to incorporate sharing to other social media outlets as a
feature on the app. However, creating specific Hunger Helpers social media accounts
would only be worthwhile after the Hunger Helpers project has gained traction in the
community and only as a way to effectively communicate updates on the project as a
whole— not as an effective way to raise awareness about the project.
52
Encouraging advertisement of the program through partners
The food pantries and soup kitchens that partnered with Illinois Public Media in
the project would be valuable for encouraging potential volunteers to not only volunteer,
but to volunteer through the Hunger Helpers app.
For larger organizations that only keep in contact with its volunteers via email, we
can design a newsletter explaining the project and linking to the Hunger Helpers
website. In addition, we recommend asking larger partner organizations to share
information and link to the website through their social media accounts.
Expansion of Faces of Hunger
Positive feedback received during usability testing was that participants
responded well to the Faces of Hunger page. One participant said “I like the faces of
hunger tab— very motivating.” Another mentioned, “I liked the stories about people who
use food banks because it makes it more personal.” This positive feedback stayed
consistent through the second round of testing. One participant said the site would be
better with “more faces of the hungry throughout the pages. It doesn’t appeal to me
emotionally because there are no photos of people. Images with emotional impact help
tremendously.”
Illinois Public Media can build on this positive feedback by launching a
multimedia project documenting some of the “faces of hunger” in central and eastern
Illinois. A smaller version of the Faces of Hunger project will be available on the Hunger
Helpers site, but we recommend that a larger multimedia project be linked to on the
Illinois Public Media’s site. The project would profile people who are directly affected by
hunger and rely on food assistance. It is important to personalize the Hunger Helpers
project in this way so that potential volunteers can see the people they will be helping in
participating.
53
We recommend that the multimedia project be displayed on Illinois Public
Media’s site because it shows the issue of community hunger is an ongoing and
important project to WILL, and not an afterthought. People who may not be interested in
downloading the app and otherwise may never follow the link to the Hunger Helpers site
could learn about the issue of hunger on the main site, and may choose to participate in
ending hunger in their own way. Featuring such a project prominently on the WILL site
demonstrates WILL’s dedication to the issue.
(2) Spreading the word in the journalism community
SUMMARY: It’s important for Illinois Public Media to focus on raising community
awareness about the project to ensure its success, but it is also important for
WILL and Reynold’s Journalism Institute to raise awareness about this venture
within the journalism community. This is a pioneering project that could open
discussion about newsrooms’ role in civic participation and community
engagement— and we want to encourage that discussion.
Discussion of project on RJI “Futures Lab” vodcast
Newsrooms are searching for new, innovative ways to engage audiences. There
is a legitimate debate about how large a role the media should play in civic engagement,
but there is no denying Hunger Helpers is a pioneer project in terms of audience
engagement.
Hunger Helpers is one of the first of projects that encourage audiences to
engage more with their community. While hosting a discussion on the project on the RJI
vodcast will not necessarily attract more participants, it will create more recognition
within the journalism community, and perhaps encourage other newsrooms to create
similar community engagement projects.
Continued blogging on the project
54
Should RJI continue funding the project, future capstone students should
continue blogging about the progress of the project on the current blog, Beyond
Engagement (www.beyondengagement.wordpress.com ). This is a way to document
the process of launching such a project and serves as a learning tool for other
newsrooms or interested parties considering such a project.
55
Recommendations
Illinois Public Media
Recommendations mandatory for the project’s success:
1. Choose a designated person from Illinois Public Media to be the first point of
contact for the project. They will handle the information coming from the backend
of the site (such as joining a team requests), to communicate as needed with
partners, and to take lead in marketing the project. (Probably Kimberlie Kranich).
2. Illinois Public Media must market this project in the months approaching the
app’s launch. It is most important to do this online and on-air. On-air
advertisements for the app need not exceed 15 seconds to be effective.
Listeners and viewers will not know about the project until Illinois Public Media
takes initiative by raising awareness.
GroundCntrl
Recommendations mandatory for the project’s success:
1. The ability for users to raise awareness about the project through social media
on the app as a challenge.
2. The ability for users to contact the team leader (and other members) directly via
a messaging system through the app. This would be even better if the user got a
push notification that they had a message available similar to the notifications
they receive about new tasks.
3. A team details page: the team leader contact, hours of operation and level of
involvement.
56
4. Ensure that when a team leader downloads the metadata for a team, that all
responses, interactions and tasks are recorded.
Additional recommendations:
1. The ability for users to invite friends via social media.
2. The ability to use geolocation when determining the nearest “team” available in
order to choose which team to join.
3. Add another color into the design of the app to ‘lighten’ it up. If the app design
could be altered for the Hunger Helpers app to reflect the colors and tone of the
Hunger Helpers website.
Moving Forward
1. We strongly recommend that those who work on this project in the future design,
test and develop a mobile version of the website so that if someone visits the site
from their phone, they are able to easily view information on the project and
download the app directly to their phone.
2. Remain in contact with project partners. The designated contact at Illinois Public
Media should follow up with the partners using the contact information we have
obtained to introduce themselves personally and get a deeper understanding of
the needs of each organization.
3. Based on the needs of the organization, draft a list of potential tasks and badges
that are unique to each organization.
4. On the website, there needs to be some sort of description available so that
people know a little bit about each organization before choosing a team. Since a
big aspect of the app is that people with any kind of schedule can participate, the
description should state the level of involvement required to be part of that team.
57
(Many partners do not want volunteers per say, but people who will organize food
and money drives. Therefore, depending on the organization, the level of
involvement and personal interaction will change).
5. We recommend setting a goal of launching the site and app by October. If the
project takes any longer to launch, we run the risk of losing partners. We lost one
partner just in the period of delaying the launch from March to late summer.
58
Sources
Harwood, Richard C., and Aaron B. Leavy. Why We're Here: The Powerful Impact of
Public Broadcasters When They Turn Outward. 1st ed. Dayton: Charles F. Kettering
Foundation, 2011. Print.
Rubin, Jeffrey. Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct
Effective Tests. New York: Wiley, 1994. Print.
59
60