User Experience at the Fund
It doesn’t hurt to have an opinion, as long as you are prepared to validate or change it. Starting off with a heuristic analysis of the Past grants section, I developed questions to drive follow on research.
The Past grants search tool and support pages do not live in isolation. Reviewing from the perspective of someone looking for funding, I took the daring approach to strip away everything which is not immediately and clearly helpful.
I performed an initial heuristic analysis and then reviewed notes against research data. Some of the recommended explorations for improvement include:
- Information architecture to manage orientation and expectations
- Content copy clarity and timely helpfulness
- Organisation logic of search results items
- Consistent internal logic of categories and sub-categories
The vast majority of visitors are using the tool as intended. Evidence suggested improvements areas where:
- Features attracting low interest could be removed
- Features generating uncertainty could be displayed more intuitively
- Surprising ratio of views to searches suggests need for additional data source
In response to a low response rate, I expand the dataset by tracking users to comments left on other areas of the site. Two categories emerged:
- Group A were generally looking for some specific information; a certain project, details about a project or other personal information.
- Group B are looking for funding for an area of interest. This indicates a lack of understanding about the application process.
Behaviour flow indicates that finding funding is a significant interest for users visiting the Past grants pages.
The launch of a new funding programme can lead to a significant spike in visitors to the site, but does not impact the Past grants pages. This suggests that the Past grants visitors are not tuned into developments, but are new and driven by their own initiatives.