Challenge
Documents arrived through multiple channels and were handled across up to five systems before assessment, creating manual effort, workarounds, and legacy-system risk.
Private portfolio review · Government of Alberta
Simplifying document processing for Alberta child-care subsidy applications
This private version includes detailed product screens, workflow artifacts, and delivery evidence. It is intended for professional portfolio review only.
Confidentiality: Please do not distribute, reproduce, or share these implementation-level artifacts. Project work remains the property of the respective client.
Executive summary
From fragmented document handling to a clearer staff workflow.
My role
Front End Designer with end-to-end UX ownership across workflow design, interaction design, prototyping, usability testing, developer handoff, QA, and post-launch iteration.
Delivery
Fully launched for all staff, using an incremental delivery approach that prioritized document-to-application association.
Before → after
Document intake and storage
Before: Documents arrived through multiple channels and were handled in fragmented systems.
After: Documents arriving through multiple channels were stored and handled in a singular system with streamlined review and storage access.
Repeated handling
Before: Staff manually retrieved, stored, matched, and copied information across tools.
After: A simplified workflow reduced repeated handling, manual errors, training time, and workarounds.
Assessment handoff
Before: Assessors depended on documents being located and prepared elsewhere.
After: A more consistent handoff created a unified experience for document access, reducing manual communication and status checks.
CRA consent
Before: CRA consent operated as an uploaded-document review task.
After: Digital consent became a policy-approved follow-on direction using MADI-verified accounts.
Success criteria
Reduce staff effort required to receive, locate, review, and associate documents.
Minimize manual switching between systems and duplicate handling.
Make document status and readiness clearer before assessment.
Support a feasible move away from the legacy system without delaying delivery.
Establish a platform for later improvements, including digital CRA consent.
Workflow redesign
The system problem behind the screens.
The original document-processing service required administrative and assessment staff to coordinate work across several channels and systems. Documents could arrive through online upload, email, fax, or mail, then needed to be retrieved, reviewed, classified, matched to an application, and prepared for assessment.
Current-state workflow: where the service broke downManual retrieval, review, storage, matching, and cross-system handoffs created delay before assessment. Click to enlarge.
Manual retrieval
Staff searched inboxes and repositories before documents entered the workflow.
Manual matching
Documents were matched to applications across disconnected systems.
Cross-system switching
Staff moved between tools before an assessor could review the application.
A feasible first release, with a clearer future pathThe first release linked documents to relevant applications and clarified review work. Click to enlarge.
Protected screen walkthrough
How workflow decisions translated into product decisions.
Each artifact is presented as a design decision rather than a gallery item. Click a visual to enlarge it.
1. Make document submission and metadata capture explicitThe upload flow created a clearer path for receiving a document and capturing information needed for the appropriate review workflow.
2. Give assessors clearer access to document contextThe assessor-facing view brought document status and review context closer to the application being assessed.
3. Connect detailed design to deliveryThe annotated design communicated the proposed interaction as an implementable story for development and QA.
4. Support completion and reduce ambiguityClear completion states helped staff understand what had been reviewed and what remained before an application moved forward.
Validation and iteration
Testing the workflow throughout delivery.
Moderated testing
Tested workflows, screen designs, and features as they evolved.
Unmoderated testing
Used unmoderated usability testing where appropriate.
Alignment sessions
Facilitated stakeholder and co-design sessions for screen flows and document review.
UX QA & launch
Reviewed implementation during QA and ran post-launch testing in the live system.
Outcome and measurement note
A fully launched workflow with lower staff effort.
The workflow simplified document-review activities, reduced manual steps, and lowered effort required to locate, associate, and review supporting documents.
60–80%
Estimated efficiency improvement
Based on qualitative observation and user validation across relevant documentation-review activities.
Less rework
Staff reported moving through queues more efficiently, relying on fewer workarounds, and finding training easier.
Future-ready foundation
Improved application and document integration supported later service innovation, including digital CRA consent work.
Measurement note: The estimate reflects observed reductions in processing time, steps, and staff effort; it was not a formal performance metric. Assessor impact was not separately measured.