The Role of UX in Government System Expansion

  • Fuad AbujaradEmail author
  • Ian O’Bara
  • Sarah J. Swierenga
  • Eric D. Raile
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10290)


In order to design an expansion for an existing government system that satisfies the strategic requirements of having public value, legitimacy, and feasibility, the expanded system must create something real and substantial that the target population can make use of. Our User Experience (UX) framework helps to identify areas where public value, legitimacy, and feasibility are strong, and also need more attention. We show how we used a hybrid approach that combines usability evaluation, focus groups, and online surveys to identify the user and stakeholder experiences that drive design forward in a way that leads to the success and stability of the implemented expansion.


Criminal background checks User experience Health information technology Usability Government 



Funding for this research came from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the Ninth Announcement CFDA #93.506, Funding Opportunity Number CMS-1A1-13-002.


  1. 1.
    US Census Bureau: The Older Population: 2010 Census Briefs (2011).
  2. 2.
    Friedland, R.B.: Caregivers and long-term care needs in the 21st century: Will public policy meet the challenge? (2004).
  3. 3.
    Luz, C., Swanson, L., Ochylski, D., Turnham, H.: Michigan’s ‘Building Training … Building Quality’ personal and home care aide state training program. Final report for the Michigan Office of Services to the Aging (2014).
  4. 4.
    National Center for Health Workforce Analyses: Nursing aides, home health aides, and related health care occupations – National and local workforce shortages and associated data needs (2004).
  5. 5.
    Paraprofessional Healthcare Institute: Facts 3: Who are direct-care workers? (2011).
  6. 6.
    Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General: Nursing Facilities’ Employment of Individuals with Criminal Convictions. Report OEI-07-09-00110, March 2011Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cooper, C., Selwood, A., Livingston, G.: The prevalence of elder abuse and neglect: a systematic review. Age Ageing 37, 151–160 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Post, L.A., Salmon, C.T., Prokhorov, A., Oehmke, J.F., Swierenga, S.J.: Aging and elder abuse: projections for michigan. In: Murdock, S.H., Swanson, D.A. (eds.) Applied Demography in the 21st Century, pp. 103–112. Springer Science and Business Media, Heidelberg (2008). ISBN 1402083289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Post, L.A., Swierenga, S.J., Oehmke, J., Salmon, C., Prokhorov, A., Meyer, E., Joshi, V.: The implications of an aging population structure. Int. J. Interdisc. Soc. Sci. 1(2), 47–58 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Galantowicz, S., Crisp, S., Karp, N., Accius, J.: Safe at Home? Developing Effective Criminal Background Checks and Other Screening Policies for Home Care Workers. AARP Public Policy Institute, September 2010Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Blumstein, A., Nakamura, K.: Redemption in the presence of widespread criminal background checks. Criminology 47(2), 327–359 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moore, M.H.: Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Norman, D., Nielson, J.: The Definition of User Experience (UX) (n.d.).
  14. 14.
    Abujarad, F., Swierenga, S.J., Dennis, T.A., Post, L.A.: The impact of usability on patient safety in long-term care. In: Nah, F.F.-H., Tan, C.-H. (eds.) HCI in Business, HCIB 2015, LNCS 9191, pp. 221–231. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    International Organization for Standardization: Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with Visual Display Terminals (VDTs) – Part 11: Guidance on Usability. (ISO Reference No. 9241-11:1998[E]) (1998)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Swierenga, S.J., Abujarad, F., Dennis, T.A., Post, L.A.: Real-world user-centered design: the Michigan Workforce Background Check system. In: Salvendy, G., Smith, M.J. (eds.) Human Interface, Part II, HCII 2011, LNCS 6772, pp. 325–334. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Abujarad, F., Swierenga, Sarah J., Dennis, Toni A., Post, Lori A.: Rap backs: continuous workforce monitoring to improve patient safety in long-term care. In: Marcus, A. (ed.) DUXU 2013. LNCS, vol. 8014, pp. 3–9. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-39238-2_1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Swierenga, S.J., Abujarad, F., Dennis, T.A, Post, L.A.: Improving patient safety through user-centered healthcare background check system design. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium of Human Factors and Ergonomics in Healthcare HFES 2013 (2013). Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 2(21), 21–26 (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    U.S. Department of Health & Human Services: System Usability Scale (SUS). (n.d.).
  20. 20.
    Brooke, J.: SUS: a retrospective. J. Usability Stud. 8(2), 29–40 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fuad Abujarad
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ian O’Bara
    • 2
  • Sarah J. Swierenga
    • 2
  • Eric D. Raile
    • 3
  1. 1.Yale School of MedicineNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.Usability/Accessibility Research and ConsultingMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  3. 3.Montana State UniversityBozemanUSA

Personalised recommendations