Update AAR V1 and V2 w/ SME feedback

[aprocik1]

Description

@aprocik1 following up with specifics of Appoint v2, we have a summary of what needs your attention from @mtri

We also received a bit of content-related feedback in today's stakeholder design review; content updates around this could apply to our MVP as well:

• Medical authorizations: Update body copy (above the bullets) to “may need to access certain medical records” and consider ending after the “to help you.” No need to have additional copy after that.
• What to expect next: Stakeholders emphasized avoiding confusion that the appointment will happen automatically after submitting (the rep still needs to agree).

Timing wise, re-iterating that we will need updated copy ideally by 5/27. We do have Midpoint Review scheduled for this Friday 5/17 if you'd like to try and get Governance's input by then, but currently we're not planning to request content feedback during our Midpoint Review.

Tasks

• [x] AP: Review SME feedback and provide recommendations in Figma comments
• [x] AP: Update content sources of truth to match recommendations in Figma comments

Criteria

• [x] Content recommendations have been provided to the product team

[aprocik1]

Here's the summary of recommendations from Michael:

Intro page – Since a user has to be signed in to take advantage of digital submission:

• In the intro process list: “If you’re signed in and appointing an accredited VSO representative who can digitally sign your form, you can submit it to them at the end of our online tool.”
• In the unauth sign in alert (widget): “If you’re appointing an accredited VSO representative who can digitally sign your form, you can submit it at the end of our online tool.”

Select a representative:

• "Enter the name of the accredited representative or Veteran Service Organization you'd like to appoint" search input label

Appointing a rep that has already been appointed:

• Contact alert language
• The note will only appear when appointing a VSO representative.

Appointing a Veteran Service Organization that has already been appointed:

• Occurs after selecting a VSO on an individual with multiple VSOs that matches the currently appointed VSO.

Print only available alert when selecting a rep

• Occurs when selecting an attorney or claims agent or VSO representative that only has VSOrgs that will accept print submission.

Print only available alert when selecting a VSO

• Occurs when selecting a Veteran service organization that only accepts print on the select a VSOrg page.

Unauthenticated print interstitial

• Will display for all selections on unauthenticated since digital submission is not available.
• Since the user can't sign in midflow, this probably shouldn't mention sign in even though the reason it is showing is they are not signed in.
• Occurs after selection of an attorney, claims agent, or single accredited VSO rep.
• Occurs after selection of an organization for a cross accredited VSO rep.
• This page may or may not be necessary since we have content up front and at the end of the flow about this now.

Download a copy of your form for your records

• Page functions exactly like print-fill download your form page, but the framing of the content is a bit different.

[aprocik1]

@oddball-lindsay and @mtri, here are my recommendations in your Figma file:

• Intro page: Comment 1, comment 2
• Select a rep: Comment 1, comment 2
• Appoint a rep that's already appointed: Comment 1, comment 2
• Appoint a VSO that's already appointed: Comment 1, comment 2
• Print only alert for reps: Comment 1
• Print only alert for VSOs: Comment 1, comment 2
• Print interstitial: I don't think this screen is necessary, since we have related content in alerts throughout the flow, as well as at the beginning and end of the flow
• Download for digital submit: Comment 1

For the medical records screens: Is this what SMEs want it to say?

This accredited [attorney, claims agent, Veterans Service Organization (VSO)] may need to access certain medical records to help you. You can authorize them to access all or some of these types of records:

• Alcoholism and alcohol abuse records
• Drug abuse records
• HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) records
• Sickle cell anemia records

For the confirm page: Are SMEs commenting on the "what to expect next" section of the digital submit confirm page? This is what it currently says.

We’ll process your form and update your VA.gov profile with the accredited [attorney -or- claims agent -or- VSO]’s information. After receiving your form, we usually process it within 1 week.

You can contact the accredited [attorney -or- claims agent -or- VSO] to get help any time.

After we align on these recommendations, I'll update the relevant content sources of truth.

[oddball-lindsay]

Thanks @aprocik1! I left some replies to your comments for us to discuss. One thought I had that applies to multiple comments is what we call "digital submission" in Veteran-facing language. Happy to discuss that in the Figma comment or in this thread.

I'm also wondering if "digitally sign your form" is correct 🤔 the Veteran/claimant won't be signing -- just submitting. And the receiving rep won't be signing either -- just accepting the request.

What about "digitally accept your request" instead?

Edit: after writing this comment, I realized eBenefits uses "Accepts Electronic Requests". Another option to consider.

---

Also @mtri what are your thoughts on removing the Print interstitial from the flow? If users struggle with understanding the flow ends in a print/download in testing, then that could guide us to adding the screen back in.

[mtri]

Also @mtri what are your thoughts on removing the Print interstitial from the flow? If users struggle with understanding the flow ends in a print/download in testing, then that could guide us to adding the screen back in.

Removing the print interstitial makes sense to me since we'll have supporting content that says you need to be signed in to take advantage of digital submission in the form.

The upcoming test currently only tests the digital submission flow, but if we want to confirm this we could ask about understanding of the intro content and having access to the feature.

[aprocik1]

@oddball-lindsay and @mtri, thanks for your quick review, and thanks for the clarity on the VSO / VSO rep distinction.

I just updated all my comments with a variation of this content: "Appoint a VSO that can digitally accept your form." And I updated our final state content source of truth--this includes the landing page, intro page, and confirm screens. You'll need to update those pages and screens in the Figma file.

If these updates seem good to you, I'll update our other content sources of truth to match my recommendations.

[oddball-lindsay]

These updates look good to me, thanks for the quick adapt and update! I'll let @mtri have the final 👍 for being ready to update the content source of truth :)

[mtri]

Looks good to me! I will bring it into Figma.

I have one other small question on the relationship between the digital submission language on the Find search and Appoint VSO selection here

Thanks again!

[aprocik1]

Great! I'll update our sources of truth to match my comments by the end of the week. Thanks!

[aprocik1]

Note: I updated these sources of truth with the recommendations we aligned on in Figma and this ticket:

• AAR V1
• AAR V2 (final state source of truth)

[oddball-lindsay]

@aprocik1 my apologies for only realizing this now, but in our designs Appoint v1 is intended to be without digital submission and Appoint v2 is with that digital submission feature enhancement.

The AAR V1 isn't quite accurate for "v1" as the Step 2 content has mentions of digital submission.

I don't think it's an urgent need as designs are actively pursuing v2 so we can still use this document for reference, but at some point for recording our evolution (and aligning with design files) it'd be helpful to have two distinct documents -- v1 without mentions of digital submission in Step 2, and v2 with those mentions in the doc today.

[aprocik1]

@oddball-lindsay, thanks for flagging this. I just cleaned up our content source of truth folder and all the documents within it. Let me know if you find any other inconsistencies.

https://dvagov.sharepoint.com/:f:/s/SitewideCAIA/EpKqFTllvlxOkDwz2iFgveAB9PjkKVIrJu_TUAkQPbsU0g?e=8SLJwh

[oddball-lindsay]

Thank you @aprocik1! 🙏