search

department-of-veterans-affairs / va.gov-team

Public resources for building on and in support of VA.gov. Visit complete Knowledge Hub:
https://depo-platform-documentation.scrollhelp.site/index.html
283 stars 205 forks source link

[CAIA Intake] 21-686/674 new dependents verification feature #84170

Open steele-lm opened 5 months ago

steele-lm commented 5 months ago

Content, accessibility, information architecture (CAIA) new initiative collaboration request

Use this ticket to request collaboration on a new initiative with the sitewide content, accessibility, and information architecture (CAIA) team.

About your team

About your initiative

Which of these descriptions best fits the work we’ll partner on?

Select all that apply.

What's the nature of your initiative and desired outcomes?

Dependent benefits are currently overpaid by $250m every year because the VA has inaccurate dependent information. Veterans are required to update their dependents every 8 years through a paper "Mandatory Verification of Dependents" 21-0538 form that is mailed to them. Our goal is to expand the functionality of the current "view dependents" page on VA.gov to include a "tool" (question) that will allow Veterans to indicate whether or not their dependents have changed (yes/no). If yes, they will be directed to the existing 21-686c online form flow to update their dependents. If no, VA.gov will automatically generate and submit a 21-0538 pdf to the VA (via Central Mail). As part of this tool, Veterans will also receive an email every year asking them to review and validate their dependents on VA.gov. We anticipate an online solution to dependent verification will reduce the over/under payment of benefits and reduce the administrative burden of verification on the VA.

Collaboration timeframe

Note: We work on nearly every OCTO product and manage all unauthenticated content on VA.gov, so we will need to prioritize intake requests based on overall workload and VA and OCTO priorities.

Is this work tied to a Congressional mandate, change in law or policy, or upcoming event with a specific deadline?

Where are you at in your timeline?

Tell us briefly about what you're working on now (such as initial discovery, wireframing, or usability research planning) and add any known dates for upcoming milestones or deadlines.

We are currently finalizing initial designs with our OCTO enablement team and VBA stakeholders. Our design intent is scheduled for 5/30/24. The goal is to launch this tool by the end of 2024.

Will you release this new product incrementally (for example, release to 25% of users to start)?

Collaboration cycle

Which phases of the collaboration cycle have you completed?

Select all that apply.

Collaboration cycle ticket

If you’re going through the collaboration cycle, provide your ticket number and link:

Supporting artifacts

Provide links to any supporting artifacts that can help us better understand your initiative and begin collaboration. Include artifacts like your product outline, user flows, mockups and prototypes, or any draft content.

Next steps

### Content tasks
- [ ] https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/va.gov-team/issues/86413
- [ ] https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/va.gov-team/issues/86416
- [ ] https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/va.gov-team/issues/93991
ajialeilani commented 5 months ago

One piece that came out of Design Intent was that we should be sure to include links to this new experience on other 0538 entry points like About Form 21-0538. Noting here for our IA folks.

We'll also want to consider what is the parent page of the "Form" part of this experience.

NaomiPMC commented 5 months ago

@strelichl to follow-up with @aprocik1 to confirm capacity. To review at next refinement meeting.

kristinoletmuskat commented 5 months ago

Hey @steele-lm and @ajialeilani, here is a draft IA spec for you to review! This doc has our recs for urls and page placement.

Let me know if anything there seems off or if you disagree with the placement!

FYI @aprocik1

aprocik1 commented 5 months ago

@ajialeilani, I have a couple follow up questions for you:

Thanks!

ajialeilani commented 5 months ago

Hi @aprocik1 ,

ajialeilani commented 5 months ago

Hey @kristinoletmuskat - IA spec looks good! Is it still okay for /view and /verify to exist on the same level if Veterans enter the /verify flow from a component within /view? We can always move the initial yes/no selection to /verify and have that linked out to from /view-or-change in addition to /view if that makes more sense.

kristinoletmuskat commented 4 months ago

Good Q @ajialeilani , I'm going to check with my team tomorrow afternoon on this and get back to you.

aprocik1 commented 4 months ago

Hi @ajialeilani, I just left some questions for you in your Figma file. The answers to these questions will help me finalize my content recommendations. Thanks for your attention to these!

kristinoletmuskat commented 4 months ago

Hey @ajialeilani -- yes we are good to go placing /review at the same level as /view!

ajialeilani commented 4 months ago

Hi @aprocik1 - sorry for the delay. Just replied to your comments.

aprocik1 commented 4 months ago

@ajialeilani, thanks for your responses to my questions. I created this CAIA content recommendations board in your Figma file. It includes the 5 unique screens in this flow. The only thing I'm still uncertain about is the timestamped alert on the first authenticated page. Let me know what think! I'm happy to keep refining these recommendations based on product team and SME feedback.

Note: Myself and the content team are OOO next week for summer break. Our OCTO content leads (Beth Potts, Danielle Thierry, and Randi Hecht) will be in office and working. I'm letting you know in case we don't wrap up these recommendations before EOD tomorrow.

P.S. I'm not a Figma expert, so some of the formatting and spacing is off in my board. Sorry about that!

ajialeilani commented 2 months ago

Hey @aprocik1 @strelichl I was advised in office hours to create a new ticket for another review of the new verification flow (we've made a few changes since A reviewed), but I noticed this ticket was still open. Should I still create a new ticket for a separate review?

aprocik1 commented 1 month ago

@ajialeilani, let's use this open intake ticket. Feel free to share any relevant links or updates in a comment here. Thanks!

ajialeilani commented 1 month ago

Hi @aprocik1 here are updates to designs. I've left a couple of comments in Figma, but here are some notes as well:

Thank you! Let me know when you have an idea of when you'll be able to review.

cc @steele-lm @rubensun @fiorella-io

ajialeilani commented 1 month ago

@aprocik1 we also wanted to add that this is very much the first-iteration, MVP round of the verification experience, and we'll be taking these designs into some lightweight research following review, so there will likely be more opportunities to review post-research.

ajialeilani commented 1 month ago

@aprocik1 here's an updated Mural flow that reflects our latest design changes.

kristinoletmuskat commented 1 month ago

Hey @ajialeilani ! I left one comment on your screens re: order of section on the Your VA Dependents page.

I think the new unauth version of the Your VA Dependents makes sense coming from the email. Is that the only way users will access this particular screen?

Also, I know we talked in the past about making the Dependent object cards directly manipulatable. Have y'all considered validating that assumption with users or adding to your roadmap?

Another idea for the future (no need to block this ticket/work) is whether it would make sense to combine the front-end UI of the update/verify forms (knowing they might still need to be submitted as separate things on the back-end to get processed).

aprocik1 commented 1 month ago

@ajialeilani, I completed my review of these screens. I left my recommendations in comments and text boxes in your Figma file. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks!

kristinoletmuskat commented 3 weeks ago

@ajialeilani , wanted to see whether y'all needed any more support on this from CAIA? Or can we close out this ticket?

kristinoletmuskat commented 2 weeks ago

From @ajialeilani: We’re taking a step back to ensure we’re considering the full verification experience. I’m hoping this will be an opportunity to include some things you’ve mentioned, like manipulable cards and including verification in the larger dependent process. But in short, I think it’s safe to close this ticket and we’ll open a new one once we’re in a phase that’s ready for y’all again

@strelichl @aprocik1 I see there are still 2 open content tickets (and perhaps that second one is done?). One thought it that we could close this and close the remaining ones as 'not doing', and then just spin them up again as needed with new iterations of this work. Or, we can put this in icebox (but then we would have to remember that it's there). I'm going to unassign myself from IA for now!

ajialeilani commented 2 weeks ago

Hi @strelichl @aprocik1-

New update: We're hoping to turn around this use case exploration fairly quickly and launch a verification MVP before the end of Q2. Can we keep this open and icebox it so we don't lose the information and context?

strelichl commented 2 weeks ago

Updated this intake title to differentiate from #75068, which is general updates vs. this new dependent verification feature which will semi-digitize the 21-0538 form that requires Veterans to verify their dependents every 8 years (currently a paper form)