Deliverable Feedback Followup

[bchen10]

@katrinskaya,

Thanks for your feedback and getting us the copy we need. We've consolidated our thoughts and responses to your questions below. Feel free to reach out if you have additional questions or comments about how we move forward.

Addressing feedback:

Can we separate the people served and dispensers installed into separate rows, please - they look cramped as is. Also - in the people served graph, what is the number in parentheses (x numner of people new) - new to what? Not clear.

We intentionally positioned the charts side-by-side because the graph and map are meant to be viewed together. The unique aspect of having the two next two each other is that the data in one graphic reflects the other. In a stacked view, the correlation won't be as strong, and it's important that the user is making the connection here. We can solve for the cramped feeling by increasing the spacing between the two charts in this first section (as showed below).

The "new" means the number of new people served. To clarify this more, we will label the first number as "Total" and we'll change "new" to "a month" to give the user a better idea of new growth per month.

Despencer reliability: Still not loving it…. Can we use different colors? Put the negative below the x-axis? It’s not intuitive the way it’s configured right now.

We've provided another solution in reliability chart issue: #13. Feel free to respond with thoughts in that ticket.

Adoption rate: Can we please lose the stripes? Asked for that before - not clear why this is divided into thirds.

The stripes reflect the conversation we had at our office about DSW' good use rates. In the example below we have put labels in the shaded areas so that clarifies the sections. Incorporating these thresholds gives the user an idea of how well the adoption rate is. The averages are configurable, so you can change those numbers according to your preference.

Can you delineate when Uganda and Malawi were certified with a marker (2013 and 2014) so there is no question why there is a 0 before certification.

Yes, we’re going to add a note by each of the dates in the x-axis to show when uganda and malawi were certified.

Integration

Handoff

To ensure a smooth transition on the 30th we will need you to answer the following questions by end of day Monday:

• Is there a specific site title we should be using?
• Any text on privacy policy or legal disclaimers to include in the bottom footer?
• Is there an email you'd want us to direct people's attention towards?
• Is there anybody in the organization we should be coordinating the technical aspects of this with?

On the 30th, we will provide you with a writeup explaining how to edit the content. We will also start the process of transitioning the codebase to your Github organization, and the hosting to a Heroku account controlled by Evidence Action. Please let us know who to contact so we can organize the above actions during transition.

Let's also setup some time after the 30th to meet in person and we can do a quick run through on how to edit the contents of the site and answer any remaining questions in person.

We hope you have a lovely weekend and we're looking forward to hearing from you on Monday.

cc: @olafveerman @ascalamogna @danielfdsilva

[katrinskaya]

Hi,

1. Got you on the growth chart. I am still sure why those can not be stacked - not quite getting your logic here. Can you call me Monday to walk me through your thinking? One person is fine - does not need to be the entire team.
2. Reliablity - discussed elsewhere.
3. Adoption rate - got your logic. Problem is that poor and excellent are not really standard - anything over 20% is fabulous in the WASH sector, and especially over time. Everything over 60% over time is unheard of so it seems to me that while this context is nice for us, it's not useful for a user. It's not industry standard - there is no such thing so as is is misleading. I prefer to have those sections in the chart taken out and amend the copy to say: Adoption rates for water products tend to be quite low, especially over longer periods of time. We strive for consistently high adoption rates over 50%.
4. In regard to your questions:

Is there a specific site title we should be using? Dispensers for Safe Water Key Performance Indicators

Any text on privacy policy or legal disclaimers to include in the bottom footer? Link to this: http://www.evidenceaction.org/privacy-policy/

Is there an email you'd want us to direct people's attention towards? Info@evidenceaction.org

Is there anybody in the organization we should be coordinating the technical aspects of this with? Yes, me.

[ascalamogna]

@katrinskaya

Here's a more in-depth explanation for our reasoning behind not stacking the access chart and map on desktop. Let me know if you still have questions after this.

Stacking the charts is problematic because the slider is too far away from the map for the user to understand the correlation. The chart and map are connected by the same data and the single slider controls both of them. Separating the charts makes it difficult for the user to understand the slider is affecting the data on BOTH the map and chart.

Here are some examples of sliders being used in graphics. Notice the slider is always closely associated with the graphic it controls:

Here is an example of two connected graphics side by side. Notice that if these were stacked it would be more difficult for the user to see the correlation between the two.

Stacking the map and chart also makes the page extremely long. We need to show a larger extent of the map to give the user context when stacking. Stacking will make it difficult for the user to see all the necessary parts of this section in one screen (slider, map, chart, and date). We really have to limit the data we show if we stack it. This layout maximizes use of the space.

But, I do understand your concerns about the cramping. So I've done the following and moved the slider underneath the map and chart to allow for more space. I've added a section title to tie the whole grouping together.

We really feel this is the best way to view this graphic and the most understandable format for the user.

[katrinskaya]

Got it - thanks for the explanation.