Turning complicated systems into accessible experiences people actually understand.
20+ years designing across visual, web, and UX — grounded in accessibility, clarity, and research that actually shapes the outcome.
Design has been my language since 2002 — with accessibility at the center of every decision, not an afterthought.
I believe good design is mostly good listening — to users, to constraints, to the people who have to live with what gets shipped. That's the thread through two decades of freelance design, a fire-safety sales floor, and now UX strategy grad school.
More about me →Design has been my language since 2002.
I've been working in design since 2002, starting out as a freelance designer and later founding my graphic design studio, Ladybug Graphics, in 2012. Over the years, I've worked with clients across a wide range of industries, designing websites, logos, and brand identities while learning how people interact with digital spaces and make decisions online.
My background includes graphic design, web design, visual effects, and 2D animation, but UX and UI design are where things really clicked for me. I enjoy thinking through how people move through systems, where things break down, and how better structure can make experiences feel clearer and easier to use.
Accessibility isn't something I add on at the end of a project. It's part of how I think about the work from the start.
That became personal for me after I experienced hearing loss and received bilateral cochlear implants in 2016. That experience changed how I navigate the world, and how I approach design.
Creating user-centered, accessible experiences has become an important part of my work. Completing the Google UX Design Professional Certificate helped sharpen that focus, and I'm currently pursuing a master's degree in Communication Management with a concentration in UX Strategy.
From friction to a guided path forward
Today
- Category labels assume clinical knowledge
- Patients guess, then second-guess
- Uncertainty pushes users to call instead
- Confirmation screens offer little reassurance
The Opportunity
- Guide users with plain-language questions
- Recommend a short, confident list of options
- Explain what happens next at every step
- Design the confirmation to build trust
A complete, tested scheduling flow
Six screens covering the full guided flow — from choosing a need through confirmation, plus a designed response for when no appointments are available.
STEP 1
STEP 2
STEP 3
STEP 4
STEP 5
SYSTEM STATETurning critique into a stronger prototype
Instructor Feedback
- Strong screen selection tied to real user goals; clear flow; supportive UX writing
- Needed: stronger visual hierarchy
- Needed: system states like empty or error states
- Needed: standardized labels and formatting
Revisions Applied
- Increased visual hierarchy on the confirmation screen
- Added dedicated confirmation and no-availability states
- Standardized card, icon, and label patterns across all screens
- Improved formatting for dates, times, and duration
Validating the design with real users
Method
3 participants, moderated remotely via Microsoft Teams. Clickable Figma prototype. ~15–20 min each.
Task 1
Schedule a medication refill appointment using the guided scheduling tool.
Task 2
Review the appointment details and confirm the visit.
All three participants completed both tasks successfully, without assistance.
Participants scanned card titles first, reinforcing the need for strong visual hierarchy.
The "Step 2 of 4" progress indicator was called out, unprompted, as reassuring.
Connecting research to design decisions
Research grounds design
Every guided question traces back to a real concern raised in interviews.
Testing validates decisions
Usability sessions confirmed what worked and surfaced what still needed to change.
Iteration builds trust
Revising based on feedback — twice — produced a stronger, more complete prototype.
Next up: a 5-day design sprint for Pioneer Health
View Next Case Study →Patients wanted reassurance, not just speed.
Waiting without updates increased anxiety
Patients wanted reassurance before they had to ask for it.
Duplicate paperwork slowed check-in
Repeated requests for the same information created friction and delays.
No visibility into wait times
Patients had no way to gauge progress through their visit.
The smallest realistic experience needed to answer the research question
Early prototype: patient intake, check-in confirmation, and live queue status
Hypothesis testing with 6 adults
| Hypothesis | Outcome |
|---|---|
| Patients want better visibility during the waiting process. | Strongly Validated |
| Queue status reduces uncertainty. | Strongly Validated |
| Mobile check-in is intuitive. | Validated |
| Virtual Queue improves the waiting experience. | Strongly Validated |
| Better communication improves confidence. | Validated |
| Clearer guidance improves usability. | Refinement Identified |
I would be thrilled if this was part of my doctor's office experience. Don't even get me started on how great this would be at Urgent Cares!
— Kylie, Usability ParticipantPioneer Pulse: a connected waiting room experience
Testing surfaced clear, actionable fixes — added confirmation after check-in, displayed wait estimates earlier, and fixed a missing "next step" button that had slipped through into the tested build.
The Strategic Proposal
Building UX From the Inside Out — a plan to make this kind of work a permanent capability at Pioneer Health.
Establish a centralized, cross-functional UX practice.
The sprint proved the concept. This proposal — written independently, drawing on the sprint as supporting evidence — makes the business case for giving Pioneer Health an ongoing capability to understand patients and design inclusive services across the full patient journey.
UX problems are system problems
01 · Patient-Centered Decisions
Traced back to what patients and frontline staff actually need.
02 · Inclusive Design
Accessibility shapes research and content from the start.
03 · Evidence Before Assumption
Ideas are tested with real patients and staff before resources are committed.
04 · Co-Creation
The people affected by a problem help shape the solution.
05 · Continuous Iteration
Launch is a checkpoint, not a finish line.
A 12-month path from foundation to scale
Who might we be excluding?
Standing question, embedded in research planning, design critique, and launch review.Next up: Locally Grown — Farm to Kitchen
View Next Case Study →Locally Grown: Farm to Kitchen
Designing content and experiences that build confidence, trust, and convenience in online grocery ordering.
Many grocery delivery apps assume experienced online shoppers.
Users may abandon orders when the process feels confusing, overwhelming, or unreliable. This case study documents my process of understanding user needs, designing trustworthy experiences, and validating solutions through usability and A/B testing.
The Goal
Help users complete orders with confidence, find meals quickly, trust substitutions, and reduce frustration.
My Role
User research, persona development, journey mapping, IA, UX writing, usability testing.
Key Insight
Users have different motivations, but all share a need for clear communication and trust.
Three personas, one shared need for guidance
Mary Holleman — The Hesitant Adopter
A retired shopper who prefers in-store shopping. Needs reassurance and confidence before completing purchases online.
Marcus Stephenson — Time-Constrained
A busy professional who values speed, convenience, and low-friction experiences.
Dawne Green — Quality-Conscious
A health-focused shopper who prioritizes transparency and product quality.
Mary's path from awareness to post-delivery
Uncertainty consistently surfaced at product selection, checkout, and order confirmation — exactly where clearer guidance could help most.
Building trust from the very first message
Written for Mary, who needs reassurance more than urgency.
- Warm, personalized greeting reduces first-touch anxiety
- Simple 3-step process: Download → Select → Enjoy
- Clear promo code incentivizes the first order
Instructor feedback, applied directly
What Changed
- Connected persona motivations directly to design decisions
- Updated IA labels to be more specific and user-friendly
- Isolated variables in A/B testing for clearer results
Why It Matters
- Strengthens user-centered design and intentional alignment
- Users find what they need faster, reducing cognitive load
- Provides more reliable data on what influences behavior