Pittsburgh Cares
Redesigned around three distinct volunteer journeys, with both returning retest participants rating the revised group-booking flow 5/5 for ease of use.
Redesigning how first-timers, corporate teams, and recurring volunteers find their way into volunteering without routing everyone through the same friction.
Role
UX Designer, solo
Timeline
6 weeks, 2026
Tools
Figma · Lovable
Platform
Web (responsive)
Team
Solo project
Project Overview
Starting with a live-site audit and three contextual conversations, I used program materials and secondary research to form proto-personas, redesign the information architecture, and test a responsive prototype through five moderated sessions and two focused retests.
01 · Context
One site, three very different people
Pittsburgh Cares routes a first-time volunteer, a corporate organizer, and a decade-long weekly volunteer through the same front door — and the same login-gated calendar before anyone sees a real opportunity.
A nonprofit needs forty people on a Saturday. A company wants a service day. A retiree wants the same Tuesday shift she's had for two years. All of it runs through one set of navigation and one set of generic calls to action. Nobody is served badly on purpose; everyone is served identically, which turns out to be the same thing.
Scope of this project
02 · Audit
What's wrong with the current site
Before defining who the site serves, I audited the live site against standard usability heuristics to find where it breaks down. Five issues came up repeatedly, and each one shaped a decision later in the redesign.
Reviewed: pittsburghcares.org
Audit Findings
01
Nine auto-rotating slides carry the site’s main messaging
The first screen is a rotating banner of nine images. Important information moves before visitors can finish reading it, with no visible way to pause the carousel or return to a previous slide.
Heuristic: User control and freedom
02
Browsing opportunities sends visitors to a different domain behind a login
The Calendar button leaves pittsburghcares.org for a Galaxy Digital subdomain with different branding and an account wall. Visitors receive no warning that they are leaving the website or that an account is required before they can browse opportunities.
Heuristic: Visibility of system status
03
Every audience is offered the same undifferentiated set of links
Seniors, corporate teams, families, recurring volunteers, and solo first-time volunteers all encounter the same equally weighted image buttons. The homepage does not help visitors identify the path that matches why they came.
Heuristic: Match between the system and the real world
04
Key numbers and labels are embedded in flat images
Statistics, button labels, and several headings are displayed as images with empty alternative text. This content cannot be resized, selected, read by a screen reader, or discovered through search.
Heuristic: Accessibility and recognition over recall
05
There is no way to filter by date, cause, or commitment
Volunteer opportunities appear in a single chronological stream. A recurring volunteer looking for one cause and a first-time volunteer searching for an available Saturday must complete the same manual scanning.
Heuristic: Flexibility and efficiency of use
Problem statement
Pittsburgh Cares routes first-time volunteers, corporate teams, and returning volunteers through the same experience and a login-gated calendar, making relevant opportunities harder to find.
03 · Empathize
Proto Persona Exercise: three groups, one undifferentiated front door
Three audience groups emerged primarily from the site audit, Pittsburgh Cares program materials, and secondary research. The informal conversations provided additional context but were not used as sufficient evidence to validate the audience categories.
These proto-personas are working hypotheses rather than research-validated personas. Their motivations, needs, and journey emotions should be tested with Pittsburgh Cares volunteers and corporate organizers before product decisions are finalized. Quotes attributed to Matt, Brooke, and Emma are illustrative, synthesized from the site audit, program materials, and secondary research rather than transcribed from a single interview.
Three user groups
First-time individual volunteer
Busy professionals who want something low-commitment but are unsure where to start.
Senior / recurring volunteer
Recurring engagement, community and social motivation, wants less digital friction.
Corporate team organizer
Needs to book a group event; cares about logistics and capacity, not personal interest-matching.
Three jobs to be done
After creating proto personas, I used Jobs to Be Done to make them more actionable and focus my final design on what actually matters to each group.
Job to be done
“When I’m thinking about volunteering, I want to explore opportunities before creating an account, so I can decide whether there’s something that fits my interests and schedule.”
What they need
- Low-commitment browsing
- Clear opportunity details
- The ability to explore before signing up
Job to be done
“When I’m organizing a volunteer event for my company, I want to quickly understand the group options and next steps, so I can confidently plan an event for my team.”
What they need
- A clear path for group volunteering
- Relevant information upfront
- An obvious way to contact Pittsburgh Cares
Job to be done
“When I already know how I want to volunteer, I want to get back to relevant opportunities quickly, so I can sign up without repeating unnecessary steps.”
What they need
- Fast access to opportunities
- Familiar navigation
- Minimal friction between discovery and signup
Competitive Audit
| Platform | Relevant pattern | Application to Pittsburgh Cares |
|---|---|---|
| PlatformIdealist / VolunteerMatch | Relevant patternRadius-based location filters and clear virtual versus in-person options | Application to Pittsburgh CaresGive volunteers visible control over distance and opportunity format |
| PlatformJustServe | Relevant patternLocation search, availability filters, map view, and upcoming-date sorting | Application to Pittsburgh CaresPair list and map views so volunteers can quickly find nearby opportunities |
| PlatformGolden | Relevant patternOpen-capacity filtering and a dedicated section explaining what participants should expect | Application to Pittsburgh CaresSurface available spots, dress code, activity level, and other practical details before signup |
| PlatformPoints of Light Engage | Relevant patternTools for creating a project, choosing dates, setting goals, and inviting participants | Application to Pittsburgh CaresConsider a lightweight path for volunteers who want to organize their own project |
What the competitive audit changed
Four platforms solving adjacent versions of the same problem. These are the patterns worth borrowing.
- ✓Map view toggle (from JustServe)
- ✓“What to expect” section on opportunity detail pages — dress code, who else will be there (from Golden)
- ✓Radius slider instead of implied distance (from Idealist)
- ✓“Only show opportunities with open spots” filter toggle
- ✓Radius slider placed near the top of the Browse page
Journey maps
Emotional arcs are inferred, not measured. Where the line dips is where the redesign has work to do.
Goal
Find a Saturday opportunity and understand what to expect before creating an account.
Primary friction
The current experience sends him to an external, login-gated calendar before he can evaluate an opportunity.
Design opportunity
Let him browse complete listings, review practical details, and decide whether a shift fits before signup.
Goal
Plan a volunteer day for 30–50 employees with clear capacity and logistics.
Primary friction
Individual-focused browsing and interest-matching tools do not answer her questions about group size, dates, accessibility, or coordination.
Design opportunity
Create a dedicated team-day path that leads with capacity, availability, logistics, and a named contact.
Goal
Review and reconfirm her usual shift with minimal effort.
Primary friction
The current experience treats every visit as a new discovery session and places repeat commitments behind unnecessary navigation and login steps.
Design opportunity
Provide a persistent “My Volunteering” area with upcoming commitments and one-action reconfirmation.
View full journey maps
Feels the Pull
Hits the Wall
Sizes It Up
Commits
Shows Up
Reflects
Feels the Pull
Does
Sees a post about a food drive and decides this is the weekend he finally does something.
Touches
Social feed, a friend's story, Google search for “volunteer Pittsburgh”
Opportunity
Hits the Wall
Does
Lands on the site and is pushed toward an account and an external login-gated calendar.
Touches
Homepage nav, third-party calendar, sign-up form
Pain point
Opportunity
Sizes It Up
Does
Finds one listing that looks plausible and tries to picture himself there.
Touches
Opportunity detail page
Pain point
Opportunity
Commits
Does
Taps “I'm In” and gives name, email, and a time slot.
Touches
RSVP form, confirmation email
Opportunity
Shows Up
Does
Arrives Saturday morning, finds the check-in table, gets a task in under five minutes.
Touches
Confirmation email, on-site check-in
Opportunity
Reflects
Does
Leaves feeling useful and open to a second shift.
Touches
Follow-up email
Opportunity
Gets the Mandate
Searches the Site
Checks Capacity
Gets Confirmation
Coordinates Team
Reports Up
Gets the Mandate
Does
Leadership asks for a team volunteer day for 30–50 people next quarter.
Touches
Internal email, calendar
Opportunity
Searches the Site
Does
Browses generic listings written for individuals and gets offered an interest quiz.
Touches
Homepage, interest quiz, listing pages
Pain point
Opportunity
Checks Capacity
Does
Emails two nonprofits to ask whether 40 people can come on the 14th.
Touches
Contact forms, email threads
Pain point
Opportunity
Gets Confirmation
Does
One nonprofit confirms date and headcount.
Touches
Booking confirmation
Opportunity
Coordinates Team
Does
Sends parking, dress code, and accessibility details to 40 employees.
Touches
Logistics packet, internal comms
Opportunity
Reports Up
Does
Compiles hours and headcount for the leadership recap.
Touches
Post-event report
Opportunity
Returns to the Site
Looks for Her Shift
Reconfirms
Shows Up
Glances Around
Returns to the Site
Does
Opens the site Thursday evening to check her Saturday shift.
Touches
Homepage on a laptop
Opportunity
Looks for Her Shift
Does
Digs past discovery modules and a re-login prompt to find one line of information.
Touches
Nav, login screen, search
Pain point
Opportunity
Reconfirms
Does
Confirms she's coming Saturday.
Touches
Reconfirm button
Opportunity
Shows Up
Does
Sorts groceries with the same crew she's known for two years.
Touches
On-site check-in
Opportunity
Glances Around
Does
Occasionally looks at a nearby opportunity if a weekend opens up.
Touches
Discover section
Opportunity
04 · Define
Defining the problem
The site's problem isn't missing features — it's a single generic path standing in for three different intentions.
The guiding How Might We
How might we design distinct paths through Pittsburgh Cares for end users, so each group reaches what they need without friction meant for someone else?
How might we let first-time volunteers see real opportunities before requiring an account, so early curiosity doesn't die at a sign-up wall?
How might we give corporate organizers a dedicated path to confirm capacity, logistics, and group size without funneling them through an individual interest quiz?
How might we give recurring volunteers a one-click way back to their usual shift, so the site stops re-selling them on volunteering every time they return?
05 · Ideate
Ideation: three lanes instead of one funnel
Rather than optimizing one shared path, I gave each intent its own route from the homepage down — then mapped what each route had to contain.
Low-fidelity wireframe
Nav, hero, and a “Where do you fit in?” block that names the entry paths in plain language.
Low-fidelity hero exploration — deliberately grayscale so the conversation stays on structure and entry paths, not color.
User flows, one per intent
Rounded box = screen · outlined block = decision · plain box = action.
- actionHas a free Saturday
- screenLanding page — browse, no account
- actionOpens an opportunity listing
- screenOpportunity detail (“What to expect” strip)
- decisionSounds doable?No → back to browsing · Yes → continue
- actionTaps “I'm In” — name, email, time slot, no account
- screenConfirmation screen
- actionShows up Saturday
- actionTold to organize a team day for 30–50
- screenLanding page
- actionClicks “Plan a Team Day”
- screenGroup-booking form — size, date range, logistics needs
- screenMatched nonprofits — capacity shown up front
- decisionA match fits her date & size?No → adjust form · Yes → select nonprofit
- actionConfirms booking
- screenConfirmation — assigned point of contact + bundled logistics
- actionShares packet with team → team attends
- screenPost-event report
- actionReports impact up to leadership
- actionOpens site before her usual Saturday shift
- screen“My Volunteering” — one click from anywhere
- decisionShift needs reconfirmation?No → view details as-is · Yes → one-click reconfirm, no re-login
- screenReconfirmation acknowledged
- actionOptionally glances at Discover (fully secondary)
- actionShows up Saturday
View supporting research · full site map
Find Opportunities
Matt's path
- “What to Expect”
- Search by Category
- Search by Location
- Skills Quiz (optional)
- Sign Up
- Success Page
Plan a Team Day
Brooke's path
- Group Size & Date Request Form
- Matched Nonprofits / Capacity
- Booking Confirmation + Point of Contact
- Logistics Packet
- Post-Event Report
My Volunteering
Emma's path
- Upcoming Shifts
- Reconfirm / Check In
- Volunteer History & Hours Logged
- Discover New Opportunities (optional)
Help & Info
Shared
- FAQ
- Accessibility Information
- Contact / Support
- Testimonials
Account
Shared
- Create Account
- Login
My Volunteering is reachable from every page via persistent nav, not just from Home.
06 · Prototype
Prototype: the principles, made clickable
I translated the three audience paths into a working responsive prototype. The five flows below show how volunteers browse opportunities, evaluate a shift, organize a team day, and manage recurring commitments.
Key flows, step by step
Captured from the live build, so the story holds even if the hosted prototype is ever unreachable.
Flow 01
Three entry paths, presented as peers
Visitors choose Find Opportunities, Plan a Team Day, or My Volunteering directly from the homepage.
Flow 02
Browsing with no account wall
Volunteers can review complete listings, dates, locations, and availability before creating an account.
Flow 03
‘What to expect’ before you commit
Opportunity pages show dress code, activity level, group size, parking, and arrival information before RSVP.
Flow 04
Team-day matches lead with capacity
Group results show which organizations can accommodate the requested headcount and date range.
Flow 05
One-click reconfirm for recurring shifts
Returning volunteers can review an upcoming commitment and reconfirm it in one action.
Try the live prototype
It's a real build, so links work and every path can be walked end to end.
Style Guide
Color, typography, and component rules used throughout the prototype.
Persona colors are load-bearing: they only appear on content owned by that persona's path, never as decoration.
Core palette
Ink
#1F2A3D
Ink Soft
#4B5768
Background
#F4F8F7
Card
#FFFFFF
Line
#DCE6E2
Persona accents
Teal — Matt
#4FA98A
Blue — Brooke
#3E7CB1
Gold — Emma
#C9963A
Lavender
#E3DBF5
Grey — shared
#7C8798
Semantic colors
Pain / Friction
#B4432E
Opportunity
#1F7A5C
Caution
#C9963A
Highlight
#8B5FBF
Type scale
Playfair Display 800
Page titles
Playfair Display 700
Section and card titles
Inter Semibold 600
Labels, tags, navigation
Inter Regular 400 — body copy at a comfortable measure with generous line height, because one persona named dense pages and small text as a pain point.
Inter Italic — quotes and captions.
Components
07 · Test
Usability testing: two paths held, one broke
Five moderated sessions on the prototype validated no-account browsing and the recurring volunteer fast lane, and concentrated almost every logged issue in the corporate group-booking form.
5
Participants
Moderated think-aloud sessions
2
Follow-up retests
Scoped to the group-booking task
3
Core tasks tested
One per job to be done
3
Changes made and retested
From 6 logged usability issues
Testing used a convenience sample of five participants. Two returned for follow-up testing limited to the group-booking task, so the results are directional. The post-event report framing and date-range helper text were implemented but not independently validated.
Results by journey
01 · First-Time Volunteer
4.8/5Average ease rating · persona: Matt
Task
Find an opportunity that fits and RSVP without creating an account.
What happened
All five participants browsed real opportunities and completed an RSVP without ever being asked to sign up. The “What to Expect” strip was praised unprompted in 4 of 5 sessions.
Friction logged
- The “See if it fits” link was mistaken for the primary CTA.
02 · Corporate Organizer
3.0/5Average ease rating · persona: Brooke
Task
Book a 30–50 person team day for a company group.
What happened
Participants recognized the group path as its own route, then stalled inside the booking form itself — the lowest-scoring task of the study, and the source of nearly every logged issue.
Friction logged
- Group size only accepted increments of 5 — hit in 3 of 3 sessions with a non-round headcount.
- No working back-navigation from deep in the flow — 3 of 3 sessions where it was attempted.
- Unclear whether the booking was confirmed, and whether the date field wanted a range or one date.
03 · Returning Volunteer
5.0/5Average ease rating · persona: Emma
Task
Reconfirm a recurring shift.
What happened
A perfect ease rating across all five sessions with no observed hesitation and no issues logged — including from the one participant, a 65-year-old weekly volunteer, who closely matched Emma's profile.
View supporting research · smaller issues logged
- The “See if it fits” link was mistaken for the primary CTA.
- “Yes, I can't make it” was read as awkward button copy.
- Participants were unsure why Sign In exists after completing tasks without it.
- An optional post-RSVP profile setup was read as required.
- A post-event impact report appeared before the event occurred (2 of 5 sessions).
08 · Solution
Five decisions that carry the redesign
Each decision traces back to a specific point of friction, and each one is visible in the live prototype.
Browse before you belong
First-time volunteers are still deciding whether an opportunity fits. Delaying account creation allows them to evaluate the commitment before the website asks for personal information.
Three doors, not one funnel
Organizers, first-time volunteers, and returning volunteers arrive with different goals. Routing by intent reduces wrong turns and removes steps meant for another audience.
The fast lane stays fast
Recurring volunteers complete a familiar, frequent task. Persistent access to upcoming commitments prevents them from repeating a discovery process they no longer need.
Practical details before commitment
Unanswered questions about clothing, parking, physical activity, and arrival create uncertainty. Presenting those details before RSVP helps volunteers decide whether a shift fits.
Capacity-first group results
Corporate organizers begin with headcount, dates, and logistics. Ranking matches by feasibility helps them evaluate options before comparing organizational missions.
09 · Learnings
From observation to iteration
Three problems from initial testing drove three changes, and two follow-up sessions retested them rather than assuming the fixes landed.
01
Organizers couldn’t enter their exact group size
What participants did
The selector limited group sizes to multiples of five. Three participants needed to enter a different headcount and were forced to round their group size up or down.
Why it mattered
Corporate organizers work with confirmed headcounts. Requiring them to enter an inaccurate number reduces confidence in the booking before it is submitted.
What changed
Replaced the fixed increments with free numeric entry, keeping the increment-of-5 buttons as optional quick-select shortcuts.
What the retests confirmed
Confirmed in both retests. Silas found the exact-entry control unprompted; Sheila entered her exact headcount of 41 without hesitating.
Still unverified: Nothing outstanding on this fix.
“definitely improved”
02
Back navigation dumped organizers out of the flow
What participants did
Three participants who tried to move backward from deep in the group-booking flow were kicked all the way out and had to restart the request from the beginning.
Why it created friction
The flow was built as one linear form with no sense of where you are in the process, so backward navigation had nowhere safe to return to.
What changed
Added a persistent step indicator and breadcrumb, so each step is a place you can return to.
What the retests confirmed
Confirmed — Silas specifically tested backward navigation at each step and it held.
Still unverified: A related change — labeling the post-event report as a sample rather than completed data — was implemented but not exercised in either retest.
“there's a back button here... every step of the way so that you can go back”
03
Confirmation didn't feel confirmed, and the date field contradicted Task 1
What participants did
Two participants finished the group-booking flow unsure whether the request had gone through. Two others were confused by the earliest/latest date-range picker after using an exact single-date picker minutes earlier.
Why it created friction
Task 1 teaches a mental model — pick one date — that Task 2 silently breaks. Paired with an ambiguous end state, the most consequential moment in the flow felt uncertain.
What changed
Added an unmistakable “Request Confirmed” state distinct from any preview screen, plus an inline hint near the date fields for organizers who already have one specific date.
What the retests confirmed
The confirmation state is verified — Silas reached a clearly labeled confirmation screen showing the point of contact.
Still unverified: The date-range helper text drew no comment in either retest, so it remains implemented but not independently confirmed.
Group-booking ease: before vs. after
The lowest-scoring task in initial testing, retested with two of the original five participants after the changes above.
| Tester | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Silas | 4/5 | 5/5 |
| Sheila | 2/5 | 5/5 |
Two participants retested this task. Silas moved from 4/5 to 5/5 and Sheila from 2/5 to 5/5, so both ended at 5/5 for ease of use. That is the full sample for this retest.
Next Steps
With another round, I would recruit corporate organizers who plan volunteer events, retest the two changes that remain unverified, and run a card sort before finalizing the navigation labels.