-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
Doing design and research in the federal government
The biggest difference about being a design or research practitioner in the federal government is that best practices from the private sector are no longer optional, but often required by law. Below are the most common areas you'll need to learn about.
The federal government is legally required to make sure all digital products comply with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, which means everything we create (or buy) needs to be accessible to all users, including employees, regardless of their abilities or disabilities. Here are a few of the many available resources around accessibility practices:
- 18F’s Accessibility Guide
- Udacity Web Accessibility Training (free!)
- A11yWeekly newsletter
- Section 508 IT Community Listserv
ODDD works closely with our DOI/OS Section 508 Coordinator. They are a good contact for questions or clarification on our 508 requirements and assessment metrics.
The federal government goes to great lengths to ensure that government agencies and services aren’t creating barriers for people to access information, and that information is protected whenever it is solicited.
The law that most impacts government designers’ day-to-day work is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). It's worth investing the time to get to know this law and its nuances enough to be able to confidently clear up any misconceptions you may encounter related to its implications on user research in government. In short:
The PRA is a law designed to “maximize the practical utility of and public benefit from information collected by or for the Federal Government,” specifically to:
- Reduce burden on the public and prevent the Federal government from collecting redundant information or information that they don’t actually need to provide a service
- Make sure that the way the Federal government is collecting information to make policy is designed so that the resulting information can be used to produce meaningful, accurate statistics (think census)
- Give the public a chance to weigh in on how the government is collecting information
PRA = The federal government can’t make you fill out bad forms all willy nilly, and you get to weigh in.
In other words, the PRA is actually awesome!
— User Research Is Not Illegal, Uncle Sam, by Erie Meyer
Read this blog post in its entirely for a plain-language explainer on some of the most common misconceptions around the PRA and conducting research in government. It's written by one of the founding members of the U.S. Digital Service
The following are a few authoritative resources that provide evidence for and further explanation of the PRA exceptions and flexibilities that are relevant to the type of user research we do.
Other important restrictions we need to adhere to:
“Over a 12-month period, if you are requesting the same information from ten or more people or entities, you need PRA clearance.”
To avoid needing clearance, keep each study to 9 or fewer participants, and do not repeat that study or ask the same questions in more than one study more within a 12-month period.
These cards describe many of the methods and tools available to put human-centered design into practice. Created by 18F, the cards ensure our shared values are well documented, and they serve to help instruct future hires on how we work. Also, they are open to any and all organizations – including all federal agencies - to help employ human-centered design on their own projects.
The cards include the PRA implications for each method. The government research guidance in the lower right hand corner of the card is one of the parts that received the most attention and vetting from legal counsels. GSA and OMB attorneys reviewed these cards before we18F published them publicly.
One method card in particular is the most directly applicable to our work (but please review them all; they're great!) - Stakeholder and user interviews. No PRA implications. The PRA explicitly exempts direct observation and non-standardized conversation, 5 CFR 1320.3(h)3.
The language in this section in and of itself, and out of context, is a little wonky, but it's basically a specific sub-definition of "information" as it's applied to PRA. Emphasis ours.
(h) Information means any statement or estimate of fact or opinion, regardless of form or format, whether in numerical, graphic, or narrative form, and whether oral or maintained on paper, electronic or other media. “Information” does not generally include items in the following categories; however, OMB may determine that any specific item constitutes “information”: (3) Facts or opinions obtained through direct observation by an employee or agent of the sponsoring agency or through nonstandardized oral communication in connection with such direct observations;
This essentially says that non-standardized conversations (e.g. any sort of 1:1 interview, contextual inquiry or usability test based on a loose conversation guide) are exempt from the rules of PRA.
The language in this OIRA memo is another example of a favorable interpretation of 5 CFR 1320.3(h)3. In the last page of the memo:
Thus, when the sponsoring agency merely observes a user interacting with a digital services tool or product and at most engages in nonstandardized oral communications with the user, the facts or opinions the sponsoring agency obtains are not subject to the PRA.
M-17-06: “Policies for Federal Agency Public Websites and Digital Services”
This was an update to the policies surrounding public websites and digital services for federal agencies that was issued in Nov 2016, which is worth a read in general.
This was a 2010 memo that provides guidance on how PRA relates to social media. Much of the content of this memo has implications on our approach to recruiting user research participants.
In short, you are free to use a recruiting screener to recruit participants directly from your site, or from social media, but certain rules and restrictions apply. PRA interpretations vary by agency, so be sure to consult with ONRR’s PRA officer if you have questions.
It is our responsibility to make sure that anyone participating in our research is doing so of their own free will, and that they have enough information to make that decision responsibly.
We follow the principles in the 18F Handbook: Getting informed consent: respect, beneficence, justice.
The ODDD process for informed consent is outlined in our User Research Participant Guide.
One of our expectations as UX experts in the government is to foster trust between our agencies and the public. We are obligated to respect and protect privacy. Here are some guides and tools to help you manage PII responsibly in your design work:
- 18F Handbook: Managing Personally Identifiable Information (PII)
- What people think about before deciding to share personal information with the government, an 18F research initiative
- 18F Method Cards: Privacy
At ONRR we don’t record our research sessions, and we avoid collecting PII from our participants. Take the extra care to deidentify any collected information before storing it in Teams or sharing in a report. Each agency has different record retention policies so check with the appropriate person at ONRR or DOI on how to store or destroy interview notes.