Opening Page
The analyst lands on the full U.S. map with two ways to begin: selecting a state directly from the map or searching by state, county, community, or city.
01 — Context
Context
The Interactive Map is one of the first steps in the workflow for generating the risk analysis report. Analysts use it to select the geographic boundary for their analysis, which defines which area will be included in the report. However, this selection process can be complex and not clearly explained.
I redesigned the interactive map experience to make geographic selection clearer and easier to confirm before users move forward with report generation.
02 — Problem
Problem
The existing platform was built on an ArcGIS-based application. It was robust for users with GIS expertise, but confusing for non-specialist users.
While the platform offered many advanced tools, not every user needed that level of complexity to define a geographic boundary and run an analysis. This created a steep learning curve for users who were unfamiliar with GIS tools.
The design challenge was to simplify the map-based selection workflow while still supporting the accuracy and flexibility required for hazard analysis.
03 — At a Glance
At a Glance
The redesigned workflow helps users move from an initial map view (landing) to a defined geographic selection with more clarity and flexibility.
Landing
State selection
County selection
Community selection
04 — Understanding the Problem
Understanding the Problem
To understand how users interact with the map, I reviewed existing business requirements and participated in client workshops with stakeholders who work closely with analysts.
I was able to identify three key user groups with different levels of GIS familiarity and analysis needs:
Primary
Hazard Analysts
They usually know the exact location they need, but have to go through extra steps to find it.
Secondary
Technical Specialists
They know how to use the interface, but get frustrated by how many steps it takes to do tasks they already know.
Secondary
Emergency Managers
They often handle a lot of data at once, so they need to be sure they have picked the right area before moving on.
User Needs and Goal
Select a study area quickly without needing to understand the underlying GIS data structure.
Clearly understand what is selected on the map at every point in the workflow.
Select and confirm the correct geographic area for analysis, then move on to the next step with confidence.
A complex map does not need a complex workflow. Because users were already looking at a dense map, the redesigned flow needed to reduce cognitive load by helping them focus on one action at a time.
Product Goals
-
Maintain map context — Allow users to make location decisions while keeping the selected geography visible and understandable.
-
Increase selection confidence — Make it clear what is selected, what is active, and whether the user is ready to move forward.
-
Simplify the path to selection — Reduce unnecessary hierarchy and support both guided exploration and direct search.
05 — Ideation
Ideation
To simplify the selection process, I explored multiple interaction models to understand how users could find and select jurisdictions while maintaining the map as the central element of the workflow.
-
Concept 01 — Structured Drill-Down
I first explored a structured sidebar flow using dropdowns. Starting with the State and arriving at the Census Block. This created a clear sequence, but it still depended on a rigid hierarchy and pulled too much attention away from the map.
- Depended on a rigid hierarchy
- Pulled too much attention away from the map
- Difficult to scale when users needed to select jurisdictions across different parent regions
- However, users needed a persistent side panel that showed the active jurisdiction and its relationship to the parent geography.
A side panel showing the active jurisdiction and its relationship to the parent level was definitely a keeper.
-
Concept 02 — Zoom-Based Boundary Switching
I also explored whether the map could guide the workflow by changing boundary detail based on zoom level. This felt more natural since most people are familiar with Google Maps, but it did not give users enough control to explicitly select and confirm a jurisdiction for analysis.
- Limited control over the selection process
- Users use zoom in/out for other purposes too, e.g., for a better view or faster movements.
Zoom in/out was not sufficient enough for this user cases. Users still needed a clear selection model, visible states, and a confirmation step before moving forward.
-
Concept 03 — Search-Assisted Map Selection
Finally, I explored a search approach for users who already knew the area they needed. This made it faster to get started and meant they didn’t have to click through every map layer.
- Search for a specific location or jurisdiction
- Beneficial for users who know the exact location they want to select.
Search integration showed clear potential for faster location lookup and carried into the final design as a map-integrated search bar.
Each concept had something worth carrying forward. The final design incorporates all three of these elements while addressing the visual feedback issues that none of them had fully resolved.
06 — Key Design Decisions
Key Design Decisions
Based on the concepts explored, I narrowed the final design direction to three ideas:
- Support direct lookup for known jurisdictions
- Let users switch boundary types without repeating the selection process
- Make selected areas easier to confirm.
Decision 1 - Support direct lookup for known jurisdictions
Improved search experience
For users who already knew the jurisdiction name or FIPS code, the search provided a faster path into the map flow without requiring them to manually navigate through each geographic layer.
Decision 2 - Let users choose boundary types without a strict hierarchy
Boundary selector buttons
I designed boundary selector buttons that let users select a state first, then choose a boundary type without navigating through every geographic level.
Decision 3 — Make selected areas easier to confirm
Selected-boundaries summary panel
I paired map symbology with a selected-boundaries panel so users could verify where the selected area was on the map and how it fit into the broader geographic hierarchy.
Together, these decisions shaped a map-centered workflow that enables users to find, select, and confirm geographic boundaries with less friction.
07 — Final Design
Final Design
The redesigned Interactive Map keeps the geography selection process on the map. Analysts can search for a location, select a state, switch between boundary types, and confirm their selection without leaving the map workflow.
State Selected
After selecting a state, the analyst can choose the boundary type they need: County, Community, Census Tract, or Census Block. The map updates to match the selected boundary type instead of forcing users through a fixed sequence.
Boundary Type Selected
With Virginia selected, choosing County redraws the map to show county boundaries within the state. Users can switch to another boundary type without restarting the flow.
Confirm Selection
Selecting a county highlights the active jurisdiction while dimming surrounding areas. A selection card appears next to the chosen area, showing location details and a clear option to add it to the study area.
Search entry point
For analysts who already know the the location name or jurisdiction ID, search provides a faster entry point than navigating the map manually.
Selected boundaries overview
As analysts make selections on the map, a summary panel on the right keeps track of what has been added to the study area.
The selections are organized by hierarchy, allowing users to see both the boundary level and the specific jurisdictions they selected at a glance.
Jurisdiction selector
Analysts can switch between State, County, Community, Census Tract, and Census Block boundaries without restarting the selection flow.
The selector tool reduced the need for a rigid drill-down method and gave analysts more direct control over the geographic level they wanted to analyze.
Colored Symbology
I created the palette using the U.S. Web Design System by combining unique colors with varying border thicknesses.
This helped reduce reliance on GIS-specific map patterns and made it easier to distinguish between active, selected, and available boundaries.
08 — Outcomes & Reflection
Outcomes & Reflection
The new Interactive Map Viewer gives analysts a clearer, more flexible way to define a study area before creating a risk analysis report.
-
Reduced reliance on a rigid State → County → Community drill-down flow
-
Improved visibility of selected jurisdictions through map feedback and a selected-boundaries panel
-
Supported both users who wanted guided exploration and users who already knew the jurisdiction they needed
What was delivered
Geography selection
Delivered
State selection, boundary-type switching, selected-boundaries summary, and confirmation flow.
Search integration
Presented
The search feature was presented in a final review session. The project concluded before formal approval was given from the client.
Further exploration
Explored
Improved multi-state selection, advanced search, symbology refinements, and post-selection confirmation are left as future design opportunities.
What I learned
One thing I learned from this project is that having complex and extra controls doesn’t always guarantee a better user experience. A better experience happens when things are simple and give users just enough tools to get their job done with confidence.