ECE County Customer Portal

The existing portal reflected the system’s structure rather than an administrator’s priorities. Its home screen was a branded list of site names. Administrators could see which sites they had, but not how many learners were active, what coursework was getting done, how many seats remained or where reports lived.

The redesign reverses that hierarchy. The home view leads with the health of the whole subscription: active sites, learners, courses completed and course hours, with reports one step away. Each site then opens into the people and actions inside it: seats and subscription dates, site reports, active, pending and inactive users, and the controls to add users or assign courses. The resulting hierarchy moves from subscription → to site → to person, with the actions and information relevant to each level.

Customer identity needed to vary without creating customer-specific products. Each county or state needed a portal that was recognizably theirs without changing the underlying product model.

That meant defining customization as data and identity, not creating a different product for every customer. What changes from one organization to the next is its name and identity, its sites, its learners and its subscription. What stays the same is the information hierarchy, navigation, summary patterns, reporting and user management. Administrators get a portal that feels like their own, and a new customer doesn’t require a new product.

The conventional delivery path was already incompatible with the deadline. An outside design and development estimate came in around $20K, with delivery projected two to three months late.

The alternative was a different delivery model. Working with Engineering, I helped establish an AI-assisted workflow where the design deliverable was a functional Figma Make prototype rather than a set of static screens.

Discovery, design, and the working prototype took the first week. Final refinement and handoff took the second. Because the prototype included usable code, Engineering could carry that work into implementation. The prototype became a bridge into production rather than a conventional design handoff, with Engineering building the production portal from there.