Dam and Levee Risk Database Redesign
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) maintains structural and risk data for every dam and levee in the United States. Their legacy software (built in the 1990s) had become unusable, forcing engineers to rely on spreadsheets and offline workarounds. This created data integrity issues, duplicated datasets, and prevented accurate risk modeling.
Role: Lead UX Designer
Goal: Design and build a modern, efficient, secure system that streamlined workflows and reduced latency.
User Types
Super User
Senior Engineers running complex models
New User
Early-career engineers primarily doing data entry
Understanding the Users
The user group was small but highly specialized—civil engineers with deep domain expertise in dam and levee infrastructure.
Because my team's access was limited, research was conducted through recurring weekly meetings. Each session focused on mapping workflows, validating assumptions, and correcting misunderstandings. Over several months, we developed a comprehensive understanding of the existing system, data structures, and user needs.
Key Pain Points
1. Cumbersome Workflows & Latency
Tasks in the legacy software required excessive clicks and long load times. This made already complex workflows frustrating.
2. No Offline Capabilities
Field engineers often lost connection inside dam structures. Without offline access, they resorted to Excel, eventually abandoning the software entirely—leading to fragmented, outdated data and manual risk modeling.
Design Approach
Low-Fidelity Exploration
With limited stakeholder availability (20–30 minutes every week or two), I iterated quickly on low-fidelity concepts. Each session, I presented updated flows and screens and gathered feedback from subject-matter experts.
The initial redesign:
-
Reduced clicks per task
-
Allowed users to move between tasks without returning to the main menu
-
Introduced a cleaner, Material-UI–based structure
Stakeholder Pushback & Iteration
Mid-way through, the client became concerned that new workflows would be too unfamiliar and feared missing regulatory deadlines. Despite our team advocating for the redesign, they requested layouts closer to the legacy software.
We spent some time reworking the entire interface to mirror the old system only for the client to quickly realize the original redesign was superior. While frustrating, this validated the new design and strengthened trust going forward.
High-Fidelity & Developer Handoff
Once the client recommitted to the new design, I created high-fidelity mockups and collaborated closely with developers. Stakeholders reviewed each section to ensure alignment.
Testing & Validation
There was no budget for formal usability testing. Validation happened through:
-
Bi-weekly walkthroughs with subject-matter experts
-
Developers implementing workflows and me conducting UX QA testing
-
Realistic workflow simulations once the software was functional
Outcomes
The final product delivered:
Faster workflows
A modern and intuitive UI
Improved data integrity
Foundation for future offline capabilities
Despite being slightly over budget due to design reversals, the client was thrilled with the result and quickly adopted the new tool. After a short beta period, it moved into active use with minimal onboarding thanks to client involvement throughout the process.
What I Learned
Trust your UX research
My initial design was correct, and ultimately validated.
Advocate for your work
As a first time Lead Designer, I hesitated to push back. Now I actively guide clients through decision-making rather than defaulting to “the customer is always right.”
Educate stakeholders early
Talk to the stakeholders early about design rationale to prevent costly rework.
This experience shaped me into a more confident UX lead able to handle complex, high-stakes software projects.