DCHS Insights CX Human-Centered Design @ DCHS PROTOTYPE no real data

Use it as a shared operational briefing that brings the most useful parts of PULSE—volume, trends, goals, outcomes, equity, and field learning—around one time-sensitive issue.

Read the view from the client's next deadline forward. It should first show how many affected clients need attention and where they are in the process. It should then show what happened to their benefits, whether another service was actually received, and whether food, care, housing, utility, or transportation needs remain unresolved.

Each weekly measure should answer four questions: who is counted, where they are in the journey, what changed since the last review, and who is expected to act. Measures that require more stable follow-up—such as benefit restoration, coverage-gap duration, or service receipt—can be refreshed monthly or quarterly and summarized in the weekly view when there is a meaningful signal.

Begin by publishing baselines and definitions. Add targets only after the responsible team can defend the denominator, the reporting lag, the desired direction, and the part of the result it can reasonably influence.

The first six stages show whether an affected client reaches a confirmed benefit decision with usable proof. Each benefit episode then belongs to one path: the benefit was retained or restored, or it remains lost or unresolved. Reporting both groups separately shows where continuity held and where another response is needed.

Keep the stages and outcome groups separate. A high submission rate can coexist with poor document matching or a coverage lapse. Among clients whose benefit remains lost, a referral can also fail before help is received. Showing those distinctions reveals where further investigation or an operational response belongs.

These examples make four practical questions easier to picture: who is affected and when, what outcomes clients experience, where the process can improve, and who may be getting missed. The value is in defining useful HR1 measures; the visuals simply show how those measures could become concrete and readable.

Measure prompt 01

Who is affected, and when?

Show upcoming renewals, response deadlines, unresolved proof requests, or coverage gaps over time. This helps staff see how many people may need support, when demand is likely to rise, and whether a change lasts longer than a single week.

Measures to consider

For example, plot the number of affected renewals due each week beside the number still missing a confirmed response seven days before the deadline.

Interpret carefully

Keep SNAP and Medicaid visible as separate series before presenting a combined total, because their rules, dates, and response options differ.

Measure prompt 02

What outcomes are clients experiencing?

Show whether benefits were retained without a gap, restored after a lapse, or remained lost or unresolved. For clients who need another source of help, show whether that service was actually received. Keeping these outcomes distinct makes progress and remaining harm visible.

Measures to consider

For example, compare the share of affected Medicaid clients who retained coverage without a gap with the shares restored after a gap or still without coverage at follow-up.

Interpret carefully

Define the follow-up period and reporting lag, and do not combine retained, restored, lost, and unresolved cases into one success rate.

Measure prompt 03

Where can the process improve?

Track the few process measures that most directly protect continuity, such as proof matched without a duplicate request, outreach completed before closure, or follow-up after a client accepts a referral. These measures can reveal where an otherwise promising response is falling short.

Measures to consider

For example, show the weekly share of submitted documents that were matched to the correct case without asking the client to send the same information again.

Interpret carefully

Choose measures that a named team can influence. Benefit loss and client hardship remain important outcomes, but they should not be presented as staff performance scores without careful interpretation.

Measure prompt 04

Who are we missing?

Compare completion and continuity by preferred language, communication channel, accommodation need, housing stability, benefit, or another approved grouping. This can reveal when the process works for one group but repeatedly stalls for another.

Measures to consider

For example, compare confirmed notice contact and on-time proof submission by preferred language and channel, then investigate the largest gaps with client listening.

Interpret carefully

Apply minimum-cell, suppression, and review rules before publication. Missing demographic or access data should be shown as missing rather than silently removed from the denominator.

Together, these measures can show the number of clients approaching a benefit action, how the proof process is working, what happens to benefits and services, where outcomes differ, and what staff are seeing in the field.

• Affected volume and deadlines

  Show how many clients are approaching an affected SNAP or Medicaid action, how many decisions are due this week, and how the workload is distributed across programs and teams.

  • Show how many people are approaching a renewal or response deadline.
  • Call out returned notices and unresolved contact information.
  • Count cases that still require an applicability or exemption determination.
  • Separate work due in the next 7, 14, and 30 days.

• Proof and decision funnel

  Use one shared funnel from affected status through proof and decision, with a denominator at every step so the point of loss is visible.

  • Start with the affected clients DCHS can identify.
  • Show whether requested proof was available and submitted.
  • Show whether proof was accepted without another request.
  • End with retained, lapsed, restored, and unresolved benefit outcomes.

• Continuity and client consequences

  Use follow-up signals to show when a benefits transition is affecting food, health, housing, or a client's ability to continue another service plan.

  • Track days without coverage among clients who later regain Medicaid.
  • Identify behavioral-health appointments interrupted during a coverage gap.
  • Monitor food insecurity and urgent basic-needs responses after SNAP loss.
  • Include client-reported burden, access needs, and unresolved harm.

• Alternative-service follow-through

  Use a closed-loop ladder that keeps an offered resource distinct from help the client actually received.

  • Record when an alternative was offered.
  • Distinguish client acceptance from successful provider contact.
  • Record whether an application or enrollment was completed.
  • Confirm whether the service or resource was received.

• Access and equity checks

  Compare the funnel by benefit, preferred language, communication channel, disability or accommodation need, housing stability, and other approved groupings without publishing identifiable small cells.

• One field signal for staff

  Pair the measures with one de-identified friction pattern, policy clarification, or service-capacity update that tells staff what to do differently this week.

The visual flow establishes the sequence. This table turns each stage into a measurable concept by naming its denominator and the direction that would indicate progress.

These decisions determine whether the focused view helps teams intervene or merely summarizes activity after the fact.

The data sources and definitions that have to connect before each part of the view can be trusted. System names remain deliberately general until the working group confirms the records of authority.

Metrics show where a pattern occurs. The persona, screening, and listening scenarios explain what to ask, how to respond, and what the numbers may be hiding.

Close