Role
Category
Product
Timeline
Teams
Situation
Task
Action
Result
Situation: Over four months, I worked as a UX researcher with Daily Living Labs
to understand how adults with physical and or mental disabilities navigate Activities of Daily Living.
Task: The goal was to identify real barriers in daily routines and support
the development of assistive products and an AI service that guides users
toward practical, personalized solutions.
Action: I conducted foundational research including interviews, environmental audits, field visits, workshop facilitation, AI usability testing, and market validation at the Dallas Abilities Expo, documenting over 200 ADL pain points, observing 30+ participants, running usability tests with 9 users, and gathering feedback from 20+ attendees.
Result: These insights informed prototype refinement, clarified user needs, guided AI decision pathways, and established a strong research-driven foundation for future DLL assistive products.
Below is a video exploring my experience with this project and how it shaped my thinking.
Problem statement
Adults with disabilities navigating Activities of Daily Living face barriers due to inaccessible environments and solutions that fail to reflect the complexity of real home settings and diverse needs. Current assistive products and services lack personalization and practical guidance, limiting users’ ability to maintain independence and dignity in their daily routines.
Goals that guided future outcomes
Identify real-world barriers individuals with disabilities face when completing Activities of Daily Living
within home environments.
Understand how diverse abilities, routines, and environmental factors impact independence and task completion.
Inform the development of assistive products that are practical, adaptable, and usable in real home settings.
Support the creation of an AI tool that provides personalized, relevant recommendations based on individual needs.
Ensure all solutions promote independence without compromising dignity.
Approach to Research
To understand how adults with disabilities navigate Activities of Daily Living, I used a mixed-method research approach combining secondary research, environmental analysis, primary research, and research tool creation. This approach was designed to build a strong foundation, gather real-world insights, and prepare for evaluative testing in later phases.
Environmental Analysis
To understand how real home environments impact Activities of Daily Living, I conducted environmental audits with others on the research team
and created a journey map to capture where and why breakdowns occur.
Environmental Audits
conducted audits across five key home areas to identify physical barriers within real living environments.
Documented challenges such as tight spaces, unsafe surfaces, limited grab points, and storage placed out of reach
Observed how layout and furniture placement make transfers, reaching, and mobility more difficult, even when assistive devices are available
Identified the bathroom and kitchen as the highest-risk areas where unsafe workarounds frequently occur
ADL Journey Map
I created a personal ADL journey map to break down a full day of activities and identify where tasks become difficult or unsafe.
Identified 39 distinct pain points across daily routines from wake-up to bedtime
Captured moments where tasks became physically demanding, emotionally stressful, or required assistance
Used this map as a foundational framework to guide interviews, field visits, and prototype focus areas
Secondary Research
The goal was to understand how different disabilities impact Activities of Daily Living and identify opportunities for assistive support, I conducted targeted secondary research focused on conditions, existing tools, and lived experiences.
Disability Impact Mapping
I created a chart documenting 17 non–age-related disabilities that directly affect Activities of Daily Living.
Outlined each condition and its primary ADL impacts
Categorized impacts as mobility, cognitive, sensory, or mixed
Established a structured understanding of how different conditions affect independence and task completion
Used this framework to align research with users most likely to benefit from DLL’s assistive products and AI tool
Existing Assistive Products & Technologies
I reviewed 10 motion-detection and assistive technologies to understand what solutions currently exist and where gaps remain.
Identified product categories the AI could reference, including stability aids, transfer supports, adapted utensils, and hands-free grooming tools
Noted limitations such as high cost, low accessibility, and lack of adaptability across different ability levels
Social Listening
I analyzed conversations across 7 online disability communities and 6 influencers to understand lived experiences outside of structured research.
Identified recurring themes around cost, frustration with existing tools, and caregiver burnout
Observed frequent reliance on DIY solutions when formal products were inaccessible or impractical
Captured emotional and experiential insights that informed later research and design decisions
Research Tools Created
To prepare for the primary research planned in later phases, I created several tools to support participant recruitment and screening.
These tools established the structure needed to identify the right participants, guide conversations across different interview types, and reach
a broader audience for potential involvement in testing.
Screeners
What i did:
Crafted screeners to filter for relevant participants and ensure they matched the project’s focus.
Goal:
To structure conversations so that interviews consistently surfaced routines, challenges, and workarounds.
Outcome:
20 + responses with the creation of workshops
Interview Guide
What i did:
Crafted screeners to filter for relevant participants and ensure they matched the project’s focus.
Goal:
To structure conversations so that interviews consistently surfaced routines, challenges, and workarounds.
Outcome:
Became the basic structure for collegues interviews and allowed them to conduct interviews efficently and have room for personalziation for each person they talked to.
General Public Survey
What i did:
Created an interview guide to be used as the base script for formal interviews regarding the adult with a disability.
Goal:
To structure conversations so that interviews consistently surfaced routines, challenges, and workarounds.
Outcome:
20+ responses
Primary Research & Fieldwork
To understand real-world experiences with Activities of Daily Living, I conducted primary research through interviews, field visits, organizational outreach, and observational work. This phase focused on capturing lived experiences from adults with disabilities, caregivers, and program staff.
AI Tool Testing Preparation
To support evaluation of the AI tool, I assisted with survey distribution, participant screening, and early testing preparation among the general public.
Distributed AI-related surveys and screened participants for usability testing
Identified early gaps between user expectations and AI behavior; they did not understand why they were being reccomended a product that did not seem like it was for them even though the AI identified that the tool could be useful for their situation dispite it being used for something else.
Observed that users expected immediate recommendations rather than exploratory questioning
Interviews
I conducted and supported interviews to understand daily routines, caregiving dynamics, and challenges related to ADLs.
Participated in 3 interviews, including leading an interview with the head of respite at Coventry Reserve
Documented how caregivers adapt routines using personal workarounds
Identified the physical strain, emotional labor, and time demands associated with caregiving
Captured recurring ADL challenges shared across participants
Organization Outreach
I contacted 20+ organizations across North Texas to recruit participants and expand research access.
Reached caregivers, adults with disabilities, and program staff for interviews, testing, and workshops
Built relationships that supported workshop attendance and prototype testing
Expanded the diversity and relevance of the participant pool
Field Visit: Coventry Reserve
I completed a two-day overnight field visit at Coventry Reserve, observing six adult participants throughout their daily routines.
I completed a two-day overnight field visit at Coventry Reserve, observing six adult women across their daily routines. Before engaging with participants, staff provided communication guideline documents outlining how to interact respectfully and effectively with adults with disabilities. These materials explained appropriate language, tone, prompting styles, and engagement boundaries, which shaped how I conducted observations and how I interpreted behavior during the visit.
Key insights from Visit
Predictability and routine heavily influence whether ADLs succeed or require intervention.
Bathroom safety remains a significant barrier, even among participants who are considered mostly independent.
Emotional reassurance is a continuous need and directly affects the flow of ADLs.
Cognitive processing differences require step-by-step guidance, patient pacing, and clear communication.
Participants value independence deeply, often attempting tasks without equipment or assistance even when risks are present.
Staff rely on structured prompting systems, consistent language, and dignity-centered communication to maintain participant safety and autonomy.
Field Visit: Beyond Care Day Center
I conducted an additional field visit at Beyond Care Day Center to observe people in a different program environment. the goal was to Compared routines, independence levels, and support structures to those observed at Coventry Reserve, Examined how different environments shape the way ADLs are completed and supported, and Identified opportunities where simple assistive tools or environmental adjustments could improve autonomy
The adults that attend this day center deal with more behavioral challenges than at covetry. this program is state funded and does not have the resources that coventry has. The staff was limited and the need for assistance was greater. many of the particapnts there had their own needs that illimated the abiltiy of the minimal staff to make sure everyone interacts as a group. some indivdials were highly reactive and the steps to calm them down were to …..
Key insights from Visit
Predictability and routine heavily influence whether ADLs succeed or require intervention.
Bathroom safety remains a significant barrier, even among participants who are considered mostly independent.
Emotional reassurance is a continuous need and directly affects the flow of ADLs.
Cognitive processing differences require step-by-step guidance, patient pacing, and clear communication.
not all Participants value independence deeply, often attempting tasks without equipment or assistance even when risks are present.
Staff rely on structured day plans, consistent language, and dignity-centered communication to maintain participant safety and autonomy.
Overall synthesis of feild word
To understand real-world experiences with Activities of Daily Living, I conducted primary research through interviews, field visits, organizational outreach, and observational work. This phase focused on capturing lived experiences from adults with disabilities, caregivers, and program staff.
high-level insights that drive decisions
Insight 1
ADL challenges are shaped more by environment than by ability
Evidence from environmental audits + field visits
Layout, spacing, and reach consistently created barriers
Insight 2
Independence is deeply tied to emotional well-being
Observed across Coventry + Beyond Care
Users attempt tasks independently even when unsafe
Insight 3
Existing solutions fail due to lack of real-world adaptability
Secondary research + fieldwork
Tools don’t translate well into actual home environments
Insight 4
Users prioritize simple, direct solutions over complex systems
Workshop + AI testing + expo
Preference for immediate, actionable recommendations
Insight 5
Functional ability is more relevant than demographic data
AI testing + interviews
Age was not a meaningful input for personalization
Evaluation & Real-World validation
To assess how research insights translated into usable solutions, I led and supported the evaluation of both physical prototypes and a digital AI tool across structured and real-world environments. This included coordinating and facilitating a multi-prototype workshop, conducting AI usability testing, and engaging with a broader audience at the Dallas Abilities Expo to understand how solutions performed outside controlled settings.
Prototype Testing Workshop (Powered to Move)
I organized, coordinated, and facilitated a user-testing workshop at Powered to Move Gym with 11 participants across varying disability backgrounds. I was responsible for managing participant flow, preparing materials, and serving as the lead facilitator for the AI tool testing station.
Coordinated logistics including RSVP system, table setup, signage, and testing materials
Directed participants to appropriate testing stations and supported multiple teams during evaluation
Led testing for the AI tool, guiding participants through interactions while observing behavior and feedback
Supported evaluation of 6 physical prototypes and 1 digital tool in a real-world setting
AI Tool Usability Testing
I conducted usability testing for the AI tool during the workshop, serving as the lead facilitator at the testing station and guiding participants through the interaction while observing behavior, decision-making, and points of friction.
Tested the AI tool with 7 participants across varying abilities
Guided users through the flow while allowing for independent interaction and natural responses
Documented user behavior, confusion points, and expectations in real time
Key evaluation insights:
Users expected the AI to provide immediate recommendations, rather than begin with exploratory questioning
Typing created a barrier for many participants, highlighting the need for alternative input methods such as buttons or guided selections
Some prompts were unclear or felt irrelevant, requiring simpler, more direct language
Age-based questions were not meaningful; functional ability and injury level were more relevant for personalization
Market Evaluation (Dallas Abilities Expo)
To evaluate how the concept resonated beyond structured research settings, I engaged with attendees at the Dallas Abilities Expo, presenting prototypes and the AI tool concept to individuals actively seeking assistive solutions.
Spoke with 20+ attendees, including individuals with disabilities, caregivers, and accessibility professionals
Explained the purpose of the prototypes and gathered feedback on usability, relevance, and value
Observed how users responded to the concept in a real-world, market-driven environment
Key evaluation insights:
Attendees prioritized solutions that account for differences in strength, dexterity, reach, and mobility levels
The concept resonated more when framed as a “solution finder” rather than an AI tool
Many users rely on friends, family, and word-of-mouth instead of searching online for solutions
High frustration exists around the cost and accessibility of assistive tools
Users valued personalized recommendations, especially when they felt practical and easy to implement
Outcomes & Impact
The research established a clear understanding of how adults with disabilities navigate Activities of Daily Living, directly informing both physical product development and the direction of the AI tool. Insights gathered across research, fieldwork, and evaluation translated into actionable changes that improved usability, relevance, and alignment with real-world needs.
Research Outcomes
Documented 200+ ADL pain points, creating a comprehensive foundation for identifying high-impact problem areas
Observed 30+ participants across field visits, workshops, and real-world environments
Mapped ADL challenges across 17 non–age-related disabilities, supporting more inclusive and targeted design decisions
Product & Design Impact
nformed refinement of 6 physical prototypes, ensuring designs better aligned with real home environments and user capabilities
Identified the need for solutions that prioritize simplicity, adaptability, and environmental fit over complexity
Highlighted high-risk areas such as bathrooms and kitchens, guiding focus toward safer, more practical interventions
AI Tool Impact
Shifted the AI from an exploratory system to a more direct, recommendation-driven experience
Informed the need for simplified inputs, including reduced reliance on typing and clearer interaction flows
Reframed the product as a “solution finder”, improving user understanding and acceptance
Prioritized functional ability over age as a key input for personalization
AI Tool Impact
Established a research-driven foundation for future Daily Living Labs products and services
Validated that successful solutions must account for both physical and emotional aspects of independence
Reinforced the importance of designing for real-world environments, not ideal conditions
Reflection
It was an honor to be able to exist in a community that I had not much knowledge on, it shaped me more as a person and developed my skills to be bale to interact with more people in various conditions an dculture. we are all more alike than differnt.
Accessibility requires going beyond guidelines. ADA standards alone do not address real-world needs.
Environment shapes independence as much as ability. Layout, predictability, and routine all impact whether tasks can be completed independently.
Emotional needs influence ADLs. Confidence, reassurance, and communication affect how users engage with tasks.
Clear communication and respectful language matter. The way instructions are delivered directly impacts understanding and independence.
Next Steps
passing on the building blocks to the grad program of the research findings and evaluation insights, the next phase would focus on refining solutions to better align with real-world environments, user needs, and accessibility requirements.
Refine physical prototypes to better account for environmental constraints, especially in bathrooms and kitchens.
Simplify the AI tool by reducing reliance on typing and improving clarity of prompts and interactions.
Shift AI logic to prioritize functional ability over demographic inputs.
Continue testing solutions in real-world environments to ensure usability beyond controlled settings.
Further develop solutions that support both physical and emotional aspects of independence.
Key Outcomes
Text about the image
Discovery
Through detailed collaboration and iteration, we developed a solution that not only met the project goals but provided long-term strategic value for the client, delivering impact beyond launch.
Through detailed collaboration and iteration, we developed a solution that not only met the project goals but provided long-term strategic value for the client, delivering impact beyond launch.