ELMS
Case Study
Modernizing NEPA Workflows with the Enterprise Land Management System for the USDA Forest Service.
Context
The USDA Forest Service manages land across the U.S. and must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when planning projects that may impact the environment. NEPA defines three types of environmental analysis:
- Categorical Exclusion (CE)
- Environmental Assessment (EA)
- Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
Each comes with strict regulatory requirements, legal documents, and public transparency milestones. Staff were managing these processes through outdated and fragmented tools (like the eMNEPA suite and CARA), which caused:
- Confusion when selecting and managing workflows.
- Inconsistent documentation standards.
- Limited accessibility compliance (508/WCAG gaps).
- Inefficient project tracking and collaboration.
The mission: replace obsolete systems with ELMS, a unified, accessible platform that supports CE, EA, and EIS workflows end-to-end.
My Role
I joined the ELMS team as a Senior Product Designer during the alpha phase — when the product was moving beyond discovery into real-world testing.
From there, I helped shape the system through alpha ➞ beta ➞ pre-launch, focusing on:
- Scaling NEPA workflows – streamlining CE and building out EA and EIS.
- User validation – running UAT sessions with Forest Service staff and business members.
- Feature design – Admin Panel (role-based management), Feedback Mechanism, and Global Search.
- Accessibility and compliance – ensuring Section 508 + WCAG standards across workflows.
- Agile collaboration – writing design stories, testing with developers, and aligning with stakeholder needs.
Process
Mapping & Scaling Workflows
The workflows were the backbone of ELMS. Unlike most systems where you scale up complexity linearly, NEPA workflows differ significantly:
Categorical Exclusion (CE)
The most deceptively complex workflow. CE requires checking for extraordinary circumstances, making it the longest in terms of branching logic. The outcome is a FANEC (Finding of No Applicable Extraordinary Circumstance).
- Designed conditional logic (e.g., “Is a comment period applicable?”) so the workflow adapted dynamically.
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Mid-range complexity with structured steps for drafting, review, and public involvement. The outcome is a FONSI (Finding of No Significant Impact).
- Designed for handling public comment periods and integrated decision notices.
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
The most involved legally and publicly, but more linear in structure than CE. Includes objection/appeal phases and extended timelines. The outcome is a ROD (Record of Decision).
- Built support for legal notice requirements and long-form tracking.
I collaborated directly with Forest Service business members to validate these workflows against real-world processes. This ensured ELMS could handle all three analysis types end-to-end, not just as abstract diagrams but as working, usable flows.
User Acceptance Testing (UAT)
Because ELMS was in early phases, we relied on alpha and beta testing participants to validate workflows. I facilitated sessions that focused on:
Clarity of Milestones
Because NEPA projects can stretch over years, users needed a clear sense of where they were in the process. UAT tested whether milestones like Scoping or Decision Document were obvious and understandable. Feedback showed users sometimes lost context, so we refined the timeline and added cues to reinforce orientation.
Conditional Logic
Not every workflow requires the same steps, like a public comment period. We used conditional logic to show or hide milestones based on project needs. Testing confirmed the logic worked but revealed that users wanted clearer explanations, leading us to refine language and help text.
Ease of Navigation
Users needed to move smoothly through required sections while still being able to jump back and edit. UAT showed the sidebar worked well but could leave some users uncertain about context. We introduced breadcrumbs and improved labeling to balance structured guidance with flexibility.
Designing Supporting Features
Beyond workflows, ELMS needed supporting tools to function at scale. These features gave administrators oversight, staff faster access to projects, and users a direct channel for shaping improvements.
Admin Panel
Designed with role-based access controls and user management, the Admin Panel gave administrators clear delegation tools. They could assign permissions, manage accounts, and oversee system activity without relying on technical staff. This shifted control into the hands of Forest Service administrators and reduced support bottlenecks.
Global Search
Built to help staff quickly find proposals using keywords and filters across multiple criteria. Users could locate proposals regardless of assignment, pin important ones for easy access, and view all associated documentation — including final outcome documents such as FANECs, FONSIs, and RODs. This feature reduced navigation time and gave staff a more holistic view of project progress and results.
Feedback Mechanism
Introduced a persistent feedback button available across all pages. When clicked, it opened a modal form where users could submit bugs, feature requests, or general feedback. Submissions were automatically routed into the project management system, where the team could triage, refine, and prioritize items for sprints. This created a living feedback loop between Forest Service staff and the development team, ensuring the product evolved with real-world needs.
All supporting features were designed with accessibility-first principles, ensuring compliance with WCAG and Section 508.
Iteration Across Phases
I worked through three major phases of delivery.
Alpha
Clarified workflows, built early prototypes, and captured feedback through UAT.
Beta
Scaled workflows, validated Admin and Search, and refined accessibility standards.
Pre-launch
Stabilized workflows, validated conditional logic, and ensured readiness for FS-wide adoption.
This iterative approach meant every phase reduced risk — by launch, workflows and features were not only functional but validated by the people who would use them.
Impact
Delivering Clarity, Compliance, and Confidence In NEPA Workflows
ELMS was more than a system replacement — it was a modernization effort that streamlined complex workflows, supported regulatory outcomes, and gave staff the tools and confidence to manage proposals effectively. The following outcomes and takeaways capture both the tangible results and the lessons learned through design and testing.
Outcomes
The project delivered measurable improvements that supported both regulatory needs and day-to-day usability. Each workflow was tested and validated against NEPA requirements while ensuring staff could confidently move through the system.
- Validated Workflows – CE, EA, and EIS scaled and tested with outcomes supported (FANEC, FONSI, ROD).
- Milestone Clarity – Reduced staff confusion by embedding conditional logic and contextual cues.
- Accessibility Compliance – Full WCAG and Section 508 standards achieved across workflows and features.
- Supporting Features – Delivered Admin Panel, Global Search, and a built-in Feedback Mechanism.
- System Readiness – Progressed from alpha → beta → near-launch with stable, tested workflows.
Key Takeaways
From testing and refinement, several lessons stood out that shaped the product and guided design decisions moving forward. These insights reflected both the complexity of NEPA and the practical needs of Forest Service staff.
- Workflows Require Adaptability – CE branching was more complex than EA or EIS, demanding dynamic conditional logic.
- Testing Brings Hidden Issues to Light – Even with limited alpha users, UAT uncovered critical gaps like missing notices.
- Compliance and Usability Go Hand in Hand – Legal confidence and staff confidence were both essential for adoption.
