Designing a Better 'Federal IT Dashboard'
By Zach Gemignani
July 29, 2010
Find more about:
dashboard
We were thrilled when we first found out that the Federal IT Dashboard had incorporated our JuiceKit treemap. A year later, the dashboard has been relaunched:
U.S. CIO Vivek Kundra relaunched a IT Dashboard today, and, well, the thing almost makes navigating federal tech spending data fun. Kundra told Politico's Morning Tech that the inspiration for the redesign are online tools people might use to navigate their stock portfolios. The new dashboard offers up more data on spending on more than 7,000 federal IT projects
The first time around, it was awesome to see transparency and visualization brought to the federal government. This time, some of the excitement has worn off and we're going to use it as a case study for "opportunities" to design a better dashboard. There are five areas where it can be significantly improved:
- Message
- Flow
- Charts
- Context
- Design fundamentals
(Not coincidentally, these are the types of areas we cover in our Viva Visualization Tour. Next up, Boston August 25th.)
Part 1: Message
The information designer is responsible for presenting the data in a way that the message is delivered in a clear and understandable way. If the data is left to speak for itself, users can be left confused or frustrated. And in all likelihood they won't to see the full value of the data. That's particularly tough for this Federal IT Dashboard where a huge amount of effort has been put into gathering consistent data across agencies.
The goal of this dashboard is clearly stated on the landing page:
“The purpose of the Dashboard is to provide information on the effectiveness of government IT programs and to support decisions regarding the investment and management of resources.”
They want to answer a couple fundamental questions: Where is money being spent on IT projects? How effective are those projects being managed? Unfortunately the data isn't presented in a way that novice users can quickly answer those questions. Instead the dashboard raises more questions than it answers. For example:

A giant chunk of overall spending goes to the Department of Defense. But how big are these numbers? How are they changing?

Pie charts show that something is mostly green--but not entirely. What does this represent? How should I feel about mostly-green performance?

The three ratings lines are converging around 7.5. What are these numbers and what is driving the trends?
We took the liberty of sketching up a revised dashboard that would more effectively talk to the message of IT program cost and performance. Our dashboard has two primary views, spending and performance.
IT Spending. Where is the money going? Here we have highlighted the top spending agencies and those that are seeing the greatest increases in spending. The line chart on the right shows the trend in spending for any selected Agency. In this way, a user can click on items that they are interested in and immediately see what has happened over time. Labeling also matters. We included titles that would be easy for the first-time user to understand.

Performance. How effectively are the projects being delivered? In this view, we have included something we call a "Spike Chart"; it is a specialized version of a Parallel Coordinates Chart. The Spike Chart allows you to track the performance of the same entities (i.e. Agencies) across multiple performance criteria. The chart will quickly reveal which Agencies bubble to the top (or the bottom) and how they perform across different evaluation criteria.

Within each view, we would let people see the data either by Agency or Investment. In both cases, the resulting visuals are focused on showing which entities are spending/performing the best/worst--and how are the values changing.
There is a ton more functionality embedded in the Kundra's IT Dashboard, but we'd argue for hiding that away until the user has understood the most important and/or interesting information. Then they can drill down into the specifics of a project or organization.
If you're interested in learning more about how to design better dashboards, check out our white paper Designing Dashboards People Love to Use.





5 comments
Andy Kirk said:
Good work Zach/Juice - in my article http://www.visualisingdata.com/index.php/2010/07/still-awaiting-tuftes-influence/ I picked up on some the dashboard components you have critiqued here also.
Cheers
datakid said:
Good one.You might be interested to take a look at the collection of Tutorials and videos on Data mining.
Tutorials: http://www.dataminingtools.net/browsetutorials.php
Videos: http://www.dataminingtools.net/browse.php
paresh said:
Always an interesting exercise [I always try to keep in mind the effort that has gone in to bring it to the current level]. Certain observations on your version of the dashboard,
a. I believe it would be useful if the percentage change in spending corresponds to the line of actual expenditure - We know DOD spending are the highest but what about the change - [after going through the numbers it is less than 0.3%.]. The change possibly need not be sorted to make it easier to assess the % change.
b. I am confused regarding the spike chart. All the points are above the average. Possibly the color [ blue/grey] indicates the assessment - then the distribution of dots is not clear. I presume the use of Red/yellow and green in the original dashboard was to indicate the three levels - "normal", "needs attention" ... - how are these indicated in the spike chart?
Incidentally, really enjoyed reading your white paper.
John said:
Can anyone tell me the supplier who build/designed the dashboard? Thanks.
Zach said:
@John: Here's a good place to start for the vendor who build/designed the dashboard. http://it.usaspending.gov/?q=content/contracts&buscid=622
@paresh: I appreciate that there is a lot of effort and pressures that result in the final dashboard that we see.
Your first point about lining up the change values with the spending values is a great one. It would be a nice feature if two columns could be linked by Agency then sorted by one column or the other.
The spike chart can either show only those Agencies above the average or only those below (leaders v. laggards). The "best or worst" toggle in the header would allow the user to flip between these views. I didn't make that very clear. In addition, the user can select a single Agency (shown in blue) and see where it shows up along the various columns. The three colors/metrics that you mention are selections just below the title. Again, I didn't do a great job of explaining all this functionality. We're looking to put together a spike chart demo that would display all these interactions. It is really quite cool.
said:
Add a comment