Research · Strategy · Service design

Making complex systems work better for people.

I use research, strategy, and systems thinking to understand what people need, where they get stuck, and why — then turn those insights into better products, services, and organizational decisions.

Healthcare
Education
Financial services
Legal services

Explore my work Get in touch

Janvi speaking on stage, gesturing as she explains an idea — Talk on design thinking, BESCY NYC, 2025

Clients and partners

In the field

Mothers, some holding babies, around tables in a room with a painted mural and a wall of sticky notes — A session with mothers and their babies, 2026

Janvi presenting a slide titled Today we will work through 3 questions to partners around a table — Three questions for the implementation session, 2026

Janvi leading a youth focus group, with young people around a table and community agreements on the wall — Leading a youth focus group in Mayfair, 2025

Janvi speaking to a group seated around a long table, with sticky notes on the walls — Facilitating the visioning session, 2025

Janvi at a wall of notes under the question: what themes do you observe across social systems? — Looking for themes across issue areas, 2025

Janvi pointing to a theory of change board on a covered porch while a team looks on — Walking the team through the boards, Oklahoma City, 2025

Janvi kneeling at the front of a large group photo in front of a striped wall — With the team at the end of a leadership session, 2024

Janvi seated at the front of a session beside a speaker and a slide titled Stages of Transformation — Co-facilitating a leadership session, 2024

Session participants reading the implementation steps on the wall, beside a screen that says We need your feedback — Getting feedback on the implementation process, 2024

Janvi and a teammate leading a discussion with seated participants — Facilitating an ideation session with prosecutors and defense attorneys, 2024

Janvi and participants standing in a circle, connected by strands of yellow yarn — A yarn-web activity at the community design session, 2023

A woman beside a long wall of sticky notes about pregnancy, from before pregnancy onward — Mapping the highs and lows of pregnancy, 2022

A community room full of mothers talking around tables — A research session with mothers, 2022

Janvi presenting to a full room of lenders and partners — Kick-off convening, Milwaukee, 2021

A session with mothers and their babies, 2026

Three questions for the implementation session, 2026

Leading a youth focus group in Mayfair, 2025

Facilitating the visioning session, 2025

Looking for themes across issue areas, 2025

Walking the team through the boards, Oklahoma City, 2025

With the team at the end of a leadership session, 2024

Co-facilitating a leadership session, 2024

Getting feedback on the implementation process, 2024

Facilitating an ideation session with prosecutors and defense attorneys, 2024

A yarn-web activity at the community design session, 2023

Mapping the highs and lows of pregnancy, 2022

Selected work

Services rarely break in one place. They break in the gaps.

Financial servicesResearch · Product strategy · Prototyping

MKE BOSS

Designing and testing a financial access platform for small business owners

Led research with entrepreneurs and lenders, tested the intake and referral experience, and translated findings into the MVP for a JPMorgan Chase-funded platform.

Read the case study →

The MKE BOSS home screen, with a business owner and the words Milwaukee BOSS

Legal servicesResearch · Co-design · Service design

For The People

Redesigning a legal reform service for wider adoption

Research across prosecutors, defense attorneys, and formerly incarcerated people to uncover competing needs and friction points across the service journey.

Read the case study →

Janvi and a teammate listening to a participant during a For The People convening at San Quentin

HealthcareResearch · Journey mapping · Service design

Mamas in Bloom, Perinatal Health Equity Initiative

Designing a maternal health program around barriers to care

Research with 100+ mothers, providers, and community partners to identify gaps in care and design the program’s first service blueprint and curriculum.

Read the case study →

A woman pointing to sticky notes on a journey wall about pregnancy, beside prompts for moments mothers felt supported and moments they felt stressed

HealthcareResearch · Strategic planning · Program evaluation

Cradle Cincinnati

Turning maternal and infant health research into a five-year strategic plan and evaluation

Research and program evaluation that helped leaders set priorities, reassess programs, and build a long-term strategy and evaluation system.

Read the case study →

Janvi leaning in at a table of mothers and providers during a co-design session

See all projects →

What people say about working with me

“No matter how messy or complex the inputs are, Janvi has this superpower of turning them into something that is desirable to engage with and easy to follow such that clients or users are actually able to act on the information.”

Sharon Lu, Lead Strategy and Design Consultant, DC Design

“Janvi was very communicative and always available to answer questions. She worked as a great lead on this project and steered us in the directions we ought to go.”

Client team member, Cradle Cincinnati

“[Janvi] can formalize the chaos that we are. Creates a strategy and executes with a calmness that belies the difficulty of the process.”

DC Design colleague, 360 review

“[Janvi] always keeps people at the center of her work, which led our team to levels of impact and outcomes we simply wouldn’t have reached otherwise.”

Troy Mosby, DC Design

How I work

I believe research should change what happens next.

What I aim to change, how I run research, and the journey maps, blueprints, and plans I make.

How I work →

About me

From a sheet-metal workshop in Mumbai to research in New York.

How I got here, and my talks and writing.

About me →

Contact

Let’s talk.

I’m looking for user research, insights, and service design roles on product and strategy teams. Based in Brooklyn, NYC.

janvipghatalia@gmail.com LinkedIn

← Selected work

Financial services · Milwaukee · 2021–2022, pilot launched 2024

Designing and testing a financial access platform for small business owners

Milwaukee had organizations offering loans, coaching, and business education. But entrepreneurs struggled to find the support that fit their needs, while lenders lacked a shared way to coordinate referrals.

I led research and product design for MKE BOSS, a digital platform that helps entrepreneurs find relevant support and gives community lenders a shared way to manage referrals.

Client: Milwaukee Small Business Continuum of Capital: three community lenders, funded by JPMorgan Chase
My role: Lead researcher, from discovery to the pilot launch. I designed every MVP screen and wrote the requirements.
Done at: DC Design, a research and strategy consultancy
Methods: Interviews · Process mapping · Think-aloud testing · Wireframes and prototypes

The MKE BOSS home page on a laptop: Milwaukee BOSS, Milwaukee’s small business portal to profits, the one-stop shop for Milwaukee’s entrepreneurs of color to find the resources they need to build, operate, scale, and sustain their small businesses — The MKE BOSS home page: one place for an owner to start, with a match to the right lender.

The challenge

Owners went from lender to lender, retelling their story each time. Many didn’t apply at all. They didn’t trust financial institutions, were afraid of loans, and were often turned down without hearing why.

The outcome

Owners answer a short intake and get matched to the right loans, coaching, and classes. Lender staff can pass an owner to a partner and see who is holding each one. The pilot launched in February 2024.

100+business owner leads in the pilot’s first six months

61%of owners seeking funding also chose business education

5renewals of the engagement, growing from $90K to $500K

01 · Research

Listened to both sides

How I researched

Method	Who and how many	Why
Interviews	10 entrepreneurs of color	To learn how they look for funding, decide whom to trust, and handle being turned down
Interviews and process mapping	13 staff at the three community lenders	To see how each lender passed owners to the others, step by step

Business owners

Many were mistrustful of financial institutions.
Many were afraid of taking on a loan.
When they were turned down, they often never heard why.

“When you apply you feel amazing, when you get denied, your chest just feels stepped on.”

Lender staff

Each lender served a different loan size, so many owners started at the wrong door.
Referrals were emails and phone calls, not logged or tracked.
Once an owner was referred, no one knew what happened next.

A step-by-step map of one lender’s referral process, from first contact to a loan decision — One lender’s referral process, mapped step by step.

02 · The gap and the opportunity

The problem wasn’t a lack of resources. It was the gap between them.

Finding 1

Owners need the right fit, not more options

More options don’t help if owners can’t identify the right one.

“I don’t have time to google anything.”

For the productGuide owners to relevant services instead of presenting a directory.

Finding 2

Money alone isn’t enough

Access to capital needs to come with business education.

“I’m still drowning financially if you are giving us money and not the education of how to use it.”

For the productInclude coaching and classes alongside financing.

Finding 3

Support has to feel personal

A referral only works when it leads to a real connection.

“Don’t refer me to an org. Refer me to a person at the organization.”

For the productMake referrals trackable and show who is responsible for the next step.

Business ownerAnswers a few questions about their business and what they need, from funding to skills.

MKE BOSSRanks lenders by best match, with classes and coaching alongside.

Lender staffGet the lead, meet the owner, and pass it to the next-best match if it isn’t a fit.

03 · Design and testing

Designed every screen, and let testing change them

I took the platform from rough flows to final screens for both sides. In May 2022 I ran think-aloud tests on the wireframes with two staff at each of the three lenders and with three business owners. Three changes mattered most.

Low-fidelity sketch of a portal page listing next steps and resources for the owner — **Low fidelity** The first sketch of an owner’s next steps.

Mid-fidelity wireframe of recommended loans and classes, each with a button to select the service — **Mid fidelity** Recommended loans and classes, ready to test.

The final recommendations screen showing the best-match loan first — **High fidelity** The best-match lender first.

1Making referrals visible

Mid-fidelity lender workspace with separate tables for incoming referrals, outgoing referrals, and clients

Final lender workspace listing incoming leads and outgoing referrals, with who sent each one and the reason for the referral

What we first designed: Lender staff saw incoming and outgoing referrals in separate tables. Nothing showed what happened after a handoff.
What we heard: “Who is holding the baton?” and “We have to figure out a good drop down system for status.”

What changed: Each lead shows who sent it and why, and the referring lender can see the status of the owner it passed on.
Why it mattered: A referral became a handoff someone owns, so owners stop getting lost between lenders.

2Respecting business experience

First version of the business stage question: five stages from seed and development to maturity

Final business stage question with two plain choices: planning and startup, or growth and expansion

What we first designed: Five textbook business stages, from “seed and development” to “maturity.”
What we heard: Lender staff said the tone made owners “feel like they’re inexperienced.” An owner warned, “You don’t want to insult a mature business or intimidate a startup.”

What changed: Two plain choices, planning and startup or growth and expansion, with experience asked in its own step, in neutral words.
Why it mattered: Owners who already distrust lenders need to feel respected on the first screen. A question that talks down to them can end the conversation.

3Reducing friction

Early sketch of a portal page asking owners to create an account to receive personalized resources

Final intake screen asking for the owner’s name and contact information, where their curated resources and recommendations will be sent

What we first designed: Owners would create an account and come back to a logged-in portal for their next steps.
What we heard: From our testing notes: “entrepreneurs are not logging in right now.”

What changed: No account needed. Owners share an email and phone number, and their matches are sent straight to them.
Why it mattered: Busy owners don’t come back to log in. Sending matches to their inbox meant they got them without an extra step.

Two smaller changes

“Client” became “Business name,” because lenders “refer to every client through business name.”
Personal questions moved to the end, with an “I don’t want to disclose” option, after an owner asked, “What if I don’t want to disclose my race/ethnicity?”

04 · Requirements and launch

Wrote the requirements and the matching logic

I turned the research into requirements for the engineering partner, wrote the matching logic, and worked with the engineers on what had to ship first.

Each lender is scored for fit, starting with loan size.
Owners see lenders ranked by best match. If a lender can’t help, the lead goes to the next-best match.
Owners who aren’t ready for a loan are pointed to classes that get them ready.

What this project taught me

Access isn’t just about whether resources exist. It’s about whether people can find them, trust them, and actually receive the support they need.

Entrepreneurs needed more than capital. They needed education, guidance, and relationships with people who could help them move forward. And the organizations providing that support needed better ways to work together.

Sometimes the most meaningful intervention isn’t creating another service. It’s connecting the resources that already exist so they can reach the people who need them.

← Selected work

Legal services · Oakland, California · 2023–2024

Redesigning a legal reform service for wider adoption

For The People (FTP) is a nonprofit that helps district attorneys’ offices use prosecutor-initiated resentencing (PIR), a law that lets prosecutors take a second look at past sentences. New offices were slow to get going, and how FTP ran the program wasn’t written down in one place.

I led research across every side of PIR, from prosecutors to people in prison, and turned it into FTP’s first services blueprint: a plan to hand the work to each new office in three rounds.

Client: For The People, Oakland, CA
My role: Project lead and lead researcher
Done at: DC Design, a research and strategy consultancy
Methods: Interviews · Observation · Journey mapping · Design session · Services blueprint · One-on-one testing

A participant pointing at the draft program steps taped along a wall while three others listen — Working through the draft blueprint, phase by phase, at the design session in February 2024.

The challenge

PIR only works when prosecutors, defense attorneys, prison staff, community groups, and the person in prison all move together. FTP did most of the work for each new office, but its know-how wasn’t written down, so offices had no clear way to take it over.

The outcome

We wrote the program down as a services blueprint that hands the work to each office in three rounds: FTP does it, then trains the office, then becomes its hotline. FTP said the work “served as a catalyst to implement/organize our process.” We also designed a guide for new FTP staff.

20interviews across seven roles, from elected DAs to people who had been in prison

10challenges mapped across PIR, from choosing cases to reentry

3rounds to hand the work from FTP to each new office

01 · Research

Listened to prosecutors, and to everyone PIR depends on

FTP asked us to focus on prosecutors. But prosecutors don’t do PIR alone, so we widened the research to everyone it depends on.

How I researched

Method	Who and how many	Why
Interviews	10 people in DA offices: 2 elected DAs, 7 prosecutors, and a paralegal	To learn what makes an office start PIR, and what slows it down
Interviews	2 people who had been in prison, 2 public defender staff, a community organization, and 5 FTP staff	To see the same process from every other side
Observation	A convening of DAs inside San Quentin	To watch prosecutors and people in prison talk face to face, which interviews alone couldn’t show

DA offices were chosen for range: traditional to progressive, champions and skeptics, in California and beyond.

District attorneys’ offices

Belief in second chances crossed political lines.
PIR competed with full caseloads, so it slipped.
Offices trusted FTP and wanted its guidance.

“I was very excited to work on [PIR], but I was scared as to its execution, because I knew it could be executed in a way that would give it a stain for years if we didn’t do it right.”
A prosecutor

Everyone else in the process

People in prison often doubted the letters were real.
Weeks of silence left them unsure where their case stood.
Partners weren’t always clear on FTP’s role.

“There was a 2 week period where I just didn’t know anything, and that was nerve-wracking.”
A formerly incarcerated person

02 · The gap and the opportunity

Every side wanted people safely home. No one had the whole map.

We mapped 10 challenges across PIR, from choosing cases to reentry. Three shaped the design:

Finding 1

Offices have to build PIR, not just do it

A new office sets up a team, systems, and partners, all while carrying full caseloads.

“You’re not just doing case work—you’re developing a unit in an organization. And nobody knows how to do that.”

For the programHand the work over in stages, on real cases, so offices learn by doing.

Finding 2

Prosecutors want to make the call themselves

They value deciding which cases to look at, how fast, and what to recommend, and they check the work.

“We wanted to verify everything was accurate... we needed the reassurance that we worked it up, that we agree, and we ourselves reviewed all the documents.”

For the programGive offices the full record and clear options, and leave the decision with them.

Finding 3

A “no” is often a “not yet”

Many decisions really meant “not right now,” but the letters people got read as final.

“What we receive is not necessarily a yes, and not necessarily a no. It’s like a not yet.”

For the programKeep the door open, with letters that encourage and reminders to look at the case again.

Journey map of the five stages of PIR for a person in prison, from not yet knowing about PIR to going home, with their feelings and words at each stage — Journey map: the five stages of PIR, as lived by the person waiting in prison. We made one for prosecutors too. Tap to see it larger.

03 · Design and testing

Wrote the program down, then tested it with the people who run it

I pieced together how PIR ran from FTP’s guide, sample agreements, and timelines, and mapped it one-on-one with FTP staff. We redesigned it with 8 current and former prosecutors and 2 defense attorneys at an in-person design session, tested it one-on-one with prosecutors who had done PIR with FTP, and finished it with FTP’s legal team.

The For The People services blueprint: three rows of 15 steps, one row for each round — The services blueprint: the same 15 steps in each of three rounds. Red points are FTP’s actions, and black points are the office’s or its partners’. Tap to see it larger.

1Handing the work over in three rounds

Before

What we first designed: One round of PIR. FTP trained the office in workshops along the way, then helped it set up to continue alone.
What we heard: Offices wanted FTP’s guidance and were wary of getting PIR wrong. In testing, some prosecutors said they needed a steady contact at FTP for questions more than more workshops.

After

What changed: Three rounds of the same 15 steps. In round 1, FTP does PIR for the office. In round 2, it trains the office as they go. In round 3, the office runs PIR, and FTP is its hotline for questions.
Why it mattered: Offices see PIR done before they do it, and they can keep going after FTP steps back.

The three phase labels from the blueprint: FTP as the executor, FTP as the trainer, and FTP as the hotline, each with a one-line description — The three rounds, as the blueprint names them.

2Letting prosecutors check the work

Before

What we first designed: FTP reviewed the cases and presented summaries to the office, with a follow-up meeting to set a deadline for decisions.
What we heard: In testing, prosecutors said they would double-check FTP’s work anyway. They wanted to know what FTP looked at and where it came from.

After

What changed: FTP shares a folder with every case file summary and support document, so the office can review the cases on its own before it decides.
Why it mattered: The decision is the prosecutor’s. Seeing the full record lets them make it with confidence.

Steps 6 and 7 of round 1 in the blueprint, including FTP setting up a folder for the office to review all case file summaries and support documents — Steps 6 and 7 in round 1, with the shared folder.

3From “no” to “not yet”

Before

What the program did: Offices told people who weren’t chosen in different ways: a generic letter, word through their lawyer or family, or nothing at all.
What we heard: Many cases were “not right now,” not never. And people in prison told us they kept their hopes low to protect themselves: “I believe it when I see it.”

After

What changed: FTP gives offices several letter templates for people “not moving forward for now,” written to encourage them to keep going. Offices choose the one that fits, and set reminders to look at those cases again.
Why it mattered: In FTP’s words: “Something as simple as a letter can have a more profound impact.”

Step 8 of round 2 in the blueprint: for people not moving forward for now, the office sets follow-up alerts and sends one of FTP’s notification templates — Step 8 in round 2, when the office takes over the letters.

Two smaller changes

Partners from the first round. In testing, a prosecutor said, “I’d want the relationships directly in round 1.” FTP now starts talking with future partners in round 1, and holds a transition meeting to connect them with the office before it steps back.
Everyone hears the outcome. If someone couldn’t attend their hearing, FTP makes sure they’re told the court’s decision, because people didn’t always hear their verdict.

04 · Handing it over

Designed a guide for new FTP staff around the blueprint

FTP’s legal team writes the content, and we designed the structure: a short intro, the blueprint, and a page for each phase and step. We tested a prototype section with a newer team member and fixed what was unclear.

“External validation that put pen to paper, showing a lot of what we experience / hold as institutional knowledge.”
For The People team, at the project closeout

“Gave us a design-thinking template for an internal guide that will help make internal processes more streamlined and accessible moving forward.”
For The People team, at the project closeout

What this project taught me

A process that lives in a few people’s heads can’t be handed over.

PIR asks prosecutors, defense attorneys, community groups, and the person in prison to move together, and each held only part of the picture. Writing the whole process down, and testing it with the people who run it, is what let FTP plan how to step back.

That’s how a good program outlasts the few people who know it by heart.

← Selected work

Healthcare · New Jersey · 2026

Designing a maternal health program around barriers to care

Mamas in Bloom offers Black mothers in New Jersey free, nurse-led support from before pregnancy through the months after birth. But not enough mothers were joining, and some who joined quietly dropped off.

I led research and service design for the program: mapping how it really ran, finding where mothers were getting lost, and turning both into a service blueprint, a curriculum, and a report for state leaders.

Client: Perinatal Health Equity Initiative (PHEI), for its Mamas in Bloom program
My role: Project lead and lead researcher
Done at: DC Design, a research and strategy consultancy
Methods: Focus groups · Intercepts · Staff interviews · Journey mapping · Service blueprint · Town hall

Two mothers, one with a toddler beside her, adding sticky notes to a long journey wall that runs from before pregnancy to after birth — Mothers mapping their journey, from before pregnancy to after birth, at a research session in 2026.

The challenge

No one knew whether mothers were turning the program down or getting lost on the way in. Inside PHEI, the program lived in people, not in process. Each staff member ran it their own way, and it was hard to show what it achieved.

The outcome

Mothers weren’t saying no. The research found 18 barriers between hearing about the program and staying in it. We wrote the program down in a service blueprint and a curriculum, and took mothers’ voices to state leaders. PHEI is now putting it into practice, starting with a cohort model to track mothers’ progress.

18barriers found, from first hearing about the program to staying in

5 of 5client team members rated the blueprint very or extremely valuable

6policy recommendations for New Jersey’s state leaders

01 · Research

Listened to mothers, and to the team running the program

How I researched

Method	Who and how many	Why
Focus groups, with journey worksheets	30+ mothers, some in the program and some never enrolled	To learn how mothers find support, and why they stay or leave. Each mother scored every stage of the program from 1 to 5.
Intercepts	Mothers at hair salons, beauty supply stores, and WIC offices	To reach mothers who would never come to a session, where they already spend time
Focus group and interviews	6 systems leaders and 2 fathers	To see the program from the people around mothers
Staff interviews and process mapping	PHEI’s team, role by role, from community health workers to clinical staff and leadership	To map how the program really ran, from first call to graduation

Every worksheet, wall, and intercept was tagged by income, ancestry, age, program status, and county, so findings could be split by group.

Mothers

Many never heard about the program, or thought it was only for breastfeeding.
“Free” sounded like a catch.
Some who signed up never knew who their specialist was, or whether they had graduated.

“I thought I owed you money for helping me, so I avoided the call.”

A teammate talking with stylists and customers inside a hair salon — Intercepts at a hair salon, where mothers already spend time.

The PHEI team and partners

Intake was booked for 45 minutes but ran 1 to 1.5 hours, with information entered twice.
There was no written standard for follow-up, so each person ran the program their own way.
Referral partners weren’t sure who qualified or how to refer, and never heard back.

“Right now, it’s very unclear to me who does what.”
A PHEI staff member

02 · The gap and the opportunity

Mothers weren’t saying no. The program was losing them.

The 18 barriers, grouped by where mothers were lost:

Before joining

She never really hears about it, or doesn’t believe it’s for her.

Signing up

She hears about it, then gets lost signing up.

Staying in

She’s in, then quietly drops off.

Finding 1

Mothers find out through people, not channels

Hearing about the program depended on who you knew, and “free” sounded like a catch.

“No, no, no, no, no. Like this can’t be free.”

For the programActivate referral partners like WIC and hospitals, and tell them what happened to every referral.

Finding 2

Signing up is where mothers get lost

The same step felt easy or impossible, depending on whether someone called back fast.

“The process felt confusing. The link just sent me to the website and it was unclear how to sign up.”

For the programGive intake one owner, a set callback time, and a warm handoff to her specialist.

Finding 3

Mothers want one person, and each other

Their top priority was someone who knows their story and shows up. Their most repeated ask was group support.

“Through MIB I didn’t receive group support, all my support was 1 on 1.”

For the programKeep one specialist with each mother, and add group support from the start.

03 · Service design

Wrote the program down, from first call to graduation

With PHEI’s team, I built three tools: a journey map in mothers’ own words, a service blueprint for how the program runs, and a curriculum of what every mother should get at each stage. The blueprint went through three rounds with staff and leadership. The curriculum added 45 changes from what mothers told us.

The Mamas in Bloom journey map: seven stages from awareness to graduation, with mothers’ positive moments above the line and negative moments below — Journey map: seven stages, from hearing about the program to graduation, with the highs and lows in mothers’ own words. Tap to see it larger.

The Mamas in Bloom service blueprint, with four phases: awareness, intake, support, and graduation — Service blueprint: who does what at each step, from awareness to graduation.

The first page of the Mamas in Bloom curriculum recommendations — Curriculum: the minimum support every mother gets at each stage.

1One owner for intake

Before

What the program did: Intake passed between roles. It was booked for 45 minutes but ran 1 to 1.5 hours, and there were no rules for handing a mother to her specialist.
What we heard: A staff member: “It’s a lot of steps. It’s a long, drawn-out thing, and I think we lose people in the process.” A mother: “I am not sure if I was ever assigned a BJS... if I didn’t reach out then I didn’t really hear from them.”

After

What changed: An intake specialist calls within 48 hours and runs a 60-minute intake. Intake isn’t done until she’s handed to her Birth Justice Specialist (BJS) and their first visit is booked.
Why it mattered: Signing up was where mothers were getting lost. Now one person owns every step until she’s settled with her specialist.

The intake phase of the blueprint, from first outreach to enrollment, including a 60-minute intake and a warm handoff to the assigned specialist — The intake phase of the blueprint, from the first call to enrollment.

2Showing up at birth

Before

What the program did: On paper, the hospital visit came 24 to 36 hours after delivery. In practice it was up to 72 hours, and staff advocated only if a mother reached out.
What we heard: Mothers’ top priority was someone who “shows up consistently, and will advocate loudly when something’s wrong.” PHEI’s leadership wanted staff to reach out first, not wait to be asked.

After

What changed: An in-hospital visit within 48 hours, with her specialist written into her birth plan so they’re told when she gives birth.
Why it mattered: Birth is when a mother most needs someone in her corner who already knows her story.

Late pregnancy and birth in the blueprint, including the specialist written into the birth plan and an in-hospital visit within 48 hours — Late pregnancy and birth in the blueprint.

3From one-on-one to group support

Before

What the program did: Support was one-on-one only, because enrollment was low.
What we heard: Group support was the most repeated ask, at every stage of the journey.

After

What changed: Mothers are grouped by due date to prepare for the hospital together, and peer community starts from the first stage.
Why it mattered: Mothers wanted to learn from each other, not only from staff.

A curriculum page with changes from the research marked NEW, including introducing peer community from the start and mental health screening from the first trimester — From the curriculum: changes that came from mothers’ research are marked [NEW].

Two smaller changes

Stage minimums replaced “use your discretion,” including mental health screening from the first trimester and a blood pressure cuff for every mother.
Graduation became a clear step, with a ceremony, three ways to exit, and a plan for support afterward, after mothers said, “I’m not sure I graduated.”

04 · Sharing back

Took what mothers said to the community and to state leaders

We brought the findings back at Black Mamas Speak, a town hall of about 70 people. Three quarters were mothers, alongside a state senator, health department staff, hospital and WIC leaders, doulas, and social workers. What they added shaped a report for New Jersey’s state leaders with six policy recommendations.

Janvi speaking into a microphone beneath a slide about mothers’ fear of dying — Sharing what mothers told us at Black Mamas Speak, August 2026.

Cover of the Black Mamas Speak report for New Jersey’s state leaders, policymakers, and funders — The report for New Jersey’s state leaders, policymakers, and funders.

Fund the delivery of coverage this state already passed
Pay doulas a rate that sustains a workforce, and require hospitals to let them in
Make being believed measurable
Fund the mothers who earn too much to qualify and too little to buy help
Classify perinatal mental health care as a medical necessity
Connect the system to what already exists, and start earlier

What this project taught me

A program can be good and still lose the people it was built for.

Mothers weren’t turning Mamas in Bloom down. They never heard about it, didn’t believe something free was real, or slipped away quietly at the start and the end. When a program lives in people instead of process, it works for whoever happens to reach the right person.

Writing it down, step by step and person by person, is how it starts to work for every mother, not just the ones who know who to call.

← Selected work

Healthcare · Hamilton County, Ohio · 2022–2024

Turning maternal and infant health research into a five-year strategic plan and evaluation

Cradle Cincinnati brings partners across Hamilton County, Ohio, together to end infant deaths. Black babies there die at about three times the rate of white babies, and Cradle needed its next five-year plan to come from Black mothers’ lives.

I led the research and strategy: listening to mothers and the people around them, writing the 2023–2027 strategic plan, and then evaluating Cradle’s programs against it.

Client: Cradle Cincinnati, Hamilton County, OH
My role: Lead researcher; led the program evaluation
Done at: DC Design, a research and strategy consultancy
Methods: Interviews · Focus groups · Video interviews · Design sessions · Community survey · Logic models · Program evaluation

Janvi leaning in at a table with session participants, beside a wall of sticky notes — A community design session in February 2023. The idea sheet on the table is a one-stop shop for resources, an idea that became the plan’s central hub strategy.

The challenge

Cradle’s last plan targeted the leading causes of infant death. Its next one had to start from what Black mothers live through, and Cradle needed to know which of its programs were helping.

The outcome

The research shaped the three goals of Cradle’s 2023–2027 plan. Then the evaluation gave three of its programs logic models and KPIs, and leadership decided to sunset 2 programs and refocus resources.

250+mothers, partners, care workers, and providers heard

13strategies ranked by mothers, families, and providers in a community survey

2programs sunset after the evaluation, with resources refocused

01 · Research

Listened to mothers, and to everyone around them

How I researched

Method	Who and how many	Why
One-on-one interviews	7 mothers who had lost a baby	To hear, in private, what led to each loss and how each mother coped
Focus groups	32 mothers, at an affordable housing community, a library, and online	To hear what pregnancy and the first year were like: what was hard, and what helped
Video interviews	Mothers short on time	So they could answer on their own schedule
Focus groups and interviews	10 fathers and partners, 9 care workers, 14 service providers, 7 Cradle staff, and 30 advisory committee members	To put mothers’ stories in context: how well the people and services around them help

We recruited hard-to-reach mothers, with attention to low-income women, and a mix of education, marital status, and insurance.

Mothers

Mothers grieving a loss struggled to find someone to talk to.
Many worried about housing, before and after birth.
Some found appointments short and rushed, with no room to share how they felt.

“I wish I could connect to other moms that could help me, and this would help me feel better. I need moral, mental, and emotional support.”
A mother

The people around them

Support existed in the county, but mothers couldn’t find it.
Partners wanted to help but didn’t know how.
Care workers were mothers’ strongest advocates.

“We know and see that moms are stressed. We do not know why.”
A service provider

02 · The gap and the opportunity

Cradle knew how babies were dying. Mothers explained why.

We grouped what we heard into four leverage points: places where a small change can shift a lot. They came down to three findings:

Finding 1

Mothers carry stress alone

Black mothers face more stress than others, and chronic stress is linked to infant death. There aren’t enough mental health services, or ones that fit them.

“I was worried about the relationship status of my baby’s daddy. Scared that I would do it alone, I was so stressed.”

For the planBuild a community-based ecosystem of support around Black birthing people.

Finding 2

Basic needs come before prenatal care

Without a ride, minutes on a phone plan, food, or housing, mothers miss appointments and lose touch with their care.

“Mothers are difficult to get a hold of on the phone call because of the plan/number of minutes. And this, at times, creates a break in their care.”

For the planMeet basic needs at every stage of pregnancy and parenthood.

Finding 3

Mothers want doctors to listen

When concerns are waved off as normal, mistrust follows mothers into later pregnancies, and some stop going to appointments.

“They will ‘it’s normal’ you to death.”

For the planExpand the medical system’s capacity to center the needs of Black birthing people.

Pregnancy journey map for Black mothers in Hamilton County, from before pregnancy to the baby’s first year, with rows for actions, moments of joy, and challenges — Journey map built from 80 Black mothers’ stories, from before pregnancy to the baby’s first year. The challenges sort into mental health, support, medical needs, and basic needs. Tap to see it larger.

03 · Strategy

Turned mothers’ stories into a five-year plan

We took these findings to three community design sessions, each built around a persona: a fictional mother whose story combined many real ones. Mothers, partners, health workers, and service providers, 31 people in all, built ideas together. Then a community survey ranked the strategies, and I wrote the 2023–2027 plan from the results.

1From causes of death to root causes

Before

What the plan did: Cradle’s 2018–2023 plan had three priorities, each tied to a leading cause of death: births before the end of the second trimester, unsafe sleep, and birth defects.
What we heard: When mothers who had lost a baby told their stories, they talked about the months before: the stress, and the help and care that weren’t there.

After

What changed: The new plan is built on what mothers told us. Its goals and strategies came out of the research and the design sessions.
Why it mattered: Causes of death say what to count. Root causes say what to change.

The strategic plan on one page: the leverage points feeding three goals, each with its objectives and strategies — The new plan on one page: three goals, with the objectives and strategies under each. Tap to see it larger.

2Letting the community rank the strategies

Before

What we first designed: 13 strategies under three directions, drawn from the research and the design sessions, with no order of importance.
What we heard: In a community survey, mothers, partners, families, care workers, health professionals, and service providers rated which strategies would help most. Mothers supporting each other came first, then postpartum support, including help with grief.

After

What changed: A ranked list. The final plan keeps 12 of the 13 strategies under three goals, including all of the community’s top five.
Why it mattered: Cradle could see what the community expected to matter most, and start with what was testable and doable in five years.

The top five strategies as ranked in the community survey, from creating spaces for mothers to support each other to reducing barriers to existing services — The community’s top five, from the research report.

04 · Program evaluation

Checked every program against the plan

With the plan launched, Cradle needed to know which programs moved it forward. I went deep on three: Queens Village, Connections, and the Learning Collaborative. I built a logic model with each program team, heard from 120 of the programs’ participants, and every two weeks walked Cradle’s team through what was working and what wasn’t. The programs were helping in ways their numbers didn’t show: participants felt seen, supported, and connected.

Queens Village’s review table: for each of four goal 1 strategies, what’s working, opportunities to grow, and a ‘How might’ question on an orange sticky note — **Queens Village**Working: Black women built a support system with each other.Not yet: groups for moms at the same stage, and formal mental health support.

Connections’ review table: the advocates strategy and the four goal 2 strategies, with what’s working, opportunities, and ‘How might’ questions — **Queens Village**Working: Black women built a support system with each other.Not yet: groups for moms at the same stage, and formal mental health support.

The Connections theory of change, from inputs and activities to short-term, intermediate, and long-term outcomes and the ultimate goal — Logic model for Connections, built with the program team: how daily work, like one-on-one client support and group classes, leads to the plan’s goals. Tap to see it larger.

3Measuring what matters

Before

What the programs did: Each program tracked its own data, from attendance to year-end surveys, kept in different places and not tied to the plan’s goals.
What we heard: A team member told us: “Don’t know how to measure if this campaign is working.” Later, program staff said the new measures felt like a lot, but doable, and asked who would collect, enter, and analyze the data.

After

What changed: Each program has two kinds of KPIs: implementation metrics, reviewed every quarter, and outcome metrics, like whether participants feel less alone, reviewed twice a year. The roadmap sets up a data team: who sends surveys, who enters data, and who analyzes it.
Why it mattered: Leadership could see which programs moved the plan forward. They decided to sunset 2 programs and refocus resources.

A laptop showing Queens Village’s evaluation framework spreadsheet, open to its outcome metrics, beside the covers of the three program workbooks and a workbook page asking how Queens Village might create village-based mental health support — Queens Village’s evaluation framework, open to its outcome metrics, beside the three program workbooks. Tap to see it larger.

The first year of the roadmap: setting up data collection, using design thinking to improve programs, and regular strategy check-ins — The roadmap’s first year. It runs to 2027, when Cradle starts its next plan.

Two smaller changes

Teams work across programs. At a one-day convening, about 25 staff worked in mixed teams across programs and used design thinking to improve them.
Each program plans its own next steps, with a workbook showing how it lines up with the plan, what is working, and what to try next.

Janvi presenting to Cradle’s team in front of a slide showing the project’s path from research to strategy to program evaluation — Walking Cradle’s team through the work, from research to strategy to evaluation, at the convening in May 2024.

What this project taught me

The hardest part wasn’t the research. It was helping Cradle Cincinnati accept how much they needed to stop doing.

Like a lot of nonprofits, they wanted to do everything: they had the mission, the funding, and the relationships to sustain a lot of programs at once, just not the bandwidth to do all of them well. Knowing what matters most to families is only half the problem. Being willing to let go of the rest is the other half, and it’s the harder one. If I could do one thing differently, I’d run an organizational capacity and bandwidth assessment much earlier, alongside the community research, not after it.

Research can tell you what’s most important. It takes a separate, honest look at the organization itself to know what it’s willing and able to change once it knows.

← Selected work

Education · National · 2025–2026

The method worked. The way in needed work.

NPBEA built an online design thinking playbook for school leaders. Before investing more, its board and funder needed to know whether leaders would use it, and what was in the way.

Client: National Policy Board for Educational Administration, funded by the Wallace Foundation, with the Stanford d.school
My role: Pilot research lead
Done at: DC Design, a research and strategy consultancy

The home screen of the playbook platform — The playbook leaders tested on their own school challenges.

What I did

Ran a 3-month pilot with about 40 school leaders, who used the playbook on real school challenges, with onboarding, testing journals, check-ins, and phase surveys.
Tracked where leaders dropped off, and asked the ones who stopped why.
Turned it into a prioritized roadmap with four costed options, for the board and the Wallace Foundation.

Out of 100 principals invited:

Made an account38

Defined a problem37

Did empathy work26

Found root causes24

Finished every phase24

Most of the drop-off came before anyone made an account, with a second drop after the first phase.

What changed

School leaders. Leaders who used it got value even from partial use. One said: “My brain is going in 15,000 directions… this helped organize my thoughts.”
NPBEA’s team. A clear picture of why leaders stopped: time, a hard first step, and unclear starting points. The value was there. The way in was the problem.
NPBEA and its funder. A prioritized roadmap, including guided onboarding to cut drop-off, with four costed options from keeping the platform running to full investment.

A testing plan board with platform screens and sticky notes listing what to learn in each phase — The test plan: what we needed to learn from leaders in each phase.

“The method works. The adoption pathway needs investment.”

From the findings for NPBEA’s board

← Selected work

Community services · East San José, California · 2025–2026

Five nonprofits, one way in for families

Five nonprofits served the same families in a neighborhood facing displacement, each with its own front door and no shared plan. Families retold their story at every door.

Client: ¡Sí Se Puede! Collective: five independent nonprofits
My role: Project lead
Done at: DC Design, a research and strategy consultancy

Two people sorting sticky notes on an end-state board — Sorting the end-state board at the visioning session, 2025.

What I did

Ran a visioning session with the five executive directors, and heard from 142 residents, staff, and system leaders through focus groups, intercepts, interviews, and journey maps.
Led 4 bilingual co-design sessions with 58 people.
Compared 5 funding and collaboration models, and built the recommendation with the Collective’s finance manager.
Wrote the Collective’s first shared five-year plan: 3 pillars, 12 strategies, and a No Wrong Door model.

142residents, staff, and system leaders heard

58people in 4 bilingual co-design sessions

12 of 12strategies with a lead organization

What changed

Families. A No Wrong Door model: one shared intake, so families tell their story once, at any of the five organizations.
Teams at five organizations. Clear lanes: a lead and a supporting organization for every strategy, chosen by the executive directors.
The Collective. Its first shared five-year plan, with a phased roadmap and agreed next steps: lane agreements, an MOU, and hiring.

Residents seated at tables during a community session — A community session in Mayfair.

A printed sheet titled Defining Lanes, with dot stickers marking lead and support organizations — Defining lanes at the implementation workshop, 2026.

The 2026 to 2030 strategic plan with three pillars — The 2026–2030 plan: 3 pillars and 12 strategies. “No Wrong Door” is strategy 1.2.

“I really appreciated her facilitation, her approach, and empathy. She came across as dependable and extremely knowledgeable.”

Sí Se Puede Collective partner

← Home

Janvi in a tan blazer, presenting in front of a flip chart — Leading the For The People design session, 2024

Hi, I’m Janvi

You don’t know what you’ve made until you watch someone use it.

I grew up in Mumbai around my family’s sheet-metal workshop, watching how things get made.

I trained as an industrial designer and found research by watching people play a board game I helped make. When I didn’t know what came next, my dad wrote me a list of what I love: knowing people, exploring places, dancing. That list brought me to New York for an MFA in Design for Social Innovation at the School of Visual Arts.

Over the past eight years, I’ve worked where research, design, and strategy meet. Five of those years were at DC Design, leading projects from discovery to implementation in healthcare, education, financial services, and legal services.

I’m a systems thinker obsessed with clarity. I’m most interested in the space between understanding a problem and making something better, where research meets decisions and different parts of a system start working together.

Outside work: I dance salsa on a performance team, take a lot of photos, and I’m learning Spanish.
Based in: Brooklyn, NYC

My journey

A little about how I got here.

Start
Born and raised in Mumbai, India.
2012–14
St. Xavier’s College
Studied psychology and sociology.
2014–18
MIT Institute of Design, Pune
Bachelor’s in industrial product design.
InternshipsAt-Tin and Future Factory, two product design studios in Mumbai
2018–19
Memesys Culture Lab
Designed SHASN, a political strategy board game, and playtested it 500+ times. It raised $339K on Kickstarter and won the IndieCade Europe 2019 Social Impact Award.
2018–19
Family business
Joined my family’s sheet-metal manufacturing company. Designed industrial workspace furniture from field research with factory workers.
2019–21
School of Visual Arts, New York
MFA in Design for Social Innovation.
InternshipsArtists’ Literacies Institute, FLOX Studio, and Blank Plate
ThesisThe Crossover, on the misrepresentation of disability in Hindi cinema
2021–26
DC Design
Lead Strategy and Design Consultant
Led research and strategy for clients in healthcare, education, financial services, and legal services. Worked with mothers, small business owners, prosecutors, and students, and with the teams who run the services they use. Also helped win new work and led the firm’s brand and marketing.
Now
Looking for my next role in user research, strategy, and service design.

Talks and writing

Where I share what I’m learning.

Talk
Design Thinking for Social Impact, BESCY NYC
Nov 2025
Post
Stop presenting research. Frame the decision.
Jul 2026
Post
How to get research participants to open up
Aug 2026
Post
How to turn research insights into something useful
Aug 2026
Post
Ask five people how a program works, get five programs
Sep 2026

← Home

How I work

I believe research should change what happens next.

I help organizations move from understanding a problem to deciding what to do differently.

Launched a new product

A matching tool I designed and tested for three community lenders in Milwaukee drew 100+ business owner leads in its first six months.

MKE BOSS

Made a service repeatable

For The People now uses the onboarding blueprint I designed to bring on new prosecutors’ offices, across 60+ jurisdictions.

For The People

Decided what to do and what to stop

My research set the priorities of Cradle Cincinnati’s five-year plan, and the evaluation I led helped leadership sunset two programs and refocus resources.

Cradle Cincinnati

Turned a pilot into a roadmap

A pilot I ran showed where school leaders dropped off and why, and gave a national education board and its funder four costed options for what comes next.

NPBEA

How I run research

Identify the most important research questions with product teams.
Choose methods based on the decisions that need to be made.
Combine qualitative insights with behavioral and performance data.
Create reusable research processes, repositories, and feedback loops.
Communicate findings early enough to influence product priorities.

What I do

I study how people navigate complex services, make decisions, and build trust.

For 8+ years, that has meant four kinds of work.

Understand people and their needs

Uncover what people need, what drives their decisions, what builds trust, and where they hit barriers. I design and lead qualitative and mixed-methods research with everyone a service touches.

Interviews
Focus groups
Surveys
Diary studies
Field research
Concept testing

Make sense of complex systems

Look beyond single touchpoints to how products, services, teams, and institutions work together. Map the experience, find where it breaks down, and spot the opportunities with the most potential.

Journey mapping
Ecosystem mapping
Service blueprints
Stakeholder research

Turn insight into solutions

Take ideas from discovery to concept, prototype, and test. Redesign the journeys, workflows, intake processes, and tools teams use to deliver a service.

Product strategy
Prototyping
Usability testing
Service design

Help organizations decide what comes next

Bring evidence into strategic decisions. Help leadership teams set priorities, allocate resources, rethink programs, align stakeholders, and turn a shared vision into a plan.

Strategic planning
Prioritization
Workshop facilitation
Evaluation frameworks

What I make

I turn what I learn into things teams keep using.

Journey maps, blueprints, screens, and plans. Tap any piece to see it larger.

Journey maps

What it’s like to go through a service, stage by stage, in people’s own words.

The Mamas in Bloom journey map, with seven program stages and mothers’ quotes above and below the line — Mamas in Bloom

The pregnancy journey map built from 80 mothers’ stories — Cradle Cincinnati

A journey map of the five stages of resentencing, as lived by the person waiting in prison — For The People

A map of the paths into medicine for Black and Native students, from the early years to residency — AAMC

Service blueprints

Who does what, front stage and back, so a team can run it.

The Mamas in Bloom service blueprint, laid out stage by stage for mothers and for staff — Mamas in Bloom

A three-phase service blueprint for For The People’s resentencing program — For The People

Screens and prototypes

Tested with the people who’ll use them, and written up for engineers.

An MKE BOSS screen asking owners to pick the stage of their business — MKE BOSS · Intake

A flow diagram of the MKE BOSS referral system between business owners and lenders — MKE BOSS · Referrals

The home page of NPBEA’s design thinking platform for school leaders — NPBEA

Plans and frameworks

What a program should change, how you’ll know, and who leads which part.

A logic model for one of Cradle Cincinnati’s programs, from inputs to the ultimate goal — Cradle Cincinnati

The Sí Se Puede Collective’s 2026 to 2030 strategic plan, in three pillars — Sí Se Puede Collective

Workbooks and illustration

Research a team works through, instead of a report they file away. I drew the illustrations.

An illustration of a student climbing stairs covered in stones, from a reflection workbook — Mission College

An illustration of two students talking, beside questions about how to check in on students — Mission College

← Selected work

Work

All projects

Newest first. Six have full case studies.

2026Mamas in BloomHealthcare
Found where a free maternal health program was losing mothers, and designed its first service blueprint. Case study
2026Sobrato PhilanthropiesConvening
Designed a day for 116 people from 83 grantee organizations, with a workbook to take home.
2025–2026Sí Se Puede CollectiveCommunity services
The first shared plan for five nonprofits in East San José, linking emergency cash support with longer-term paths to adult learning, income, and ownership. Case study
2025–2026NPBEAEducation
A three-month pilot of a design thinking platform for school leaders, and four costed options for what comes next. Case study
2023–2024For The PeopleLegal services
The onboarding model For The People uses to bring on new prosecutors’ offices. Case study
2022–2024Cradle CincinnatiHealthcare
The research behind a five-year plan, and an evaluation that helped leadership decide what to stop. Case study
2023Mission CollegeHigher education
Research with 66 students became a reflection workbook for college leaders, with illustrations I drew. I narrowed the scope from every program to four.
2021–2022MKE BOSSFinancial services
A matching tool and referral tracker for three community lenders, launched as a pilot. Case study
2021–2022AAMCMedical education
Led research with 94 students, parents, and physicians, mapped the path into medicine from middle school to residency, and sorted 37 opportunities by impact and effort. It informed AAMC’s Action Plan 4.
2021–2022RISE, Schmidt FuturesTraining
A design thinking course for 100 teenage scholars, ending in a final expo of their projects.
2021CDC FoundationHealth
Synthesis and a report from a convening of 40+ organizations working on veteran suicide prevention.
2018–2019SHASN, Memesys Culture LabProduct design
Designed and playtested a political strategy board game: 500+ playtests, $339K from 4,209 backers on Kickstarter, and the IndieCade Europe Social Impact Award.