Carrot Fertility provides a B2B2C product which gives members inclusive options for forming a family.

I worked on the financial team which help fund member-facing medical services such as IVF, gestational surrogacy, and adoption. Simultaneously, I also worked on the admin internal tool that helped the payments team process member medical insurance claims.

I would have to balance addressing the needs and pain point of...

  • Patients in the member facing portal
  • Internal users in our admin tool

I initially lead our team through some extensive user research in order to define this project and roadmap priorities for FY2025.

(This was important since this team had never worked with a designated Product Designer)

I roped in my Product Manager partner into my research from the start, I did this not only to provide transparency but also to get early buy-in on implementing design initiated work as part of our roadmap work.


My role

Lead Product Designer & Researcher

my partners

Product Manager
Content Designer
Payments team

The Problem

Patients who are in the process of forming their family need access to an intuitive process for financially funding their ambiguous and emotional journey(s).

Internal users who process patient expenses, want to efficiently review claims in order to hit their daily metrics.

User research

The team I joined had never worked with a Product Designer, therefore there was no prior documentation/data points on our users or their experience in our financial ecosystem.

That is why I started off by leading a user research plan that informed this project to better identify both users needs and current pain points.

I broke down the research plan into 2 segments:

  • First focused on the internal users and the admin portal
  • Then focused on patients and the member portal

For both research segments, I started out by collecting qualitative data through user interviews with 5 payments team members and patients.

I did this to set a base understanding of current navigation and obstacles.

Then I worked with the BI data team to collect dashboard quantitative data from ~10,000 members. Focused on identifying patterns and mistake around their behavior when submitting claims.

Key insights

Over 78% of denied expenses are denied due to missing documentation. Therefore, we need to better educate members about the documents they need to submit before they submit expenses in order to reduce the number of denied expenses.

Over 3,000 of expenses are denied every quarter. Since we know now that the most common reason for denied expenses is missing documentation, we need to provide both patients and payments team a direct way to follow up on and correct already submitted claims.

In interviews conducted, both users expressed frustration in having to resubmit entirely new claims when current claims are missing information for approval.

Claim processors spend about 2.5 hours of their daily time reviewing all of a member's previous expenses to identifying any conditional member exceptions. Every claims processor review over 50 expenses a day and spend an average of 3 mins per claim reviewing previously submitted member claims for individual member exceptions.

Therefore, we need to provide them with a way to reduce the amount of time they spend researching individual member expenses. The payment team performance is measured by number of reviewed claims per day. In order to increase efficiency and reduce time spent per claim we need to give internal users a way to view member claim history across all expenses.

Solution #1: educating patients

In order to address the member and payment's team pain points I broke solutions off into 3 smaller design/solution projects.

Starting off with reducing poorly member submitted claims, I worked with my content designer in creating a preventative barrier for incorrect claims at the beginning of the member reimbursement flow.

Before patients submit their medical claims to our team, they will review content that educates them on the exact documentation needed for their journey type to prevent bad claim submission.

Solution #2: allowing resubmissions

While the first solutions support prevention of poorly submitted claims, the product manager and I brainstormed a new workflow for allowing members to directly upload additional documentation to already submitted claims that will notify payments team in our internal tool.

Solution #3: access to right information

I worked closely with the payments leadership team to brainstorm a solution for providing their team access to the right member information across all expenses. This would help the team reduce the time they spent reviewing each claim.

ensuring accessibility in handoff

Before handing off designs, I knew WCAG compliance was a priority for our entire UX team so I went ahead and documented HTML semantics and created a11y annotations with the design systems team.

Post handoff, I continued collaborating with engineers to ensure the implementation was true to our designs and all edge cases had been accounted for in our design files.


Decreased number of total denied expense by 64% saving costs for both patients and internal team.

Reduced daily average time internal team's reviewing claims by 2 hours/day.

Eliminated painful member pain point of submitting new claims due to missing information.

Deliverables: Member account

Deliverables: Internal admin tool

Moving forward

Balancing internal and external user needs

Although the pain points and needs of external and internal users intersect, in order to help me holistically identify and address all the needs I strategically segmented this project into 2 separate sections to help my team better digest the amount of work we would take on.

Being a proactive thought partner in creating team roadmap

This was my first time bringing in non-UX team members into the early user research stage. However, bringing in the Product manager early on allowed the both of us to sync on feature priority. Although I lead the entire design plan, I kept interview sessions open to both PM and engineers for transparency on how I was assessing UX priorities.

Listening to what a user wants vs. what they need

When dealing with having member walk through their frustrations, I found that often times they try to solution and propose 'ideal ux features'. However, some of the proposed solutions were either technically infeasible to implement or not scalable to the platform's ecosystem. Therefore, I'd focus on identifying the core of the problem rather than proposed ideas in order to find an optimal solution.