Candid PDP, Barsha Maharjan

01 · The Problem

The data that made Candid different was too hard to give.

GuideStar (Legacy) → Candid Search (PDP)
This sytem existed in the legacy platform GuideStar where the fields were scattered across disconnected tools, progress was hard to track, and publishing required so many steps that users would abandon before finishing. The new PDP streamlines the entire flow with clearer structure, fewer steps to publish, and enough context throughout so nonprofits understand what they're working toward.

GuideStar legacy images

Four frictions kept surfacing across user interviews and support tickets:

GuideStar legacy, scattered fields across disconnected tools

GuideStar legacy, progress hard to track

GuideStar legacy, multi-step publish flow

Reframe: Users weren't disengaged only because the system was hard to fill out and publish, the experience gave them no reason to push through it.

02 · Research

The problem wasn't the form, it was the lack of reason to care.

We ran user interviews with nonprofit administrators before designing anything. The finding that changed everything: people weren't stuck on usability, they were missing motivation.

The brief shifted from "how do we reduce friction" to "how do we create motivation." That reframe is what made everything that followed possible.

Who I was designing for

The Nonprofit Administrator

Responsible for transparency, stretched thin

One or two people managing the org's public presence alongside many other responsibilities. The seal matters only when they understand what it signals to donors and funders.

The Small Nonprofit (<$1M)

Fundraising is survival, not strategy

The Go for Gold program gives free premium access, but only if they can find it. Discovery was as much a design problem as usability.

The Annual Returner

Already has a seal and needs to keep it

Seals expire if information isn't updated. This user returns yearly with a specific task. The design needed to surface what lapsed and make re-verification feel fast, not like starting over.

The design question

How might we make earning a Candid Seal feel like an achievement, not a chore?

Hypothesis

If we surface progress, surface stakes, and remove cross-system friction, users will treat the seal as something worth pursuing, not just something they have to do.

03 · How the design evolved

What we tested, what failed, what shipped.

The design evolved in response to what users said and did and it reshaped how I thought about motivation.

V0

Public profile as the editing surface

The first version kept editing inline on the public profile where clicking any section opened a modal window editor. The intent was to keep users oriented by letting them see their public profile and edit it in the same place.

Finding
Scope creep: The implementation was too complex for the engineering team to build within the timeline, so the editing architecture had to change.

V1

Guided Seals tour

The hypothesis was that a guided tour would reduce friction and help users move through the seal-earning process with less confusion.

Finding from usability testing
Guided Seal review banner: 4 out of 5 users did not notice this banner at all.
Guided tour: Users wanted more control over what to fill out vs a linear guided tour.

Detour · Duolingo

Looking outside the domain, what makes voluntary, hard work feel rewarding?

Between the V1 failure and the V2 explorations, I looked outside the product entirely and studied how Duolingo drives retention. Three mechanics stood out: progress is always visible, the next milestone always feels close, and streak loss creates urgency to return.

I mapped each directly onto the seal system. The completion bar triggers the near-completion effect. The field checklist makes the next step specific and actionable. The seal expiration warning mirrors streak-loss anxiety. These patterns became the foundation for everything that followed.

Duolingo retention patterns mapped to the seal system

V2

First seal panel: All four seals visible

Early explorations showed all four seals in a simple sidebar list with required fields as text. While completed fields were checkmarked, there were no progress bars or percentages to show how close users were to the next seal level.

Finding
Testing revealed the gap between current and next felt unclear. Users could see what was done, but not how much further they had to go.

First seal panel with all four seals visible, no progress yet

V3

Field-level status: Making the next step clear

Each field within a seal tier now showed a completion status: Completed, Incomplete, or Review. Users knew exactly what to act on next. The "Earn Bronze Seal" CTA appeared for the first time, giving the sidebar a clear endpoint and anchoring progress to a concrete action.

Finding
Showing all four seals at once made the sidebar too long to scroll through. Statuses on each field made the sidebar look busy and overwhelming.

Field-level status making the next step clear

V4

Getting closer: But running out of space

This version kept all four seal tiers visible at once, each showing their required fields and a CTA to earn the next seal. All seals and their fields were always in view, addressing the scroll issue from V3.

Finding
It was decided that more required fields were to be added to each tier, the sidebar couldn't contain it all. A more scalable approach was needed.

Getting closer: seal level clarity and next step

Shipped

Completion bars and sidebar checklist added

Adding percentage bars to each seal tier directly applied the near-completion effect. Users seeing 45% don't think "55% remaining." They think "I'm almost halfway there." The sidebar now showed current seal status, completion percentage, and a "See all required fields" link that expanded into a full checklist. Together, these gave users everything they needed to feel progress, understand the goal, and stay motivated to return.

Usability test validated

Users understood which seal they had and what year it was earned.
Users understood the benefit of earning a seal.
Users could clearly track their progress toward each seal level.
Users liked being able to jump directly to the field they needed to fill out.
Users liked being able to publish their changes as they filled fields out.

Final shipped experience with completion bars, seal benefits, and field checklist

04 · Design decisions

The three decisions that changed behavior.

Each choice is traceable to a research finding or a failed test you just read about. Together they transformed the experience from a form into a progression system.

01 · Visibility

Put the seals where users can always see them

In the old GuideStar flow, users had no idea what seal level they currently held while editing, that information lived elsewhere. Surfacing all four seals directly in the editing interface reframed the task from "filling out a form" to "progressing toward something."

02 · Specificity

Show exactly which fields unlock which seal

A checklist panel below the seals shows every required field with a checkmark if complete, empty if not. Users can see exactly what one action would move them forward. The path to the next level was visible for the first time.

03 · Momentum

Add a completion bar so progress feels real

Even with the checklist, users needed to feel momentum, not just see unchecked boxes. A completion percentage bar under each seal makes filling a single field visibly move the needle, applying Duolingo's near-completion effect.

· The shipped experience

What those three decisions look like, side by side.

A GuideStar profile that felt like a compliance form vs. a Candid editing surface built around earning. Same task, a fundamentally different relationship to it.

Candid PDP with seal progress and field checklist

Metric	GuideStar (before)	Candid PDP (after)	Change
Steps to publish one field update	5+ steps across 2 systems	1 step, single surface	−80% friction
Seal visibility in editing flow	Not shown: external to the form	Persistent, real-time, inline	New capability
Go for Gold discovery	Page existed but unfindable, outreach via email	1.38M eligibility checks post-launch	Surfaced from zero
Avg. publish events per active user	-	3.0 publishes per active user	Returning behavior
Unique users engaged (Jan 2025 – May 2026)	-	189K	+ scale

· In their own words

What users told us after launch.

Along with 5 star reviews, following are the user's feedbacks in their own words from the post-launch survey.