The End of the Paper Trail · Yunlei Shen

The End of the Paper Trail

9 min readShipped

Veteran Benefits Guide runs disability claims for veterans, and ran them entirely on paper. Every claim moved at the speed of a staff member carrying it. I led the design of the platform that took the whole thing online, and cut processing time nearly in half.

Product

VBG Portal

My role

Product Designer

Timeline

2025 – 2026

Scope

End-to-end claim filing, 0→1

CONTEXT

One designer, a paper business, fourteen months

VBG had been operating for years with over two hundred employees when the paper process stopped being a quirk and became the ceiling: every claim needed a staff member at every step, so serving more veterans meant hiring more people. Going digital was a company-level initiative, and our product team owned it.

I joined that team as the company's first in-house product designer, which meant no design research to inherit, no process to point at, and a fourteen-month runway to build both the product and the case for how it should be built.

Owned

ResearchIA & flowsUI designQA through launch

Partnered on

PM & engineeringOps leadMedical consultant

Constraint

Not mine: the backend claim engine, and the VA requirements I designed within.

Problem · Discovery

Four frictions that kept veterans dependent on staff

There was no research to inherit. The first month was fieldwork: I sat with every role that touches a claim and shadowed live veteran calls. Four frictions shaped everything that followed:

01documents

Days lost to paperwork

Requests for more documents after submission restarted the wait.

02forms

Disability Benefits Questionnaires too confusing to finish alone

Veterans leaned on case managers and revised them repeatedly.

03scheduling

No control over evaluations

Every scheduling change routed through a coordination team.

04status

Zero visibility into claim status

The only option was calling customer service.

Strategy

Three ways off paper, and why we took the slowest one

“Go digital” is not one decision; it is a fork. We weighed three paths:

A Ruled out

Digitize the forms

E-forms and e-signatures bolted onto the existing process. Cheapest, live in weeks — but staff still carry every step.

Removes the paper, not the ceiling.

B Ruled out

Configure an off-the-shelf case portal

Faster than building, but nothing on the market modeled VA claim logic or could turn a DBQ into a guided flow.

Bends the business around the tool — again.

C Chosen

Build a portal designed around self-service

Slowest of the three, and the only one that attacks the actual constraint: veterans depending on staff for every move.

Fourteen months, and the ceiling comes down.

Process 01: Straighten the path

Compress the journey to seven legible steps

The map made the diagnosis obvious: most of the eighteen touchpoints existed to move paper between desks, not to serve the veteran. That became the cut rule: a step survives only if the veteran needs it, not if the paper does.

Before: manual process, 18 touchpoints

veteran pain point eliminated
Veteran walk in / call in Meet with intake specialist Provide personal info Provide military info Provide disability info Provide initial documents Case manager initial review Complete mini Disability Benefits Questionnaires Underwriter review Case review specialist review Claim final review call VBG schedules evaluation Complete evaluation CRS review completed Sign additional documents File sent to VA Receive decision letter Pay invoice
consolidated ↓

After: VBG Portal, 7 digital steps

1

Sign up

merges 2 steps

2

Guided questionnaires

no more phone calls

3

Documents checklist

self-correcting

4

Schedule evaluation

self-serve

5

Complete evaluation

6

Sign additional documents

7

Receive decision letter & pay invoice

merges 2 steps

Each eliminated step was a negotiation with ops about which reviews protected veterans and which protected habits.
Six staff-only review steps eliminated; every remaining step became self-serve.

Process 02: Build the spine

A dashboard framework that scales with the process

Seven steps needed a predictable structure. I tested two opposite frameworks, total transparency versus total focus, and shipped the combination.

Explored · set aside

The all-tasks checklist

Veterans called it informative and overwhelming in the same breath — that contradiction was the finding: transparency is not showing everything, it is showing where you are.

Wireframes — exploration 1

Final design · shipped

One step at a time

The stepper won because it answers the only question a veteran reliably has: where am I, and what is my next move.

Wireframes — exploration 2
Final dashboard — gather information Final dashboard — step completed
WIREFRAME FINAL

Process 03: Retire the form

Turn the questionnaire into a conversation

The fight of the project: our medical consultant’s red line was legal defensibility — the output had to file as a real DBQ; mine was that a veteran with no medical vocabulary could finish alone. The card system below is how both red lines held.

The starting point

Fourteen pages of paper

The audit came first: clinical terminology, no guidance anywhere, and one misread field meant weeks of delay.

Real VA ankle DBQ, page 1: identification and evidence review Real VA ankle DBQ, page 5: range of motion degree fields

Deconstruct

Map every field, translate every question

You cannot simplify a question until you know what the VA needs from the answer — so I mapped every field to its intent first, and only then rewrote the words.
PAPER FIELD
"Flexion endpoint (degrees), active ROM"
"Etiology of the claimed condition"
"Ankylosis present? Specify severity"
"Functional loss and contributing factors"
PLAIN LANGUAGE QUESTION
How far can you bend your ankle before it hurts?
Tell us how this condition started.
Does the joint lock or freeze in place?
What daily activities does this make harder?
REGROUPED INTO 9 SECTIONS
01 Condition history 02 Symptoms & range of motion 03 Contributing factors 04 Flare ups 05 Surgical history 06 Scars 07 Assistive devices 08 Functional impact 09 Certification

Systematize

A question card for every kind of answer

I shaped the cards around how a veteran answers, not how the VA asks, and hid every follow-up until an answer earns it, because each visible-but-irrelevant question is one more reason to call for help.

QUESTION 1 OF 6 Tell us how this condition started.
Need help? Next
QUESTION 3 OF 6 Have you been treated for shin splints?
Yes No
Which treatments have you tried?
Shoe orthotics
Physical therapy
Need help? Next
QUESTION 5 OF 6 How far can you bend your ankle upward?
17°
45° full motion
Need help? Next

Final design · shipped

The self-service questionnaire

Condition history Symptoms & ROM Factors +6 more
QUESTION 1 OF 6
Tell us how this condition started.
QUESTION 2 OF 6 How far can you bend your ankle upward?
Need help? Save
QUESTION 3 OF 6 Have you been treated for shin splints?
YesNo
Final high-fidelity questionnaire screen
WIREFRAME FINAL

Process 04: Close the loops

A document center that runs on status

The first Document Center treated documents as files in a drawer; the shipped one treats them as states: every document says where it stands and what to do next.

Explored · set aside

Starting point: a flat file drawer

The obvious first draft: a table of uploads. But a rejected buddy statement looks identical to an accepted X-ray, and nothing says what needs the veteran's attention.

My Documents
NAMEDATESTATUS
▤ intent_to_file_scan.pdfMar 22Rejected
▤ blue_button_record.pdfJun 12In Review
▤ disability_list.pdfJan 20Accepted
▤ buddy_stmt_alvarez.pdfMay 20Rejected
▤ ankle_xray_040126.pdfApr 11Accepted
▤ nexus_letter_thompson.pdfApr 28Accepted

Chosen direction

Making the urgent impossible to miss

Once documents had a vocabulary, sorting, filtering, and badging stopped being separate decisions; they are the same five words repeated. That is why I designed the words before the screens.

PRIORITY SORT

Rejected first
Then awaiting upload
Everything else by date

STATUS FILTER TABS

All Documents Uploaded In Review Rejected · 2

NAV ATTENTION BADGE

Home My Claims Document Center2 Support Center

TYPED UPLOAD MODAL

Upload document
Document type: DD–214 ⌄ ↑ Drop file · pdf, jpg, png · 25 MB max

Chosen direction

A five-state status language

The redesign started with vocabulary, not screens: five states, split by one question — is the veteran needed, or are we? Everything visual just repeats that answer.

○ Awaiting upload

Missing: the row describes what it is and where to find it.

↑ Uploaded

Received and queued for review.

TEAM ACTS
◔ In review

A case manager is verifying it meets VA requirements.

TEAM ACTS
✓ Accepted

Cleared for the claim file. No action needed again.

DONE
✕ Rejected

Didn't meet requirements: the reason appears inline with Replace.

Fixed color per state, everywhere it appears: row stripe, badge, filter tab, dashboard count

Final design · shipped

Actions follow status

Each row offers only the actions its state allows: Awaiting gets one Upload button, Rejected gets the reason inline plus Replace. The row itself is the instruction.

Document Center
Intent to File✕ Does not establish service connection. Resubmit with physician statement
Rejected Replace
DD–214Official separation document verifying service and discharge
Awaiting Upload
Blue Button RecordUploaded Jun 12 · 4.5 MB
In review
Ankle X-Ray ImagingUploaded Apr 11 · 6.2 MB
Accepted
Final document center screen
WIREFRAME FINAL

Process 05: Book the evaluation

How much to show

Step 5 books C&P evaluations through the partner network, and it forced the project’s hardest trade. Veterans wanted instant booking and a visible address. Clinics confirm every appointment by hand, so instant booking would be a lie; a visible address would let veterans book around VBG, when the network is the business. I designed the truth instead: trust built with less information, as long as what you show is honest and what you hide has a schedule.

Chosen direction

Request, don't book: a three-state flow

READY TO SCHEDULE

Veteran picks a real date and a real slot from the network's availability.

◔ AWAITING CONFIRMATION

The request is echoed back verbatim; the clinic confirms within a business day.

NETWORK ACTS
✓ APPOINTMENT SCHEDULED

Full detail grid: date, time, examiner, network, contact, and a location that stays partly hidden.

DONE · UNLOCKS PENDING

The amber state is honest waiting: it names who's acting and how long it takes

Chosen direction

Protecting the business: the area-only map

A visible clinic address would let a veteran book around VBG. The compromise: show enough to plan (area, travel time) but not enough to bypass the network.

LOCATION North Sacramento area Exact address unlocks 48h before your visit
NETWORK Community Health (401) 771-5870
Approximate area shown; exact address appears 48 hours before your appointment

Chosen direction

Unlock on a clock, not a click

Hidden things need a promise of when. The in-person address unlocks at 48 hours — already when the reminder email goes out and clinics stop taking reschedules, so it lands on a beat veterans were listening for, and too late to be worth going around us. The video link needs no travel planning, so it waits until 15 minutes.

IN PERSON · T-48 HOURS

North Sacramento area
4520 Medical Pkwy, Suite 200 Sacramento, CA 95835 · Get directions

VIRTUAL · T-15 MINUTES

Link activates 15 min before
Join video session Link active · starts at 2:30 PM PST

Final design · shipped

One card per appointment, fully independent

A claim can need several evaluations with different networks and formats, so each is its own card with its own state; neither blocks the other.

Evaluation · Step 5 of 7
Physical Evaluation: ankle & elbow IN PERSON READY TO SCHEDULE
Community Health network · Sacramento area
Fri, Jul 24 ⌄ 10:00 – 11:00 AM ⌄
Booked through VBG; exact location shared once confirmed Request appointment
Mental Health Evaluation: PTSD VIRTUAL ◔ AWAITING CONFIRMATION
Optum network · Video session
Requested: Mon, Jul 27 · 2:30 – 4:00 PM · Optum The network confirms each appointment individually, usually within one business day.
Final scheduling screen
WIREFRAME FINAL

Impact · Outcome

processing time

48.6%

reduction in overall claim processing time

Part digitization, part design — the design share shows up where rework fell most: questionnaires and documents.

independence

53.1%

of veterans completed their questionnaires without staff support

Fourteen pages of clinical language, genuinely self-serve.

support load

49.2%

fewer customer service calls once status tracking became self-serve

Against the prior quarter’s volume, same intake.

Reflection

Next time: engineering in the questionnaire system a month earlier — the card architecture was rebuilt twice because I designed the interaction before we agreed on the data model. And instrument from day one; analytics shipped week three and cost us our cleanest baseline. What I would keep: naming the five status states before drawing any screens — it made every later decision almost automatic.

Next case study

A CRM Worth Navigating →