← Route Clarity

01 / THE INVESTMENT THESIS

[ 01 ]
Proposed product · Evidence-led review

Make the right departure unmistakable.

An accessible verification layer for transit operations, designed to help people identify the intended assignment, catch a mismatch and know whether their action was accepted.

The Product Bet

Reduce preventable assignment errors without slowing or fragmenting the control room.

The Decision Today

Approve a bounded discovery phase. The current evidence is not sufficient for a market launch.

Route identityAssignment contextVerified acknowledgment
THE DIRECTOR'S ASSESSMENT

A promising need. An unproven business.

The original work shows a meaningful accessibility signal. Turning it into a credible product requires proving where the decision occurs, who owns it and whether this intervention beats an improvement to the existing system.

What deserves investment

The foundation of this investment is a set of proven route identity principles. By shifting away from color as the sole identifier, we establish a more resilient system for operations.

At the core of this strategy is a governed identity component. This ensures consistency across all touchpoints, reducing cognitive load and preventing systemic mismatches.

What would make it durable

To ensure long-term viability, the product must prioritize reusable integrations. Building standardized adapters allows the verification layer to communicate seamlessly with existing agency operations platforms.

This approach reflects a generational ambition. Rather than replacing incumbent systems entirely, a durable product enhances them, providing a verified acknowledgment loop that can evolve with future transit technologies.

THE QUESTION THAT COULD CHANGE THE DESIGN

If the system already knows Springfield, why ask someone to select Springfield again?

A prefilled review where the operator confirms the assignment may be safer and faster than a manual selection. Testing this interaction is a critical next step before committing to production.

Market reality in 2026

The market reality is defined by incumbent systems like CleverCAD and Vontas. These platforms hold the authoritative data and established workflows. A new product must prove it can integrate smoothly rather than expecting agencies to abandon their current infrastructure.

Alternatives we should evaluate before building
OptionWhy it may winDecision rule
Configure incumbentLowest friction and cost.If the existing platform can support the accessible review.
Vendor-integratedNative experience within the established suite.If the incumbent vendor is willing to partner.
Standalone companionIndependent verification and faster updates.If agencies need a dedicated layer that outpaces incumbent roadmaps.
Replace platformTotal control over the workflow.If the incumbent is fundamentally broken (least likely).

02 / EVIDENCE & PEOPLE

[ 02 ]

Start with what we know. Name what we don't.

REPORTEDINFERREDPROPOSED
SEAN · DAY TWO · CORRECT
58/99→104/104

Improvement observed during the color-matching test on the second day. [1, pp. 6-7]

SEAN · DAY TWO · REACTION TIME
1.08 s→0.99 s

Decrease in average response time for correct selections on the same day. [2, slide 8]

The signal is useful

The observed improvement in accuracy and reaction time provides a clear signal. It confirms that a more accessible palette can reduce the friction associated with color matching in a controlled scenario.

The causal claim is limited

However, the causal claim is limited by the study constraints. A two-day test with two participants does not prove that this specific palette will prevent real-world dispatch errors or scale across all operational variables.

REPORTED

Sean

Operator in the study scenario

Experiences deuteranopia (red-green color vision difficulty).

Task:Identify and select the correct route destination.
Expressed need:A reliable way to identify the destination without relying solely on color.
Participant profile anonymized from the original study.
INFERRED / JOB TO BE DONE
“"I need to know my assignment is correct so I can depart safely and on time."”
Potential Barriers

Color-reliant interfaces, rushed schedules, and uncertain system feedback.

Design Implications

Provide redundant text labels, explicit selection states, and clear confirmation messages.

Stakeholder alignment plan · all roles beyond Sean are proposed for discovery
Stakeholder/roleWhat they need to believeEvidence required
DispatcherIt will not slow down operations.Task-time metrics from the pilot.
Operator/driverIt is easy to use and reliable.Positive feedback and high completion rates.
Operations directorIt reduces dispatch errors.Reduction in preventable assignment errors.
IT+vendorIt integrates securely with existing systems.Successful API integration tests.
Accessibility leadIt meets or exceeds accessibility standards.WCAG 2.2 AA audit results.
Finance+procurementThe ROI justifies the investment.Validated cost savings from the pilot.
Safety leadIt does not introduce new risks.Risk assessment and safety review.
A journey that includes the failure, not just the click
StageActionLikely emotionFailure riskResponseEvidence anchor
OrientRead the departure request.AttentiveMissing the promptPersistent task headingDestination task in report p. 1
IdentifyFind code and destination.CautiousSelecting the wrong routeRedundant identity cuesColor difficulty in report p. 2
ReviewCompare route and assignment context.Reassured if clearFailing to verifyExplicit selection and contextProposed extension
CommitSubmit and await acknowledgment.Uncertain while waitingSubmitting stale dataSeparate pending and accepted statesOriginal test auto-restarted
RecoverRefresh a conflict or check an unknown result.Confident after resolutionAbandoning the taskActionable reason and recovery pathNot studied in the original work

03 / THE PRODUCT IN USE

[ 03 ]

Identity is the beginning. Trust requires a complete loop.

The user needs to know what is required, what they selected, whether the source is current and whether the authority accepted the request.

The Four-Step Verification Loop
01

Receive

Authoritative assignment

02

Recognize

Code, name and color

03

Review

Trip, vehicle and revision

04

Acknowledge

Accepted receipt or recovery

The first product boundary

The first boundary defines what the product does and what it defers to the existing operations platform. Route Clarity focuses exclusively on the verification and acknowledgment loop.

It does not generate assignments, manage schedules, or replace the primary dispatch engine. This deliberate scoping ensures faster delivery and lower integration risk.

The identity contract

The identity contract ensures that every route is presented with multiple, redundant cues - color, code, and name. This makes recognition resilient to individual vision differences and environmental factors.

Crucially, this contract applies to every state of the interface, from initial presentation to selection and final confirmation.

WORKING DEMONSTRATION

Try the operational edge cases

The interactive prototype demonstrates not just the happy path, but how the system handles stale data, disconnections, and concurrent changes.

Launch Prototype
Failure behavior is part of the product
ConditionUser-visible behaviorRequired production control
Wrong routeClear label mismatchAccurate assignment data
Stale/offlineWarning banner and disabled submitHeartbeat and freshness checks
Concurrent changePrompt to review new assignmentOptimistic concurrency control
Slow ackPending state with timeoutConfigurable timeout thresholds
RejectedError message with reasonStandardized error responses
Correction after acceptanceRevision history and update promptImmutable audit log
Shift handoverClear current state and pending actionsSession management and persistence
AI Policy / Proposed

AI Policy: This concept extension was developed with AI assistance for research synthesis, interaction exploration, and HTML implementation. AI did not generate the original study data.

04 / VALUE & ECONOMICS

[ 04 ]

Make the case falsifiable.

While the color-selection test demonstrates usability, the business case relies on reducing costly operational rework. We must prove the financial impact.

INFERRED / INITIAL CUSTOMER

An agency with a verified gap

The ideal first customer is an agency experiencing measurable friction during the assignment process. They have the data to show where errors occur and the motivation to fix them.

By partnering with an agency that already understands the cost of these gaps, we can baseline the current state and clearly demonstrate the value of our intervention.

PROPOSED / COMMERCIAL PATH

Sell proof, then support

Our commercial strategy starts with a low-cost, bounded discovery phase to prove the concept in the agency's specific environment. We do not ask for a major commitment upfront.

Only after demonstrating clear ROI through a limited pilot do we transition to a standard support and maintenance contract, ensuring long-term alignment and value.

Interactive ROI Model

Adjust the operational realities to see the impact.

Annual net benefit
$-2,540
Year one net
$-122,540
3-year net
$-127,620
Simple payback
No payback

At these settings, the solution avoids 162.0 corrections per year, generating $12,960 in gross value. With an annual operating cost of $20,000, the operational break-even error rate is 0.46%.

Who receives the value?
Value driverDescription
Less reworkFewer instances of dispatch having to correct wrong assignments after departure.
Independent completionOperators can confidently verify assignments without calling control.
Faster exceptionMismatches are caught and resolved before they impact the schedule.
Dependable departuresOverall improvement in on-time performance and service reliability.

A realistic route to adoption

  1. 01

    Identify an agency with a documented assignment verification gap.

  2. 02

    Conduct a bounded discovery phase to baseline metrics and test feasibility.

  3. 03

    Run a limited shadow pilot to validate the interface alongside the incumbent system.

  4. 04

    Transition to full production deployment supported by an SLA.

05 / DELIVERY & OPERATIONS

[ 05 ]

Fit the service. Own the consequences.

System Architecture
System of Record

Agency operations platform

Integration Boundary

Validated adapter

Human Workspace

Route Clarity

Proposed architecture · Validated adapter handles freshness and idempotency.

Data and integration requirements

The product requires read access to current assignment data and write access for confirmation events. This integration must be robust, secure, and performant.

We propose building standardized adapters that can translate between our verification layer and common incumbent APIs, minimizing custom integration work.

Security and privacy requirements

All data in transit and at rest must be encrypted. The system will operate on a least-privilege principle, requesting only the data necessary for the verification task.

We will strictly adhere to agency data governance policies and ensure that personally identifiable information is never exposed or unnecessarily stored.

Service blueprint and ownership
ScenarioActionSystem response
Assignment appearsOperator views assignmentFetches latest data and renders UI
Operator verifiesOperator selects and submitsSends confirmation event to backend
Response is lateOperator waitsShows pending state and timeout warning
Release changesDispatcher updates assignmentPushes update and prompts re-verification
Service degradesConnection lostDisables submission and shows offline alert
Failure risks to retire before live use
RiskImpactMitigation
Correct route wrong assignmentOperational confusionDisplay full assignment context, not just the route
False confidenceErrors slip throughRequire active review, avoid auto-advancing
Alert fatigueWarnings are ignoredOnly alert on material changes or critical errors
Accessibility regressionExclusion of usersContinuous automated and manual WCAG testing
Integration dependenceSystem failureGraceful degradation and offline caching
Pilot harms continuityDisruption of serviceRun pilot in shadow mode before active deployment
Any operational change must align with FTA Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP) requirements, ensuring that new tools do not introduce unmitigated risks. [8]
Continuity Plan / Must be agreed before a live pilot

Continuity Plan: In the event of an integration failure, the system must degrade gracefully, allowing operators to fall back to the existing voice-dispatch protocol without losing context.

06 / ACCESSIBILITY CONTRACT

[ 06 ]

Accessible by design. Verified through use.

Accessibility is an acceptance discipline across the full workflow. A palette alone cannot establish it.

Exact colors, honest contrast

While preserving the specified route colors, we must ensure that all text labels meet strict contrast requirements. This means adjusting the text reading surface without altering the underlying brand identity.

This careful balance ensures that the interface remains familiar to all operators while becoming accessible to those with vision differences.

Redundancy with meaning

Every critical piece of information must be conveyed through multiple channels. Color is supported by text, state changes are supported by icons, and visual cues are available to screen readers.

This redundancy is not just a compliance checkbox; it is a fundamental design principle that makes the system more robust for everyone.

Preserved route tokens · calculated sRGB contrast
RouteFillOriginal pair contrastPrototype label surface
Moraine#ED648E2.87:1Light text on dark backing
Xenia#F6F61C14.5:1Dark text directly on fill
Linden#22BB2C2.38:1Light text on dark backing
Springfield#38688C4.89:1Light text on dark backing
Columbus#5A39116.42:1Light text on dark backing
Huber#6A0CB78.21:1Light text on dark backing
Acceptance matrix
RequirementStandardTesting approach
Keyboard/focusWCAG 2.1.1Manual testing with standard keyboards
Screen-readerWCAG 4.1.2Testing with NVDA and VoiceOver
ContrastWCAG 1.4.3Automated contrast checking tools
Zoom/reflowWCAG 1.4.10Browser zoom up to 400%
TargetsWCAG 2.5.5Minimum target size verification
LanguageWCAG 3.1.1Clear and simple language review
Time/motionWCAG 2.2.1No auto-advancing or tight time limits
These requirements are baselined against WCAG 2.2 AA. Meeting these standards is a prerequisite for deployment, not a secondary goal. [9]

07 / APPROVAL & PROOF

[ 07 ]

A proposal a skeptical committee can evaluate.

Approve learning in stages. Tie further spending to operational evidence, integration feasibility and acceptable risk.

REQUEST NOW / ILLUSTRATIVE CAP
$30,000

Discovery/baseline/feasibility

CONDITIONAL NEXT ENVELOPE
$90,000

Integration and pilot after Gate 1, combined $120,000

This budget is illustrative and designed to force a disciplined, phased approach to investment. Funding is released only when specific gates are passed.

Proposed sequence · twelve weeks after access and staffing are secured
StageFocusGate
Weeks 1-3 DiscoverBaseline metrics and technical feasibilityGate 1: Go/No-Go on integration
Weeks 4-6 Design/testIterate prototype with operator feedbackGate 2: Usability and accessibility sign-off
Weeks 7-9 ShadowRun in parallel with existing systemGate 3: Data integrity verified
Weeks 10-12 Limited pilotLive use on a subset of routesGate 4: ROI proven, approve production

Recruit for relevant variation

Testing must include a diverse group of operators, capturing different shifts, experience levels, and vision profiles. We will not rely on a single demographic.

By recruiting for variation, we ensure the system is resilient across the full spectrum of real-world use cases.

Measure the entire task

We will measure success not just by route identification, but by the completion of the entire confirmation loop. This includes handling interruptions and recovering from errors.

Task-time guardrails will ensure that our intervention does not inadvertently slow down the dispatch process.

Proposed pilot gates · thresholds require agency agreement before testing
MeasureCriteria for passing
Primary outcomeStatistically significant reduction in assignment errors
Task-time guardrailAverage verification time does not increase by more than 2 seconds
Integrity gateZero dropped confirmation events in the audit log
Accessibility gateZero critical WCAG 2.2 AA violations
Adoption/supportPositive net sentiment from pilot operators
Economic gateProjected annual savings exceed the cost of the intervention

Questions the toughest stakeholder should ask

Proposed Sponsor Narrative

We are asking to earn the next investment.

This investment brief outlines a pragmatic path from a promising research signal to a viable operational product. It acknowledges the risks and sets clear gates for further investment.

By approving the discovery phase, we commit to finding out if this intervention can truly reduce operational friction and improve accessibility without disrupting existing workflows.

We ask for a named sponsor, access to agency operations for the pilot, and the initial $30,000 budget to begin this work.

Decision recommendation

Approve discovery subject to a named sponsor, agency access and a validated budget. Defer production approval.

08 / SOURCES & LIMITATIONS

[ 08 ]

A proposal with a traceable basis.

This brief was prepared following a comprehensive review of the original study materials and relevant accessibility standards. The review was completed in late 2026.

  1. [1]
    Mini Project 1 - Report.pdf

    Original color-matching study report, pp. 6-7.

  2. [2]
    MP1 Class Presentation | Subedi.pptx

    Original class presentation deck, slide 8.

  3. [3]
    Route Clarity Concept Extension

    Interactive prototype and design rationale.

  4. [4]
    W3C WCAG 2.2

    Web Content Accessibility Guidelines.

  5. [5]
    W3C Understanding Contrast

    Guidelines for text contrast.

  6. [6]
    W3C Understanding Use of Color

    Guidelines for redundant visual cues.

  7. [7]
    Agency Operations Platform API Docs

    Reference for standard integration patterns.

  8. [8]
    FTA PTASP Requirements

    Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan guidelines.

  9. [9]
    Accessibility Compliance Standards

    Baseline requirements for deployment.

  10. [10]
    DOJ Title II Requirements

    Updated legal context for digital accessibility.

What this review did not do

This review did not conduct new primary research, validate the financial model with live agency data, or complete technical integration with a vendor system.

What is included

It includes a synthesized analysis of the original study, a proposed operational workflow, an accessibility compliance framework, and a structured investment plan.

Route Clarity · Product investment brief · Prepared from the supplied case study and primary sources · 2026