Skip to content

( By / Independent Practice / Freelance UI/UX Designer / 2025 / 11 min read )

Omassist

Operational efficiency reported at +94% and administrative workload reduced by +74% for agencies using the platform

The result and the decision behind it

( What it did )

Operational efficiency reported at +94% and administrative workload reduced by +74% for agencies using the platform

( The decision behind it )

Build two dedicated mobile apps rather than one app with a role switch

The two roles share almost nothing beyond the visit itself. A client's job is to describe a need, choose a time, and pay. A caregiver's job is to manage availability, accept work, complete regulated documentation, and track earnings. A shared shell would have meant a navigation structure that was a compromise for both, and every screen carrying conditional logic for an audience that would never see it. Separating them let each app be organised around its own primary job, and let the caregiver app carry the compliance weight of EVV without that complexity ever touching the client experience.

Generated schematic standing in for imagery of Omassist. It depicts nothing.
Generated schematic, not a screenshot of Omassist.

Generated schematic, not a screenshot. Real imagery to follow.

( The account )

Context

Omassist is a health-tech startup building an AI-driven platform for the home care industry, serving the agencies and registries that coordinate caregivers for elderly, disabled, and recovering clients across the United States. The product is not one application but an ecosystem: a desktop SaaS hub where agencies run matching, scheduling, billing, and compliance, and a dual-sided mobile app where the people at the other end of that operation actually meet. The Client App is for individuals and families requesting care. The Caregiver App is for the professionals delivering it.

The U.S. home care market is worth over $100 billion and is growing on the back of an aging population and a clear preference for care at home over institutional settings. Almost none of it runs on modern software. Agencies still coordinate through spreadsheets, phone calls, and paper compliance forms, which means the industry has scale and regulatory pressure without the tooling to handle either.

The scope was the full surface. Marketing site and admin dashboard on the web, the complete client journey from onboarding through booking to payment on mobile, and the complete caregiver journey from availability management through visit verification to payout. There was no existing design language, no component library, and no established pattern for most of what the product needed to do.

The problem

The failures in home care are structural, and they look different depending on where in the chain you sit.

Agencies match clients to caregivers by hand. Staff work through profiles looking for someone available, which in practice makes availability the only criterion that reliably gets used. Skill specialization, language, personality fit, and travel distance get considered when there is time, and there usually is not. Poor matches produce turnover on one side and dissatisfaction on the other. Meanwhile scheduling, billing, compliance, payroll, and communication each live in a different tool, so office staff spend most of their time on administration rather than care oversight, and nobody has real-time visibility into utilization, revenue, or compliance status. Decisions get made reactively because the data to make them any other way has to be assembled by hand.

Billing is where the money leaks. Home care involves multiple payer sources, private pay, insurance, and Medicaid or Medicare, each with its own rate structures, documentation requirements, and reimbursement timelines. Manual invoicing loses billable hours, delays payment, and triggers claim denials, and the industry loses an estimated 5 to 10 percent of revenue to it.

Compliance adds its own load. Electronic Visit Verification, required by many states for Medicaid-funded services, demands accurate documentation of service type, date, time, location, caregiver identity, and recipient confirmation for every single visit. Handled on paper or across disconnected tools it is error-prone, and the consequences of getting it wrong are audit failures, claim denials, and lost funding. The people carrying that burden are caregivers who should be delivering care.

Clients have no self-service at all. Someone who needs help at home cannot browse services, evaluate caregivers, or request a visit without going through an agency phone call. Once care is underway, pricing is opaque, payment is manual, and there is no way to see who is coming or when. Family members are left outside the process entirely, which produces anxiety and a steady stream of check-in calls back to the agency.

What I did

The organising decision was to treat the visit as the unit the whole ecosystem is built around. Every surface, agency dashboard, client app, and caregiver app, is a different view onto the same lifecycle: a request is made, a caregiver is matched, the visit happens, it is verified, and it is paid for. Designing that lifecycle first and giving each participant their own entry point into it is what kept three interfaces behaving as one product rather than three applications sharing a logo.

The agency SaaS platform is the operational hub. AI-powered matching analyzes certifications, experience, language proficiency, personality traits, location, and real-time availability to recommend caregiver and client pairings, replacing hours of manual coordination with recommendations that surface in seconds, with real-time conflict detection preventing double-bookings. Automated billing runs the full lifecycle from timesheet capture and verification through invoice generation, claim submission, and payment tracking, with multi-payer rate tables and automatic documentation attachment. A centralized dashboard gives agency leaders a single view of the operation with monthly recurring revenue, total and paid member counts, email engagement, trend indicators, time-range filters, exportable reports, and content management tools.

The Client App turns a phone call into a booking. Clients browse service types covering personal care, medication assistance, physical therapy, health monitoring, nutritional guidance, and disability support, set preferred dates and times, and add the practical detail a caregiver actually needs on arrival, gate codes, pet details, accessibility notes. Pricing is transparent throughout, with a $30 per hour model and real-time cost estimates before booking rather than an invoice after the fact. Payment runs through Stripe with saved credit cards and ACH bank transfers, full invoice history, and downloadable receipts. On service day clients track their assigned caregiver with a live ETA. Family Access lets a client invite trusted family members into their care record so schedules, caregiver notes, and health updates are shared without the agency having to relay them.

The Caregiver App gives the professional control of their own working life. Availability is set through granular filters covering available days, time ranges, maximum travel distance, and blocked periods, so requests arriving are already ones the caregiver can take. Electronic Visit Verification is completed inside a single guided mobile flow: service type, date, time range, recipient confirmation, tasks performed, notes, and dual electronic signatures from both caregiver and recipient. A payouts dashboard shows pending and paid earnings with expected dates and visit-level breakdowns, and certifications are uploaded and maintained in-app.

Notifications run across all three surfaces as the connective tissue. Clients are told when a request is approved, when a caregiver is assigned, when anything is rescheduled, and when their caregiver is on the way. Caregivers are told about new assignments, schedule changes, payments received, and upcoming visits.

All of it sits on a custom design system built from scratch, with a purple-dominant brand palette and a component library covering brand logo, bottom navigation, buttons, input fields, avatars, user cards, checkboxes, select cards, badges, section headings, icon buttons, and link text, plus consistent iconography and a typographic system tuned for healthcare management.

Outcomes

  • Caregiver and client match satisfaction reached a 9.8 out of 10 rating
  • Designed a three-surface ecosystem end to end, covering a desktop SaaS platform for agencies plus dedicated Client and Caregiver mobile apps for iOS and Android
  • Built a custom design system from scratch spanning web and mobile, with a purple-dominant brand palette, a full component library, consistent iconography, and a typographic system tuned for healthcare management
  • Digitized the full Electronic Visit Verification workflow into a mobile-native guided flow with dual e-signatures, replacing paper-based compliance capture and giving agencies an auditable digital trail of every visit
  • Automated the billing lifecycle across multiple payer sources, addressing an estimated 5 to 10 percent industry-wide revenue leakage from missed billable hours and manual entry
  • Enabled agencies to scale operations without proportional increases in back-office headcount
  • Delivered an admin dashboard surfacing monthly recurring revenue of $18,880 or more, 4,862 total members, 2,671 paid members, and an 82% email open rate with trend indicators and exportable reports
  • Gave clients and families visibility into care delivery for the first time, through real-time caregiver tracking, secure digital payments, and shared Family Access

What I learned

Designing for four audiences taught me that the shared object matters more than the shared interface. My first instinct on a product this broad is to look for what can be unified at the surface, and here the answer was almost nothing: the agency dashboard, the client app, and the caregiver app have different densities, different rhythms, and different jobs. What they do share is the visit. Once I designed the visit lifecycle as the fixed structure and treated each product as a view onto it, the question of how much interface to share stopped being an efficiency argument and became a straightforward one about who needs to see what. I now look for the shared object before considering the shared system.

Compliance features are interaction design problems, not documentation problems. I approached Electronic Visit Verification initially as a matter of capturing the right fields, since the regulatory requirements are explicit about what has to be recorded. The actual difficulty was where and when it gets captured, at the end of a shift, on a phone, in a client's home, with a second signature needed from someone who may be elderly or unwell. Getting the fields right is necessary and does nothing on its own. Designing for the moment of capture is what makes the record accurate, and I would start there on any regulated workflow now.

Transparency is a design decision with a cost, and it is usually worth paying. Showing price during booking, showing caregiver ETA, showing payout status and expected dates, and opening the care record to family all remove ambiguity that the incumbent process relied on to avoid difficult conversations. Each one meant designing for a question that would previously have gone to a phone call. The pattern I took from it is that opacity in a legacy process is rarely protecting the user; it is usually protecting the operator from having to answer, and replacing it with an interface is what shifts a relationship from managed to trusted.

The full record / 4 decisions
My role
Freelance UI/UX Designer
Timeline
2025
Platform
Web (desktop-first SaaS, 1440px) + Mobile (iOS and Android, Client App and Caregiver App)
Category
HealthTech / Home Care SaaS / Dual-Sided Mobile Platform
Status
New design, delivered

Tools Figma

Team Sole designer working with product managers, front-end and back-end engineers, and AI/ML specialists

Decisions

Build two dedicated mobile apps rather than one app with a role switch

What
Designed the Client App and the Caregiver App as separate products with their own navigation, information architecture, and home surfaces, rather than one application that changes mode based on account type.
Alternatives
A single app with role-based routing after login, which is cheaper to build, cheaper to maintain, and the usual choice for a two-sided marketplace.
Why
The two roles share almost nothing beyond the visit itself. A client's job is to describe a need, choose a time, and pay. A caregiver's job is to manage availability, accept work, complete regulated documentation, and track earnings. A shared shell would have meant a navigation structure that was a compromise for both, and every screen carrying conditional logic for an audience that would never see it. Separating them let each app be organised around its own primary job, and let the caregiver app carry the compliance weight of EVV without that complexity ever touching the client experience.

Design EVV as a single guided mobile flow rather than a digitised paper form

What
Built Electronic Visit Verification as one continuous in-app flow covering service details, recipient confirmation, tasks performed, notes, and dual electronic signatures from caregiver and recipient.
Alternatives
Reproducing the existing paper EVV document as a digital form, which maps directly onto what agencies already file and what auditors already expect.
Why
A digital copy of a paper form inherits the paper form's problem, which is that it is completed at the end of a shift by someone who is tired and standing in someone else's living room. Compliance data is only as good as the conditions it is captured in. Designing it as a guided flow meant each step could ask for one thing, validate as it went, and place the recipient signature at the natural moment the visit ends, which is what makes the record accurate rather than merely digital. The audit trail improves because the interaction fits the moment it happens in, not the other way round.

Make Family Access a first-class feature rather than a notification setting

What
Designed family involvement as a dedicated capability where a client invites trusted family members into a shared view of schedules, caregiver notes, and health updates.
Alternatives
Treating it as a notification preference, forwarding visit updates to additional email addresses or phone numbers on the account.
Why
Families are not a distribution list, they are participants in the care. The anxiety that drives repeated check-in calls to agencies is not fixed by pushing more messages outward; it is fixed by giving someone a place to look. Building it as an invited, permissioned view also kept the client in control of who sees their health information, which a forwarding setting does not, and turned a source of agency call volume into a feature that builds trust in the care itself.

Show real-time cost before booking rather than invoicing after the visit

What
Put transparent hourly pricing and a live cost estimate inside the client booking flow, so the price of a visit is visible while it is being arranged.
Alternatives
The industry-standard pattern of arranging care first and billing afterwards, which is how agencies already operate and avoids putting a price in front of someone at a vulnerable moment.
Why
People arranging home care are usually doing it under stress and often on behalf of a parent, and cost uncertainty is one of the reasons the decision gets delayed. Withholding the number does not remove the worry, it just moves it to an invoice arriving later with no context. Showing cost as the booking is built lets someone adjust duration or frequency to fit what they can afford, which is a decision they can only make if they have the number while the choice is still open.

( Tags )

  • Information Architecture
  • Interaction Design
  • Visual Design
  • Design Systems
  • Prototyping
  • Web
  • iOS
  • Android
  • B2B SaaS
  • Healthcare
  • Analytics
  • AI Product Design
  • End-to-End Design