Reaching the Nearby Neighbor — A Community Access Case Study

01 — Project Overview

Executive Summary

Rainier Valley Food Bank building exterior with community mural, Seattle WA

Rainier Valley Food Bank — 9021 Rainier Ave S, Seattle, WA 98118

The Rainier Valley Food Bank serves one of Seattle's most ethnically and economically diverse communities. Despite its central location, an internal observation prompted the question:

Why are residents living immediately nearby underrepresented among service users?

Our team of four human-centered design researchers partnered with RVFB to investigate this paradox. Rather than treating it as a logistics or marketing gap, we approached it as a deeper problem of trust, visibility, and cultural alignment.

Research and Design Question

"How might we increase engagement, trust, and perceived accessibility among nearby residents who are not currently using RVFB's services?"

Over two quarters, we conducted a site-based field study, designed and distributed a multilingual community survey, ran five in-depth interviews across three participant groups, developed an audience segmentation framework, mapped a user journey, and produced a suite of low-fidelity outreach prototypes.

Our findings converged on a consistent set of barriers: social stigma deterring first visits, passive and narrow awareness pipelines, language access gaps, and scheduling mismatches. Each barrier represents a direct design opportunity, and our final concepts address all four.

Problem Framing

Nearby residents in Beacon Hill and Rainier Beach who qualify for RVFB services are underrepresented as users. The gap is not a shortage of food or services. It is a shortfall in trust, awareness, and structural accessibility.

Target Population

Food-insecure adults in South Seattle
Residents near RVFB not yet using services
Non-English speaking community members
Working families and younger adults

Organizational Contacts

Karey Fey, Director of Operations
Zoe Ferenczy, Community Engagement
Otis Pimpleton, Food Services Manager

Research Foundation

Prior work in HCI and food systems (Patel et al. 2024; Dillahunt et al. 2023; Jo et al. 2023; Katzman et al. 2025) establishes that food access is shaped by dignity, social trust, and cultural alignment, not only physical availability.

02 — Process Narrative

From Discovery to Design

A chronological account of research, synthesis, and design activities across four project phases.

Phase 01 — Winter 2026

The Barrier Audit: Discovery

What we did: We conducted a 90-minute on-site field study at RVFB on April 8, 2026. Two researchers ran rapid-fire interviews with 10 current staff and visitors. Two others conducted a site walkthrough, photographing signage, entry points, wayfinding, and proximity to nearby landmarks including the public library and high school. We organized all field notes in Miro using affinity diagramming, grouping observations into six thematic clusters: visibility and wayfinding, awareness channels, barriers to engagement, visitor patterns, the physical environment, and outreach suggestions.

In parallel, we designed a six-section community survey deployed in English and Spanish, covering demographics, RVFB awareness, food access patterns, barriers to use, preferred information channels, and voluntary interview sign-up.

Key Decision We conducted the field study before waiting for survey saturation. This gave us firsthand contextual grounding quickly, and the resulting observations directly shaped our survey question design.

Field Study

90 min on site, 10 rapid-fire interviews, full site walkthrough and photodocumentation

Affinity Diagramming

Miro-based synthesis across 6 thematic clusters from field notes

Survey Design

6-section multilingual survey deployed across South Seattle community channels

Phase 02 — Winter 2026

Trust and Cultural Synthesis: Ideation

What we did: With 13 survey responses collected, we conducted quantitative analysis and produced visualizations: awareness charts, age distribution, food scarcity situations, self-reported barriers, and preferred outreach modalities. Key finding: 53.8% of respondents had never heard of RVFB. Social stigma was the most commonly cited reason for non-use.

We synthesized field and survey data into a Cultural Synthesis report identifying five persistent themes: stigma as the primary barrier, narrow awareness pipelines, the role of community presence, language access as a systemic need, and the proximity-trust gap. These drove two key deliverables: a six-profile Audience Segmentation framework and a Journey Map for the Seeker persona.

Key Decision We selected the Seeker as the primary journey map subject because their barrier, awareness rather than stigma, is most directly addressable through outreach design.

Survey Analysis

Quantitative analysis of 13 responses; visualizations built for sponsor reporting

Cultural Synthesis

5 persistent themes from cross-method analysis of field and survey data

Segmentation + Journey

6-profile audience framework and Seeker journey map across 6 stages

Phase 03 — Spring 2026

Prototyping a Low-Barrier Experience: Development

What we did: We conducted five in-depth interviews across four Zoom sessions, spanning three participant types: non-users and lapsed users, current and past users, and organization-affiliated individuals. Participants included a Valley resident (Wendy), a UW student and former food pantry worker (Alexis), a church community volunteer (B), a community member whose family uses food banks (Nini), and the Student Director of the UW Food Pantry (River). Sessions ran 30 to 45 minutes each.

Six primary findings emerged. We then began low-fidelity prototype development in Figma, producing outreach flyers, wayfinding posters, interior signage, stickers, and reusable bag mockups, all aligned to RVFB's brand style guide.

Key Decision We prioritized physical outreach materials over digital solutions. Both field observations and interview data showed community members respond more to visible, in-place, tactile materials at trusted locations.

In-Depth Interviews

5 participants, 4 sessions, 30 to 45 min each, recorded and transcribed

Cross-Interview Analysis

6 key findings and 3 overarching themes synthesized across all five interviews

Lo-Fi Prototyping

Figma mockups: flyers, posters, wayfinding signs, stickers, reusable bags

Phase 04 — Spring 2026

Community Validation: Evaluation

What we did: The evaluation phase consisted of structured Concept Study Feedback Sessions with community members, 30 to 45-minute sessions in which participants reviewed our pre-developed outreach concepts and provided qualitative feedback. Sessions assessed whether our concepts meaningfully reduced the barriers documented in earlier phases: stigma, low visibility, wayfinding confusion, language access gaps, and passive discovery.

Thematic analysis of session feedback drove final concept selection and refinement. The phase concluded with actionable recommendations for RVFB to implement across outreach, signage, and partnership channels.

Key Decision We named these Concept Study Feedback Sessions, not workshops or co-design. Participants were evaluating existing concepts rather than generating new ones, and precise framing was essential for informed consent.

Feedback Sessions

Structured 30 to 45 min sessions reviewing developed concepts with community members

Synthesis

Thematic analysis identifying strongest and weakest concept directions

Recommendations

Final concept set and implementation recommendations delivered to RVFB

03 — Key Research Findings

What the Data Told Us

Six findings drawn from in-depth interviews, each triangulated against survey data and field observations.

Scheduling and Operating Hours Are a Structural Barrier

Operating hours were described not as a minor inconvenience but as the deciding factor in whether attendance was possible. Working families, students, and caregivers consistently cited time conflicts as the primary reason they could not visit even when motivated.

"They will tell me things like, I have been meaning to go, but I have not had the time, or I forgot. Usually they are just busy, and the timing does not work out."Nini, community member

Social Stigma Deters First Visits, Particularly Among Younger Adults

Shame and fear of judgment surfaced across all three participant groups. First-time users described discomfort before their initial visit. Organization-affiliated participants described actively counteracting stigma in their communities.

"I never let anyone feel ashamed about it. Free food is free food."B, community volunteer

Discovery Is Entirely Passive: RVFB Does Not Appear in the Awareness Path

None of the five participants discovered RVFB through RVFB-initiated outreach. Every discovery was self-directed or incidental: a Google search, a spotted pamphlet, a visible queue at a farmers market. The organization is absent from the discovery path of nearby residents who need its services most.

"We were at a farmers market and saw a line of people, so we went over to see what it was and realized it was a food bank. We decided to stay."Nini, community member

Faith Organizations and Community Events Are Trusted, Underutilized Channels

Two independent participant groups identified churches as high-trust intermediaries for food bank information. Community event tabling was named by multiple participants and corroborated by survey data, with 78% of respondents supporting bus stop or nearby poster outreach.

"Just making an announcement at the end of a service could reach a lot of people."B, community volunteer

Language Access Is a Systemic Need, Not an Edge Case

Non-English-speaking community members face compounding barriers: materials they cannot read, systems they cannot navigate, and staff who may not share their language. Field observations confirmed predominantly English-only on-site signage despite a majority non-English-speaking visitor population.

"Something I find really helpful is when there is a QR code that links to information in different language options. That is always super helpful."Nini, community member

Peer Accompaniment Significantly Reduces First-Visit Friction

The primary barrier to a first visit is often not logistics but the unknown. Familiar social context and low-stakes discovery moments meaningfully lower the threshold. B's practice of accompanying friends and framing the trip casually effectively neutralized emotional barriers.

"I offered to go with them so they did not have to walk in alone. Once we were there, we would make it fun, picking out different things together."B, community volunteer

04 — Audience Segmentation

Six Community Profiles

Developed from field study, rapid-fire interviews, survey analysis, and cultural synthesis. Each profile represents a distinct relationship to RVFB services and a different set of design considerations.

Caretakers

Bilingual • Dutiful

First or 1.5-generation Americans who serve as the primary English-speaking liaison for an older family member relying on food bank services. They handle transport, staff communication, and navigation on behalf of someone who may face language or mobility barriers.

Avg. Age27 yrs

Female67%

Wanderers

Resourceful • Familiar

Typically unhoused residents with working knowledge of the local food bank network. They visit multiple food banks and frequently engage with services beyond food, such as phone support or medical assistance. Regulars who know the staff.

Avg. Age38 yrs

Male83%

Wise Collectors

Seasoned • Resilient

The core of RVFB's current visitor population. Predominantly older adults, many of Somali or Asian descent, for whom English is not a primary language. Despite challenges, notably resourceful and well-practiced at maximizing available resources.

Avg. Age62 yrs

Female75%

Avoiders

Prideful • Hesitant

Community members who qualify for services but do not use them, primarily due to social stigma. For some the barrier is pride; for others, the desire to visit is genuine but shame is too significant to overcome. Their barrier is emotional, not logistical.

Avg. Age22 yrs

Gender50/50

Seekers

Unaware • Motivated

Experiencing food insecurity and motivated to find solutions, but unaware of what is available. Unlike Avoiders, their barrier is not stigma but awareness. Primary target of our outreach design concepts. If they knew about RVFB, they would likely be eager to use it.

Avg. Age22 yrs

Gender50/50

Providers

Nurturing • Driven

Primary caregivers of young families, often mothers in their early to mid-twenties, who come to secure food for infants or toddlers. Motivated by direct, needs-based necessity. Often visit with children in tow and prioritize speed and clarity of service access.

Avg. Age27 yrs

Female80%

RVFB Audience Segmentation Snapshot showing all six community profiles

Deliverable 01

Audience Segmentation Snapshot. Developed from field study rapid-fire interviews, survey data analysis, and cross-method cultural synthesis. Phase 2.

05 — Journey Map

The Seeker's Path to RVFB

A six-stage map of the Seeker persona's experience from food insecurity onset to post-visit advocacy. Each stage documents actions, emotional experience, and key pain points.

Stage 01

Experiencing Food Insecurity

A first-generation college student juggles classes, part-time work, and a tight budget. Food is running low and the meal plan is unaffordable.

Stress

Stage 02

Reaching Out to a Professor

They ask a professor about food resources. The professor mentions food banks but provides no specific, actionable information. No clear next step.

Vague Referral

Stage 03

Searching for RVFB

They arrive by bus. The stop is close but the building is hard to identify. No directional signage from the stop or street corner.

Disorientation

Stage 04

Arrival and Navigation

They enter but do not know where to go or what services are available. On-site signage does not explain the intake process. They observe others.

Overwhelm

Stage 05

Registering for Services

A staff member approaches and offers to help. Enrollment requires only contact information. The experience is easier and more welcoming than expected.

Relief

Stage 06

Telling Friends

They share their experience. Friends have not heard of RVFB. Some are interested but remain hesitant due to stigma. Word-of-mouth potential is unrealized.

Stigma Returns

Full Seeker journey map across six stages

Deliverable 02

Seeker Journey Map. Documents actions, experience quality ratings, participant anecdotes, and pain points across six stages. Developed from field study, survey, and cultural synthesis. Phase 2.

Why the Seeker?

The Seeker represents the clearest leverage point for outreach design. Their barrier is awareness, not emotional resistance, which means direct design interventions have high potential to convert motivated-but-unaware individuals into users. Improving the Seeker's journey also surfaces pain points at the arrival and service discovery stages that affect all first-time visitors.

06 — Final Outcomes

Design Concepts and Recommendations

Three primary concept directions, each traceable to specific barriers identified through research. Every feature connects back to an earlier finding.

Improved Wayfinding and Exterior Signage

Redesigned exterior signage positioned at the bus stop and along the primary approach path. Image-forward, language-neutral visual cues guide first-time visitors from street to entrance without prior knowledge of the building layout.

Traces to: Field Study wayfinding cluster, Seeker Journey Stage 3

Multilingual Outreach Materials

Physical flyers and posters in five key community languages with QR codes linking to a multilingual landing page. Designed for placement at libraries, schools, bus stops, daycares, and faith organizations.

Traces to: Cultural Synthesis language theme, Interview Finding 5

Dignity-Centered Messaging Framework

An empowering language approach that normalizes food bank use rather than framing it as emergency charity. Copy strategies designed to reduce the perceived social cost of engaging with RVFB for first-time visitors.

Traces to: Survey stigma finding, Interview Finding 2

Prototype Suite — Showcase Deliverables

Outreach Flyer

Placed in public spaces with RVFB service hours, location, and QR code. Designed in RVFB brand teal with bold typographic hierarchy for fast comprehension.

Addresses: Awareness barrier, passive discovery

Pole Banner

18″×36″ street-level signage for light posts along Rainier Ave. High-visibility format with logo, hours, address, and QR code. RVFB is in talks with the city to install banner holders.

Addresses: Wayfinding, low street visibility

Bus Shelter and Transit Ad

Interior bus and shelter advertising targeting transit riders in the Rainier Valley corridor. RVFB has reached out to Metro for pricing. 78% of survey participants supported bus stop outreach.

Addresses: Awareness, channel diversity

Full project poster showing all design concepts and outcomes

Full Concept Poster

Showcase poster presenting all four prototype categories: public signage, outreach flyer, branded grocery bags, and informative video, alongside design principles and next steps.

Presented at UW HCDE Showcase 2026

Next Steps

Stakeholder Response and Implementation Path

Our finalized design mockups were presented to RVFB stakeholders, receiving glowing remarks from marketing and senior leadership. RVFB has reached out to Metro to get pricing on bus shelter and transit advertising, and is actively exploring how to encourage the city to install banner holders on light posts along Rainier Avenue.

At the Showcase

From prototype to presentation

Our booth at the UW HCDE Capstone Showcase displayed the full suite of physical deliverables: the pole banner, outreach flyer, branded grocery bag, informative video, and custom stickers. All four concepts were live and interactive for attendees to engage with.

See us on Instagram

07 — Key Decisions

Inflection Points in Our Process

The four most consequential choices we made, what alternatives we considered, and what evidence informed our direction.

Phase 1

Starting with a Field Study Before Waiting for Survey Results

We could have deployed the survey first and used results to inform the field visit. Instead, we conducted the field study first, prioritizing firsthand contextual grounding over aggregate data.

Ten rapid-fire interviews in 90 minutes yielded richer contextual data than any survey instrument could have at that stage. The field study grounded our subsequent survey design in observed reality rather than prior assumptions, improving question quality and reducing leading framing.

Phase 2

Centering the Journey Map on the Seeker Persona

We developed six audience segments and needed to select one for the primary journey map. We considered the Avoider (emotionally blocked), the Wise Collector (current core user), and the Seeker (motivated but unaware).

The Seeker's primary barrier, awareness, is the most directly addressable through outreach design. Better signage, clearer materials, and more prominent community presence all reduce Seeker friction. Avoiders require behavioral and emotional work over longer time horizons that exceeds the scope of single-cycle outreach design.

Phase 3

Prioritizing Physical Over Digital Outreach Prototypes

We could have prototyped digital solutions: a website, SMS notification system, or social media campaign. We chose to focus on physical materials instead.

Both field study data and interview findings consistently showed community members in the target area respond more to visible, in-place, tactile outreach. Survey results corroborated this: 78% of respondents supported bus stop or nearby poster outreach. Physical materials also serve non-English-speaking residents and those without reliable digital access.

All Phases

Framing the Problem as Trust and Perception, Not Logistics

The most conservative framing would have been operational: extend hours, translate materials, add signage. We chose to frame it as a problem of social trust, cultural alignment, and perceived accessibility.

The proximity paradox, nearby residents using RVFB less than those traveling from farther away, cannot be explained by logistics alone. Secondary research (Dillahunt et al. 2023; Jo et al. 2023) and every primary method we used confirmed that food access is fundamentally shaped by dignity, belonging, and trust. Logistical interventions alone cannot close a gap that is primarily social and relational.

08 — Reflection

What We Would Do Differently

A candid team-level assessment of our process, its strengths, its limitations, and the questions we were unable to fully resolve.

What Worked

Strengths of Our Approach

Multi-method triangulation gave us strong confidence in our findings. When field study, survey, and interview data converged on the same barriers, we could trust the pattern.
Beginning with a site visit before forming hypotheses kept us grounded in observed reality rather than assumption.
Our six-segment framework gave the entire team a shared, precise vocabulary for discussing community heterogeneity.
Recruiting across three distinct participant types produced a multi-perspective view of the same systemic barriers.
Maintaining terminological precision throughout, for example using Concept Study Feedback Sessions rather than workshops, kept our methodology legible and accurate.

What We Would Change

With More Time or Resources

Survey respondents skewed heavily toward 18 to 24 year olds. A broader age and language distribution would have strengthened the quantitative component substantially.
We would pilot-test the survey instrument before deployment. Several questions were accidentally left optional, creating avoidable data gaps.
We would conduct more interviews with non-English-speaking residents, who comprise RVFB's core visitor population and are underrepresented in our dataset.
We would build partnership relationships with faith organizations and childcare providers earlier, treating them as research collaborators rather than outreach targets.
We would involve RVFB staff in earlier-stage concept review before lo-fi prototypes were finalized.

Open Questions

What Remains Unresolved

We did not interview RVFB's core visitor population, elderly non-English-speaking adults, whose perspective on barriers may differ significantly from our data.
The proximity paradox is documented but not fully explained. Neighborhood-level social dynamics and hyperlocal trust patterns remain underexplored.
Producing multilingual materials at professional quality and scale requires organizational capacity that RVFB does not currently have.
Whether dignity-centered messaging is sufficient to move Avoiders toward first visits, or whether deeper structural changes are needed, remains an empirical question for future work.

09 — Project Team

Roles and Contributions

Four human-centered design researchers, University of Washington, Winter to Spring 2026.

Angel Torres-Puga

Lead Illustrator • Visual Designer • Project Manager (Phase 4) • Researcher

Led in-depth interviews and served as the team's visual lead, producing all custom illustrations and design assets. Project manager during Phase 4. Field study participant and contributor to affinity diagramming and thematic analysis.

Justis Peppin

Lead Videographer • Researcher • Designer • Project Manager (Phase 2)

Led in-depth interview with B and directed all video production for the project, including the informative outreach video. Project manager during Phase 2. Coordinated scheduling, logistics, and stakeholder communications with RVFB.

Wenyi Tsai

Lead Designer • Project Manager (Phase 3) • Researcher

Served as the team's lead designer, directing the visual identity and prototype suite across all deliverables. Project manager during Phase 3. Conducted interview with Nini and led the field study site walkthrough, photodocumentation, and cultural synthesis.

Michelle Nguyen

Lead Researcher • Project Manager (Phase 1)

Drove the research strategy and methodology across all phases. Project manager during Phase 1. Conducted interview with River, led survey instrument design and quantitative data visualization, and developed the audience segmentation framework and Seeker journey map.

Faculty Advisor

Prof. Emeritus Andrew Davidson

University of Washington, Department of Human Centered Design and Engineering. Connected the team to RVFB, provided mentorship across both quarters, and guided research design and milestone structure.

With Special Thanks

With special thanks to our stakeholders at the Rainier Valley Food Bank, whose openness, trust, and ongoing support made this research possible from day one.

Karey Fey

Director of Operations

Primary organizational contact throughout the project, providing direction, context, and access to the RVFB community.

Zoey Ferenczy

Community Engagement Manager

Supported community outreach strategy and helped connect the team with RVFB's broader network of community partners.

Otis Pimpleton

Food Services Manager

Provided insight into food service operations and the day-to-day experience of staff and visitors at RVFB.

10 — References

Citations

[1]

Shreyas Patel, Aditya Nair, Nisarg Rajpura, and Drishti Jogadia. 2024. Food for Thought: GreenBasket's approach to helping SNAP Families and Local Farmers towards Self-reliance. In Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '24). ACM. doi:10.1145/3613905.3647976

[2]

Tawanna R. Dillahunt, Michelle Sawwan, Danielle Wood, et al. 2023. Understanding Food Planning Strategies of Food Insecure Populations: Implications for Food-Agentic Technologies. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM. doi:10.1145/3544548.3581568

[3]

Jihyeon Jo, Jing Xie, and John M. Carroll. 2023. Food with Dignity: Public Values in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Mobile Applications. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Information Technology for Social Good. ACM. doi:10.1145/3582515.3609541

[4]

Katzman, J.L., Israni, A., Okyne, S., Winton, H., and Dillahunt, T.R. 2025. Technological Tensions In Urban Food Sovereignty: Insights from Detroit's Farmers. In Extended Abstracts of CHI EA '25. ACM. doi:10.1145/3706599.3719828

Reaching the NearbyNeighbor

Increasing Outreach for the Rainier Valley Food Bank