Project overview
Access and outage coordination for one existing community network.
- Platform
- Mobile app · Android-first · portrait
- Screens
- 11 screens + 1 unhappy path (12 frames)
- Features
- 3 core features
- Bottom navigation
- Access · Usage · Report · Profile
- Prototype
- 4 linked flows
Build order: Auth (screens 1–4) → nav tabs (5–8) → core flow (9–11) → unhappy path → link prototypes.
Problem & primary user
Schools, estates, and underserved communities may share a local internet connection. Passwords, data use, outage reports, and operator notices are difficult to coordinate through group chats alone.
Primary user
"Chisom, a 20-year-old student who uses a community Wi-Fi point to attend online classes."
Geographic scope: State-level (One pilot state)
Goals
User goal: Know whether the network is available, see access balance, and report an outage.
Business goal: Community networks, local ISPs, schools, estates, and NGOs pay for access coordination.
Success: User sees access status and data balance, then reports an outage that the operator can update.
Market context
- Question
- Answer
- Who pays
- Community networks, local ISPs, schools, estates, and NGOs pay for access coordination.
- Why not WhatsApp
- Users report outages in chats and share passwords manually, with no clear uptime or data balance view.
- Design focus
- Simple access pass, usage summary, shared outage status, and fault report that works on weak connections.
Competitors to check:
- Shared Wi-Fi password (default)
- Router admin page (technical)
- ISP support call (individual, not community status)
Validate before you design
Interview 3–5 people who match your primary user. Update this brief if interviews contradict it. Do not start hi-fi until you complete the confirmation below.
- Validated user (name, age, city)
- Problem in one sentence
- One interview quote
- Success metric for your test
- Primary colour and tone
- One competitor you checked
Interview prompts
- "Walk me through the last time this happened."
- "What did you use instead? WhatsApp, paper, or nothing?"
- "What would make you trust this on a cheap Android phone?"
- "What would stop you from using this every week?"
Features & scope
v1 · three features
- See network availability and access-pass status
- Review simple session and data-use summary
- Report an outage and follow operator updates
Out of scope
- Building telecom infrastructure
- Becoming an ISP
- Unlimited free data
Screens
Design every row in wireframe, high-fidelity UI, and prototype (where the flow applies).
| # | Layer | Screen | What to show |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Auth | Splash Screen | App logo, name, and tagline for Community Internet Share. |
| 2 | Auth | Onboarding (1 screen) | Explain the app in one sentence. One Get Started button. |
| 3 | Auth | Sign Up Screen | Name, phone number, state, and PIN. No email required. |
| 4 | Auth | Sign In Screen | Phone number and PIN. Forgot PIN link. |
| 5 | App shell | Access (tab) | Network status, access-pass expiry, and connect instructions. Show bottom nav with Access active. |
| 6 | App shell | Usage (tab) | Simple session history and remaining data where the operator provides it. Show bottom nav with Usage active. |
| 7 | App shell | Report (tab) | Outage or slow-speed report with location point and pending status. Show bottom nav with Report active. |
| 8 | App shell | Profile (tab) | User name, community, pass details, and notification preference. Show bottom nav with Profile active. |
| 9 | Core flow | Access · Network status | Availability and access-pass expiry visible. Show bottom nav on post-sign-in screens. |
| 10 | Core flow | Usage · Summary | Recent sessions and operator-provided balance. Show bottom nav on post-sign-in screens. |
| 11 | Core flow | Report · Outage queued | Outage sent or stored with SMS fallback shown. Show bottom nav on post-sign-in screens. |
Layers: Auth = 1–4 · App shell = 5–8 · Core flow = 9–11
Prototype flows
Link these in Figma. Examiners should click through without your voice-over.
Flow 1 · App entry
Flow 2 · Core task (all three features)
Core flow screens: Access · Network status · Usage · Summary · Report · Outage queued
Flow 3 · Navigation
Link every nav tab so examiners can tap each bottom nav item. Tabs: Access · Usage · Report · Profile
Flow 4 · Unhappy path
Trigger the unhappy path edge case and link to that screen.
Unhappy path
Design this as its own screen state (frame 12):
The network is down and the report cannot send. Show an SMS fallback code and keep the report queued.
Link in Flow 4.
Design system
- Colour
- You choose. Keep it simple and readable.
- Type
- You choose. Keep body text easy to read on a phone.
- Tone
- Design for your user, not for a tech audience.
Reuse on every screen:
- Primary button (active and disabled states)
- Input field (empty, filled, and error states)
- Card or list item used across the app
- Navigation bar with correct labels and icons
- Empty state: what the screen looks like with no data
Submit & defense
Deliverables
| # | Deliverable | What good looks like |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Wireframes | Every screen in this brief, plus the unhappy path. Layout and labels clear. |
| 2 | High-fidelity UI | Same frames polished. You choose colour and type. Bottom nav on every post-sign-in screen. |
| 3 | Prototype | Four linked flows (entry, core task, navigation, unhappy path). Examiners can use the app without your voice-over. |
| 4 | AI prototype | Figma Make: at least 2 screens. Share link. |
| 5 | Case study (1 page) | Problem · User · Who pays · Competitors · Solution · One design decision |
| 6 | Presentation (6–8 slides) | Name · Problem · User · Solution · Key screens · Flow demo · One decision |
Before you present
- Every screen designed in wireframe and hi-fi
- Unhappy path screen designed and linked in the prototype
- Four prototype flows linked end to end
- At least one empty state on a list tab
- Shared components reused: button, input, card or row, bottom nav
- Case study names who pays and one competitor you checked
- You can explain one design decision in critique (why, not what)
- Completed 5 user interviews or 1 usability test
- Checked at least one competitor listed under Market context