Designing A Who Cares Wizard For 2Ia - Source Excerpt 02 - Decision-tree architecture
Back to Designing A Who Cares Wizard For 2Ia
Summary
This source excerpt begins near Decision-tree architecture and preserves the surrounding evidence from 2IA.org/agent-file-handoff/Archive/2026-05-17-who-cares-wizard/Designing a Who Cares Wizard for 2IA.org.md.
**Source path:** 2IA.org/agent-file-handoff/Archive/2026-05-17-who-cares-wizard/Designing a Who Cares Wizard for 2IA.org.md
Fallback logic should be generous. Every screen should include **Back**, **Skip for now**, **I’m not sure**, and **Browse all routes**. If the user skips three or more classification questions, the system should stop narrowing aggressively and show the best three likely routes with a note that the match is broad. For urgent paths, the wizard should compress optional questions and surface the official hotline, complaint portal, or redress form earlier. This is especially important because a 20-step flow is long enough that users need visible progress and low-friction exits. GOV.UK explicitly recommends one question per page, and USWDS recommends a visible step indicator with “step of total” text and brief step labels. citeturn17view0turn17view1
## Decision-tree architecture
The safest design is a **rules-based classifier with editorial content objects**, not a free-form conversational engine. The wizard should compute a candidate set of end nodes after each answer, pruning aggressively only when the user gives firm signals. The first half of the flow should classify the problem; the second half should personalize the result page, reorder contact cards, and attach warnings about what the next site will collect. That split fits 2IA’s privacy stance and makes the system easier to maintain under a corrections policy. citeturn1view1turn2view0turn5view1turn6view0
' ' ' mermaid
flowchart TD
A[Homepage Who Cares card] --> B{Broad issue area}
B --> C[Records and transparency]
B --> D[Identity and data errors]
B --> E[Surveillance and institutional decisions]
B --> F[Speech, journalism, and organizing]
B --> G[Contribute, research, or change policy]
C --> C1[Federal FOIA]
C --> C2[State or local records]
C --> C3[Appeal or mediation]
C --> C4[Procurement and vendor research]
D --> D1[Correction, access, deletion]
D --> D2[Identity theft]
D --> D3[Credit report]
D --> D4[Housing or tenant screening]
E --> E1[Employment screening]
E --> E2[Workplace monitoring]
E --> E3[Student privacy]
E --> E4[Health privacy]
E --> E5[Government surveillance]
E --> E6[Biometrics]
E --> E7[Automated decisions]
E --> E8[Border or travel]
E --> E9[Telecom privacy]
F --> F1[Journalism and source protection]
F --> F2[Activist digital security]
G --> G1[Volunteer, research, or policy collaboration]
' ' '
One important refinement is that the wizard should not ask for open-ended narratives until the very end, and even then the field should be optional. 2IA explicitly says not to invite sensitive material, and official complaint portals vary a great deal in what they require: DOJ allows a report without email or phone but warns it cannot provide follow-up in that case; HHS OCR states that it does not investigate unnamed complaints and also offers language assistance and alternative formats; CFPB requires name, email, phone, and address to create a secure account, forwards the complaint to the company, may publish de-identified complaint data, and retains complaints under federal records rules. So the 2IA wizard should preview those privacy consequences before the user leaves the site. citeturn18view2turn18view4turn20view8turn18view0
The question stack below assumes one question per page, neutral wording, and no blame language. It also assumes that result pages can reorder official contacts, NGO contacts, and research modules based on the answers given.
| Level | Example question text | Expected answer type | Branching rule | Sample end-node IDs |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Which broad issue area fits best today? | Single select | Routes to records, identity/data, surveillance/decisions, speech/civic, or collaboration families | WC-01..WC-04, WC-05..WC-08, WC-09..WC-17, WC-18..WC-19, WC-20 |
| 2 | Which role best describes you right now? | Single select | Does not change family yet; changes copy, examples, and optional sidebars | WC-01..WC-20 |
| 3 | Which institution or system is involved? | Single select | Government, employer, school, landlord, health provider, telecom/platform, mixed, or unknown | WC-01, WC-09, WC-11, WC-12, WC-13, WC-16, WC-17 |
| 4 | What are you trying to do first? | Single select | Get records, fix an error, file a complaint, get expert support, learn, or contribute | WC-01..WC-05, WC-18..WC-20 |
| 5 | Is this mainly about a decision, a record, or ongoing monitoring? | Single select | “Decision” biases to housing, employment, AI, border; “record” to FOIA/correction; “monitoring” to surveillance, biometrics, telecom | WC-03, WC-05, WC-08, WC-09, WC-13, WC-14, WC-15, WC-16, WC-17 |
| 6 | How urgent is this? | Single select | Urgent answers suppress optional screens and raise hotline or complaint options sooner | WC-06, WC-13, WC-16, WC-18, WC-19 |
| 7 | Whose rights or records are affected? | Single select | Me, child/student, worker, tenant, newsroom, community, organization | WC-08, WC-09, WC-10, WC-11, WC-18 |
| 8 | What kind of concern fits best? | Multi-select, max 2 | Privacy, discrimination, false match/error, retaliation, speech, safety, access to records | WC-03, WC-05, WC-08, WC-09, WC-10, WC-12, WC-13, WC-14, WC-15, WC-17, WC-18 |
| 9 | Which technology or data source is involved, if known? | Single select | Background check, biometrics, AI score, school records, health records, phone/location data, unknown | WC-07, WC-08, WC-09, WC-11, WC-12, WC-14, WC-15, WC-17 |
| 10 | Do you know the organization or agency name? | Yes/No + optional short text | Enables organization-specific routing and prefilled contact cards | WC-01..WC-20 |
| 11 | Is the main target federal, state/local, private-sector, or mixed? | Single select | Splits FOIA versus state records and official complaint pathways | WC-01, WC-02, WC-03, WC-13, WC-16 |
| 12 | Do you need records before you can act? | Yes/No/Not sure | Adds or foregrounds records sidecar on any route | WC-01..WC-04, WC-13, WC-15, WC-20 |
| 13 | Do you need to correct information about you? | Yes/No/Not sure | Pulls toward correction, credit, tenant, employment, student, or health paths | WC-05, WC-07, WC-08, WC-09, WC-11, WC-12 |
| 14 | Do you want an official complaint route, an advice route, or both? | Single select | Orders official regulators before NGOs, or vice versa | WC-08..WC-19 |
| 15 | Do you want to stay as anonymous as practical? | Yes/No/Need advice | Warns when official routes require PII and promotes low-disclosure options where appropriate | WC-13, WC-16, WC-18, WC-19 |
| 16 | What evidence do you already have, if any? | Multi-select | Builds the preparation checklist on the final page | WC-01..WC-19 |
| 17 | Which contact method works best for you? | Single select | Reorders phone, email, web form, or mail contacts on final page | WC-03, WC-06, WC-12, WC-16, WC-18, WC-19 |
| 18 | Do you need accessibility or language support? | Multi-select | Adds alternate-format notes, translated resources, and phone options | WC-01..WC-20 |
| 19 | How much detail do you want right now? | Single select | Shows either a short checklist or a deep packet with prep notes and legal context | WC-01..WC-20 |
| 20 | Which next step feels most useful now? | Dynamic choice from top 1–3 cards | Locks to final result, while still exposing adjacent routes when confidence is low | One primary leaf from WC-01..WC-20 |
## End-node catalog
Every end-node page should use the same shell: a one-paragraph summary, a “Why this route?” note, a “Prepare before contacting” checklist, official contacts first, then NGO/support contacts, then a compact “Research / Volunteer / Policy” drawer. Result pages should also include a leave-site notice when the next destination is likely to collect personal information. That matters because official portals have materially different privacy expectations. citeturn18view0turn18view2turn18view4turn20view8
**WC-01 Federal FOIA request.** *Issue.* Use this when the user needs federal agency records about surveillance programs, contracts, policies, audits, training, or retention rules. *Contacts.* [FOIA.gov](https://www.foia.gov/), [How to make a FOIA request](https://www.foia.gov/how-to.html), [Agency search](https://www.foia.gov/agency-search.html), [MuckRock request form](https://www.muckrock.com/foi/create/), [2IA Public Records](https://2ia.org/public-records-and-foia/). *Blurb.* This is the default route when the institution is federal and the first task is to get records rather than argue conclusions. *Next steps.* Search public pages first, identify the agency, ask for a dated and narrow record category, then save your confirmation number. *Final-page snippet.* “Start with the record, not the theory. Ask for contracts, policies, emails, audits, or retention schedules tied to a named office and time period.” citeturn20view0turn20view1turn5view0turn23search20