Ventra Website Redesign Case Study

Brief

When I first landed on the Ventra website, I felt the same confusion many first-time users likely experience: What can I actually do here? As someone who regularly uses the CTA and prefers the ease of mobile apps, I was immediately struck by how fragmented and unclear the website’s navigation felt. This led our team to select the Ventra website as our redesign project, aiming to improve its information architecture and usability.

Challenge

1. Organized by broad categories, not user goals

The Ventra website organizes content by broad categories instead of aligning with user goals or tasks.

2. Unclear for first-time users

This structure causes first-time users to struggle with understanding what they can do on the site.

3. Disconnect between labels and intent

The core issue lies in the disconnect between navigation labels and user intent, making it hard for users to complete tasks smoothly.

Resulting user frustrations

• Unclear pathways
• Excessive clicking and searching
• Confusion and frustration

Objectives

1. Improve hierachy and structure

Redesign the site’s hierarchy for a more intuitive navigation, reducing exploration and improving access to options..

2. Refine categories for specificity

Clarify and narrow down category definitions to make it easier for users to find information quickly.

3. Clarify navigation lables

Revise labels to be more descriptive and straightforward, removing ambiguity and guiding users effectively.

User Scenarios

• A tech-savvy rider who wants to use the mobile app for convenience.
• A daily commuter needing to reload their Ventra Card.
• A new user trying to purchase their first Ventra Card.

Outcome

When I first landed on the Ventra website, I felt the same confusion many first-time users likely experience: What can I actually do here? As someone who regularly uses the CTA and prefers the ease of mobile apps, I was immediately struck by how fragmented and unclear the website’s navigation felt. This led our team to select the Ventra website as our redesign project, aiming to improve its information architecture and usability.

Project Timeline

Our process was structured to move from understanding the existing system to validating improvements through testing. We began with a detailed content inventory to map out what was currently on the site. This helped us identify redundancies, vague labels, and inconsistencies in hierarchy.

From there, we ran two rounds of card sorting to uncover how users naturally grouped information. These insights directly shaped our revised sitemap. Finally, we conducted tree testing to evaluate whether our restructured navigation made it easier for users to find what they were looking for using only link labels.

Each phase built on the last, helping us evolve the structure from assumption-based to user-validated.

What is Ventra?

Ventra is the official fare payment system for Chicago's CTA, Pace, and Metra services. The platform allows riders to manage transportation using physical Ventra Cards, mobile apps, contactless payments, and more. However, despite the range of offerings, the current site fails to communicate them clearly, especially to new users.

Content Inventory

The first step was analyzing the current navigation. We discovered overlapping categories, vague labels, and a mix of task- and topic-oriented items.

Issues

• Poor hierachy and structure
• Broad and vague categories
• Ambiguous navigation labels

First Iteration

Open Card Sort — 4 Participants

To begin restructuring Ventra’s navigation, we ran an open card sort with 29 items and 4 participants. This revealed how users naturally group content—and exposed several key issues in the site’s existing categorization.

1. “Information & Resources” Became a Catch-All

Too broad to be meaningful. Participants frequently placed unrelated content—like app features and card management—into this group. It became a dumping ground for anything unclear, revealing the need for tighter category boundaries.

2. Cross-Categorization Created Confusion

Cards didn’t have obvious homes. Payment-related items like “Mobile Payment with Ventra” or “Contactless Bank Cards” didn’t clearly belong anywhere. Card management tasks (renewing, registering, mobile wallet setup) were also scattered across groups—indicating users saw them as a distinct category.

3. Some Categories Didn’t Make Sense

“Tickets & Passes” and “Programs & Services” underperformed. Users didn’t associate relevant cards with these labels. The former lacked clarity, while the latter gathered unrelated content. Only the Ventra Transit Benefits Program fit cleanly, suggesting “Programs & Services” isn’t effective as a top-level group.

First Sitemap — Initial Refinement

This version of the sitemap was shaped directly by card sort findings. It aimed to reduce ambiguity and reflect how users mentally organize content.

1. Group Added: “Ventra Cards”

Separated card actions from general info. Users clearly treated card-related tasks as their own theme. Creating a distinct group made navigation more intuitive.

2. Grop Added: “Fare”

Distinguished fare from cards. We introduced a dedicated section for payment and ticket info, reducing overlap between payment methods and card actions.

3. Group Merged: “Programs & Resources”

Combined two weak categories. To address catch-all issues, we merged “Information & Resources” and “Programs & Services” into one more clearly scoped group.

Second Iteration

Second Round — 6 Participants

In the first round of testing our revised categories, we had 6 participants sort 29 cards. No label changes were made from the pilot. Unfortunately, results showed minimal improvement. Several problems remained:

1. “Programs & Resources” Became the New Catch-All

Still too broad. Cards like “Get Help with Ventra,” “Become a Ventra Retailer,” “Info for Seniors,” and “Using Vending Machines” were dropped here—even when better options existed. This indicated that the category lacked clear boundaries and purpose.

2. “My Account” Was Misplaced

Not a content category. Participants treated “My Account” like a navigation section, but it’s a utility function and shouldn’t appear in the top-level menu. It belongs in a persistent header or settings area.

3. Tasks and Topics Were Mixed Together

Inconsistent structure. Items like “Download App” (a task) were placed alongside topics like “Fare” and “Ventra Cards,” leading to cognitive friction. Participants were unsure whether they were navigating actions or information.

4. Fare-Related Cards Still Caused Confusion

Unclear categorization. Cards like “Mobile Payment with Ventra,” “Paying with Contactless Bank Cards,” and “CTA Paper Tickets” were placed inconsistently. Participants often split them between unrelated groups.

Third Round — 5 Participants

In the second round, we renamed 19 cards and 6 groups. Results showed significant improvement in categorization. However, a few challenges remained:

1. Overlap Between “My Cards” and “Ventra Cards”

Terminology confusion. Some cards meant for “My Cards” were placed under “Ventra Cards & Tickets,” suggesting that users saw these categories as too similar. Clearer naming or grouping may be needed.

2. “About Ventra” Still Acting as a Catch-All

Low clarity label. Even after renaming, “About Ventra” remained a fallback group. Many unrelated cards were still placed there, indicating the label wasn’t helping users identify its purpose.

Second Sitemap — Refined Architecture

We developed the second version of the sitemap based on feedback from both card sort rounds and input from our professor. This iteration addressed key problems in label clarity and category structure.

1. Split “Fare” into Two Distinct Groups

Introduced: “Payment Methods & Fares” and “Ventra Cards & Tickets.” Users were confusing fare info with card-related content. By creating two clear, distinct groups, we improved label precision and discoverability.

2. Renamed “Programs & Services”

Clarified category scope. The new label better communicates the type of content included—especially helpful for organizing broader support offerings like discounts and outreach programs.

3. Moved “My Account” to Utility Section

Resolved structural inconsistency. We moved “My Account” out of the top nav and into a persistent utility area. This aligned it with common user expectations for login and settings access.

Tree Testing

Purpose

Tree testing was conducted across two phases—Pilot & Final—to evaluate the usability of our navigation structure and test how easily users could locate content using only link labels (without visual context). Our goal was to identify confusing labels, misleading categories, and low-agreement patterns that could inform further refinement of the site’s information architecture.

Participants & Setup

• 7 total prompts
• Each task designed to mirror real-world user scenarios
• Users selected paths through the navigation structure using a tree testing tool
• Success measured by whether participants reached the correct location directly or indirectly

📊 Summary of Prompts & Success Rates

Key Findings

• Payment & Card Management Paths Remain Confusing: Participants frequently bounced between “Ventra Cards & Tickets,” “Payment Methods & Fares,” and “My Cards” when trying to complete actions like adding balance or setting up a card.
• Catch-All Sections Cause Misrouting: Several users selected “Help & Resources” or “Programs & Services” when confused, suggesting these groups acted as fallback buckets and lacked clarity.
• Wording of Prompts Affects Performance: The phrase “card is about to expire” may have triggered thoughts of replacement rather than balance top-up (Task 7). Likewise, technical terms like “mobile wallet” may need more intuitive phrasing.
• Correct Paths Often Involved 3–5 Steps: Even for successful participants, indirect navigation showed a need for better scannability and label hierarchy.