reunite.
Previous“Amber Alert“
INFO/COMM 3450
Group #2
Tarn Susumpow cs823
Lianne Bornfeld lsb233
Candice Ji wj83

2reunite.
Division of Labor (part.1)
Candice Ji [33%]
Interview 5,6
Flow Model Description
Drew Flow Model
WAAD
Drew Desig Informing Model
Requirement Statement
Portfolio Formatting
Digitized WAAD
Tarn Susumpow [33%]
Interview 1,2,3
WAAD
WAAD Description
Validation Interview 1,2
Validation Results
Lianne Bornfeld [33%]
Concept Statement
Concept Inquiry Introduction
Interview 4, Research
Wish List
WAAD
Design Informing Model Description
Model Validation Introduction

3reunite.
Candice Ji [33%]
1 Persona (Sarah)
Drone Storyboard (Together)
1 Sketch
1 Concept Validation
Ideation (Together)
Paper Prototype (Together)
Portfolio Formatting
Tarn Susumpow [33%]
1 Persona (Lauren)
Fitbit Storyboard (Together)
1 Sketch
Stopmotion
Ideation (Together)
Paper Prototype (Together)
1 Persona (Edwin)
Ideation (together)
Sneaker Storyboard (together)
1 Sketch
Paper Prototype (together)
Overall Findings
Presentation Board
Candy Ji Tarn Susumpow Lianne Bornfeld

4reunite.
Candice Ji [33%]
Design Overview
Medium-fidelity Prototype
High-fidelity Prototype
Tarn Susumpow [33%]
Video
Nielsen’s Heuristics test
High-fidelity Prototype
-Tutorial
-Registration’s Error Message
-Bottom‘Reunite’Bar
Concept Validation
Overall Findings
Poster
Candy Ji Tarn Susumpow Lianne Bornfeld

Table of Contents
Concept Statement
Contextual inquiry
Results of Users Studies
Wish List
Synthesis
Flow Model
Work Activity Affinity Diagram
Design-Informing Model
Requirements
Validation
Results
Persona and Goals
Primary Persona
Secondary Persona
Served Persona
Ideation
Brainstorming Session
Best Ideas
Final Concept Development
Proposed Concept
Concept Validation
Overall Findings
Overview of Final Design
Implementation
Video Demonstration
Neilson’s Heuristics
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
Task 4
Task 5
Concept Validation
Primary Persona
Secondary Persona
Served Persona
Overview Findings
Appendix
6
7
8
14
15
16
17
18
20
26
28
29
35
41
47
48
49
52
58
59
63
64
68
69
71
72
74
76
77
78
79
80
83
86
88
90

6reunite.
Reunite will supplement existing missing persons protocols, Code
Adam and Amber Alert, to help parents and guardians who have lost
a child in a public space to find the missing person by capitalizing on
the collective real time surveillance power of the immediate populace.
Reunite will both address issues of speed and sphere of influence at play
in less nefarious, more routine disappearances in which time since child
loss and description of the child and/or abductor are insufficient, ab-
sent, or irrelevant –– information often necessary to prompt more for-
mal protocols. Thus Reunite will act in a geographically proximal public
sphere, serving to navigate a space anterior to more extensive security
or police involvement –– a faction currently lacking the formal organi-
zation necessary to harness its civic agency and involvement. A focus
on simple design will enhance Reunite’s ability to mitigate confusion
and enhance composure during a stressful time for guardians, mean-
while creating an inviting space for the general public to participate.
Concept Statement

7reunite.
When thoughtfully coalescing a group of interviewees to comprehen-
sively address the key players in the missing persons workflow, we best
attempted to reconcile our preferences for in-person interviews in the
active space with genuine players within the workflow with our noted
limited resources. Therefore, while monetary and material resources
were constrained, we sought to capitalize on available points of access
to real life arenas in which missing children may be more prevalent, al-
beit in a college town with a notable density of young adults. Thus, we
sought out interviews in what we thought to be more heavily child-traf-
ficked areas, such as the Visitor’s and Information Center of Day Hall at
Cornell University –– which many families pass through during campus
visits –– and Target, a popular family-oriented general store represen-
tative of many other large establishments such as department stores
and amusement parks and indicative of their standards and protocols.
While interviews with key people such as the Day Hall operator and
Target cashier could be done in person in the space in which a po-
tential missing child case could ensue, we chose to interview real us-
ers such as parents, guardians and the public both in the active space
and over the phone, in an attempt to get both real time data and
also guarantee comment from users who have in fact experienced ei-
guarantee comment from users who have in fact experienced either
losing a child, being a lost child, or being responsible for a group of
children –– hence the following interviews with the college-aged
female, the father and the babysitter. Some interviews were diffi-
cult to arrange –– and will be discussed in greater detail in the wish
list section –– such as those with security officials and police officers.
To prepare each interview, we were sure to begin by explaining the
purpose of our inquiry, our approach –– obtaining permission and de-
veloping a sense of rapport with every interviewee before proceed-
ing further in the exchange. When possible, we sought to emphasize
demonstration over narration, seeking stories as often as we did facts.
Additionally, we curated background statistics, history and informa-
tion concerning the issue of missing children that couldn’t be supplied
via direct interview from notable missing children’s resource web-
sites such as Amber Alert and the National Center for Missing and Ex-
ploited Children. The former details the protocol, criteria, and efficacy
of the Amber Alert system, and the latter describes the steps to take
if one’s child goes missing, the Code Adam system, references, refer-
rals and other resources. Supplementary research allowed for a more
fully fleshed-out depiction of the current context of the issue of miss-
ing children as it currently relates to history, technology and society.
Concept Inquiry

8reunite.
Users Studies
Who: College-aged female
Why: We decided to interview this person as a
representative of the general population in
order to gain insights to how a general
population might think and react to a case of a
lost person.
When: 9/16/2014 at 10pm
Where: In person, in her apartment
Q: Have you ever used the app“Find My Friends”? Would you be interested in using a
location based app and what for?
A: No. I would potentially be interested in a location-based app if it’s not for dating
purposes. Maybe it would be helpful for reuniting with friends if they are lost.
Q: Have you ever found a lost person? How did you know they were lost? What did
you do?
A: Yes. At Disney World. The kid looked lost, and that’s how we knew we had to help
him. We sat with the child for 15 minutes until the child’s parent finally came around
again.
Q: Have you ever been lost yourself?
A: I used to lose my parents all the time in Walmart when I was around 5 years old,
and we would just keep circling the store until the find each other.
Q: What kind of technology do you think can be used to help find a missing person?
A: It was harder to find people back when I was younger because people did not have
telephones. A solution to this problem today would be a phone app that can locate
other people’s phones but the problem is kids don’t really have phones.
Q: Would you would help strangers find a lost person?
A: I would.
Q: Would you be comfortable putting information about a lost person online?
A: My concern is that there will be people with bad intentions who might try to take
advantage of the situation and kidnap the lost person.
Interview 1
Full interview transcript can be found in Appendix (page 92)

9reunite.
Who: Cashier
Why: We decided to interview this person to
gain insight to how big chain stores deal
with lost people and what are the existing
protocols.
When: 9/24/2014 at 7pm
Where: In person, at Target in Ithaca Mall
Q: How often do you get complaints about a lost person in this Target?
A: I would say I see around one case of lost child per month. It used to be much more
frequent, but parents have gotten better at looking after their kids.
Q: Can you walk us through the process of recovering a lost person?
A: Target takes lost people very seriously and all the staff has been trained to behave
in a discrete manner during the entire situation.
Protocol for finding a lost person:
1. All staff on floor are notified by a special code on walkie-talkies, which cannot be
understood by other customers.
2. Part of the staff stand by each exit and make sure that no one else leaves with the
lost person
3. The rest of the staff search for the lost person.
4. If Target staff cannot find the lost person after searching the entire area, they may
notify other shop owners and the Ithaca Police.
5. Staff will look as long as they need to until they find the lost person
On the other hand, if a lost person approaches the Target staff, the protocol is as fol-
low:
1. A Target staff will escort the person to the the guest service table.
2. The lost person is asked to provide some information about themselves and who
they are with.
3. Target staff makes an announcement on the sound system.
4. Target staff will remain with the lost person until they have been claimed by the
rightful family member or friend
Interview 2

10reunite.
Who: Visitors & Information Center operator
Why: We decided to interview this person to
gain insight to how lost person complaint
are deal with at the popular meeting point
within a large college campus.
When: 9/24/2014 at 4pm
Where: In person, at Day Hall
Q: Have you ever received a complaint about a missing person while working at this
table?
A: No.
Q: Do you have a lost person protocol?
A: Every operators have been trained about the protocol of dealing with such situa-
tion.
Lost Person Protocol: Make sure that the lost person cannot be contacted via tele-
phone -> Try to find out where the lost person was last seen and when -> Immedi-
ately alert center’s Manager and call Cornell Police and Ithaca Police -> Guardian or
caregiver of the lost person can wait at the waiting area or be escorted to the police
station in Barton Hall.
Q: What do you think is good about this protocol?
A: When someone is scared, it is always better to call the police. If I know where the
person was last seen, I may call the specific building in addition to calling the police
and because there’s always two people at the reception table, one person can always
run over and help look around very quickly.”
Q: What are some ways we can improve the current protocol?
A: They said the ideal situation would be to follow something like the Disney Land
model by putting arm bands on people at risk of being lost. But there is little we can
do personally.
Q: What kind of technology do you think can be used to help find a lost person?
A: Something like a sound system might be counterproductive because it might
frighten other students and there’s always a potential risk of someone using that
information against the university. I know I would be scared. Should there really be
a lost person, the Chief of Police may choose to send out an email notification to the
whole campus in addition to patrolling the area. That’s something she can do.
Interview 3

11reunite.
continue
Design Idea: There could be some kind of vetting process. Prove you have a child or
that the is vetted through a person’s name sex offenders list or something.
Q: Have you ever lost one of your children?
A: There are two instances I can remember –– one maybe doesn’t qualify. The nanny
took my daughter to the pool without telling me. But the other time, my son got out
of my sight at Sea World.
Q: How did you respond in that situation?
A: Basically I ran around like a lunatic, looking around with the other kids in tow
screaming his name. And it was only about two minutes when he came, because I
was screaming –– he heard me calling him. And I was pissed.
Q: Do you remember how you felt when you lost your son?
A: I felt bad. (Laughs.) I’m sure that different people react differently. But the first reac-
tion is panic and then terror. Those are the only two words I can think of. I remember
I yelled at him, and I made him cry. I was furious. I still feel bad about it. I think for
some people the panic makes it difficult to think of what to do –– but for me I’m very
pragmatic, so I think I would function under muscle memory.
Q: Do you find the resources at malls like this one, large stores, theme parks, etc. suf-
ficient to handle an issue in the event your child is missing?
A: Never having tested them, I can’t say whether they are sufficient. But I know that
some places take it very seriously. There’s a story about a little girl who’s mother, she
was out of the mother’s sight for a moment, and she vanished. And she went directly
to the front of the store, and they locked the store down. And they searched the place
and found a woman in the bathroom with the child, and she had cut all of her hair off
and was going to take her out of the store.
Q: What would you do were someone to ask you for help finding their child?
A: I would tell them to look for security and I would try to find somebody as well. I can
emphasize with the horrendous feeling that their having –– having experienced it for
a few seconds.
Interview 4

12reunite.
Q: Have you ever lost someone?
A: Yes, I took preschoolers from summer camp to recess, and we were playing hide
and seek, one of the kids started hiding again without telling anyone and I called her
name but she didn’t come out, she was taking it really seriously took 20 minutes to
find her, about 3 or 5, there was a playground but surrounded by wooded area, me,
couple of volunteers there, we looked everywhere and found her under these ferns in
the woods.
Q: Would you post online or seek help on social media?
A: If I randomly found someone social media wouldn’t be my first option, but yes
would definitely post online to seek help, one time my friend’s sister went missing
for 2 weeks… it ended up being a suicide.... he posted online, there was a huge FB
campaign on finding the girl. I donated to my friend’s campaign, if there was a search
fund I would donate, I would share posts about it, but I wouldn’t go out and look, I
wouldn’t do it personally I would hire help, it’s probably better that way, think gather
money is better.
Q: What would be helpful in that situation to locate your parents?
A: A big thing would be helpful, like a monument that is apparent. People would
know about this ahead of time, if a monument exist like that at every park, like
something that everyone knows about, everyone lost can go there and meet up, like
stopping at the sight of a stop sign, people just instinctively know to go there if lost
Q: What would be helpful in the situation of finding the lost person?
A: If everybody have a tag, if everyone had a medical bracelet kind of thing with con-
tact and info that’d be nice. You know Find My iPhone? If there were an app like that
for Find My Kid or something that would be so cool. It could be a GPS tracker embed-
ded in an earing, wristlet, necklace or something and you can just find the person by
using the app on your phone! If it’s not invented yet, someone should definitely do it.
Interview 5
Preschool teacher
We chose to interview this person because this
person deals with groups of children and need
to take care of them on daily basis. This person
also has experience with losing (and finding) a
child.
9/17/2014
Over the phone
Who:
Why:
When:
Where:

13reunite.
Q: What is the procedure or protocol if you found someone that’s lost?
A: So we have a program called Lost Children. Once a Cast Member, such as my self,
find a lost child 12 or under our immediate first step is to contact LC and register the
child’s name, age, location, and name of adult of that kid so that if the parent contact
ANY member they can readily retrieve the information, also if the parent contacted
a CM first then they’d also register with LC. Once a CM found a child alone, we are
immediately released from our position and we would remain with the child until he/
she is reunited. You know we’re trained to calm the child, take him/her to the meet-
ing spot if there is one, and trace back their steps if they remember. Kids are usually
found pretty quickly, at least in my own experience. I’ve only taken one kid to the Lost
Children Room on Main Street. That’s where kids will be entertained and cared for
until their parents find them. I believe Disneyland has never lost a kid… all children
are reunited with parents before parks close.
Oh and this service sometimes help disabled people as well! Like people with autism.
So not JUST for children but yeah primarily for children.
Q: Would you post online or seek help on social media?
A: In Disneyland?? God no… we tend to keep the information quite, we don’t even
mass distribute the alert to every employee. It’s more like a ripple effect, first the im-
mediate area is notified, people that would pick up trash are instead looking for the
kid (or parents) then eventually the area grow.
Q: What would be helpful in the situation of finding the lost person?
A: I actually think Disney’s system is pretty efficient, we can usually locate the parent
and kid within about 30 minutes. We introduced MagicBand this year and it makes
finding someone even easier. What is MagicBand? It’s a all-in-one device that connect
everything from hotel room pass, to meal and merchandise purchasing cards, to fast
pass, just about everything you need in Disney. It also uses radio frequency to detect
and send information about your physical location within Disneyland, so if a kid get
lost we can track him down pretty fast. This is optional though, not everyone has to
get it.
Q: Are there any complications to the system that slows down the service?
A: It sounds bad but sometimes parents don’t even know they’ve lost their kids until
much later… so we introduced Child Switch service so adult don’t have to wait inline
twice for rides. Adults are not so active in asking for help sometimes, they’d rather
look themselves, they don’t realize Disney has such an efficient system in place! Some
times the family are concerned because they don’t speak English very well, but we
have CM that speak virtually every language ready to help!
Funny thing, some children especially teenage children, don’t actually want to be
“found.”So their parents will be frantically looking for them but they’re just having
Interview 6
Disneyland Park Cast Member
We chose to interview this person because big
places like theme parks is crowded and people
often get lost with their groups. Disney is also
known for having a very efficient people-find-
ing system.
9/28/2014
Over the phone
Who:
Why:
When:
Where:

14reunite.
Were we to have had more time, and in some cases greater availability or
accesstopeopleinpositionsofincreasedpowerandauthority,wewould
have liked to have interviewed an exhaustive list of other individuals.
Initially, we would have loved to have had the opportunity to increase
the depth of our current interviews by speaking with multiple real users
with the same work role, in order to more comprehensively get a sense
of the average climate of each. Since we recognize one parent, guardian,
and college student isn’t sufficient to produce a representative summa-
tion of the opinions and sentiments of the caretaker and general pub-
lic work roles, we would first like to interview multiple people for each
role.This could thus include more specifically, caretakers who have been
helped by the Amber Alert and/or Code Adam systems and caretakers
who have, in fact, been helped by the public. Other instances of greater
depth include interviewing the general public both with and without
children in an effort to detect whether being a parent or guardian affects
the empathy with which one responds to another’s call for assistance.
In terms of breadth, speaking directly with a security guard, police of-
ficer, store manager, and specific staff within the chain of command
for reporting a missing person will lead to greater specificity concern-
ing the motivations, concerns and goals of each individual sub work
role. On a more ambitious note, doing so in multiple places of inter-
est, from department stores to amusement and public parks could
paint a fuller picture of the context of the issue of missing persons as
it relates more expressly with location. Additionally, contacting repre-
sentatives from Amber Alert and the National Center for Missing and
Exploited Children on a more macro level, and, if possible, on a more
micro level, interviewing recently found children old enough to com-
ment on their situation would be an interesting point of comparison
to better understand the emotions and thought processes that mo-
tivate the more extreme ends in the relevant spread of work roles.
Interview Wishlist

16reunite.
The diagram presents work roles within the system of finding a missing person. The
two obvious work roles in our system are the caregiver and the lost person. Other vital
roles include police, the staff of a given establishment (if there are any) and the general
public. The parent or guardian would turn to local staff for help to find their missing
person. Raw data was instrumental in informing how staff disseminates this informa-
tion throughout a given establishment or store. Typically, a staff member will report to
their manager with news of a missing person, who will in turn inform other staff mem-
bers, notify the police, and make an announcement on a loudspeaker if possible. The
general public then is able to communicate any findings with police to help locate the
missing person. Should the lost person be of age or of requisite mental soundness, he
or should could locate the police or the store’s staff in the event they cannot find their
caregiver. According to our conducted interviews, police also send emails to listservs
in order to inform the general public of a missing person. Some potential problems
in this system include a possible technology malfunction, long periods of wait time
prior to response and the possible unwillingness of a parent or guardian to seek help.
Flow Model

17reunite.
Work Activity Affinity Diagram
This diagram was reached through a three steps process. First, each member
of the group took turns writing down work activity notes from individual inter-
views onto yellow post-it notes. Each post-it note is labeled with a code that cor-
responds to the interview it originates from. Then, all of the notes were compiled
and shuffled, then split into three equal piles. Each member of the group then
took one of the piles of notes and began to make her own WAAD. Finally, all three
members came together to discuss each of our WAADs and to agree on how best
to combine them into one comprehensive WAAD with multiple levels of depth.
Digitized WAAD can be found in Appendix (page 91).

18reunite.
Design-informing Model
While initially, we thought a social model would best depict the potential diffi-
culties current users experience in the pursuit of a lost child, given that it captures
the more social aspects of the problem –– the environmental factors as well as the
thought-processes, policies, emotions, attitudes, concerns, and norms of behav-
ior at play –– analysis culled from the WAAD suggested that a flow model would
instead be the superior design-informing model to represent the missing persons
system. This is because while the social elements of this communal system are in-
herently crucial, at its core our research indicates that the essence of the system is,
perhaps paradoxically, a passage of information, not of person. And to best repre-
sent this bird’s-eye view of the dissemination of information concerning a lost child,
the flow model most effectively delineates the territorial boundaries between work
roles as they relate to positions of agency or dependence. The flow model orga-
nizes the many layered and bureaucratic work roles, their plethora of moving parts
and how they interconnect via types of information and medium of distribution ––
a characteristic of the system we grossly underestimated prior to thorough analysis.

19reunite.
EvaluationofourWAADrevealedthesignificanceoftheinterplayamongorganizations,individuals
and technologies –– both geographically proximal and socially intimate to the caregiver/lost per-
son duality, as well emotionally and geographically distant. Thus, in the final iteration of the flow
model, a number of work roles and artifacts were added to the model –– the interactivity among
themportrayedasheightenedandthecomplexityofthedirectionofinformationamplified.Among
the added work roles gleaned from our analysis were that of the abductor, friend and security of-
ficer as well as technological artifacts such as telephones, radios, computers and cell towers which
correspond to work with federal agencies, media stations, wireless companies and social media.
In this model, a caretaker has many channels through which he or she may locate the lost person.
Through interviews, we gathered it mustn’t go unnoted that a parent or guardian may fortunately
find their missing child on their own –– in which case, had the caretaker reached out for assis-
tance from the authorities, a possible problem may arise in their failure to alert security or police
in the event they locate their child, leading to a squandering of professional time and resources.
However, a caretaker may also elect to seek help from companions, or an establishment’s security
personnel –– who may be difficult to locate –– and who may either make an announcement via
loudspeaker or initiate a Code Adam, in which case managers alert other staff members to vigi-
lantly guard the store’s entrance and strategically search for the missing person. In more serious
cases, a caretaker may choose to contact the police, who often require a detailed description of
a child or potential abductor to move forward with a formal missing persons request or Amber
Alert –– an issue which may curtail police efforts. In the event an Amber Alert is initiated, wireless
companies are notified, as well as news stations who broadcast the information on television and
radio, on the Internet and via traffic signs. This information may then be utilized by the public
and via social media –– albeit with the potential effect of media bias –– to help catch suspected
abductors and find missing persons. Police may also contact federal agencies to assist in locating
missing persons, and to offer counseling or to create publicity materials.We also noted the agency
of some missing persons to independently seek help from security, police or the general public.
All and all, we illustrated the complex network of work roles as far more reflexive, interwoven
and cyclical than depicted prior to analysis of the WAAD –– heeding the delineation between
civilians lacking agency, and the more influential authorities and organizations that assist them.
Design-informing Model
Continue

20reunite.
Requirement Statement
Voluntary involvement for searching
Would try to help someone if they asked [C1a]
Will help people find their kids [C2d]
Never helped somebody find their child [D9c]
Rationale: amber alert on phones can be annoying, helping or not should be con-
sented by the user, should not be forced upon them… when they have time/extra
brainpower
Note: should have switch for sending real-time alert on and off
Ease of interface navigation
Preschool staff [A5e]
Shop owner [A4b]
Father [A8d]
Rationale: a wide range of users, but mostly more mature adults who may not be as
tech savvy as most smartphone users
Note: so should design with minimal features and very obvious UI
Positive Emotional Impact
Scared [E3d]
The first reaction is panic + terror [E2d]
The panic makes it difficult to think straight [A7k]
Sound system might frighten people [I1c]
Rationale: because it is a very stressful situation, the product should be calming but
full of authority. It should not stress out the user even more than they already are.
Related to ease of navigation
Encourage other people / general public to help
Parents are better with finding their kids not losing their kids [I5b]
Users – lots of strangers [A18e]
There’s little we can do personally [E8c]
Will help ppl find their kids [C2d]
Rationale: the service’s ability to find will be limited by how many people actually use
it, so the general public should be encouraged and be notified that they CAN help
Note: maybe reward system for trying to help out? Ranking of most active helpers…
Accommodate different users

21reunite.
Accuracy of lost person description
Ask for detailed description of lost person [D-4]
Rationale: when helping to look for someone, need to know what to look
for
Note: consider adding photo option? Detailed description… what they’re
wearing, height etc.
Fast response Time
Must confirm abduction [F-5]
Sat with lost child for 15 minutes [D-15]
Rationale: when can a user post their missing person online? Should be
faster than amber alert, but should not be cluttered with tons of posts of
kids lost and found within a minute
Set an approximated circumference of signals
Lost child at sea world [B4c]
Open space / outside [B6d]
Location based services [J3a]
Rationale: most likely missing person did not travel far, no need to alert
EVERYONE that uses the app
Note: consider ripple effect spread of information, first immediate area
(<5km) then further
Accuracy

22reunite.
Enhance function of law enforcement
Policemen [A6c]
Police send out emails [H2c]
Police have transportation ease [H3c]
Rationale: should allow police to use it efficiently in addition to system
already in place
Note: consider add-on features for law enforcement, enable them to
delete any missing child from server if found in timely manner?
Connectivity to social-medias
Use social media [D8e]
Rationale: use social media to reach wider range of people & spread
words faster
Note: should be able to publish one message to ALL media that you want
to connect at once, typing same message multiple times can be annoy-
ing…. That new fb feature where you can see friends near by, maybe alert
them instead post as status!?
Ability to reach out to amber alert system
Amber alert is partnership between law enforcement broadcaster trans-
portation agencies and other industries [D8e]
Rationale: if it ever gets that bad the app should allow easier access to
amber alert system
Note: maybe a pop up based on how much time has passed, once reach-
es the amber alert requirement sends a notification“call amber alert”and
“reunited!”
Internal or external portal for fundraising
Donate money for searching effort [I5b]
Would try to help someone if they asked [A18e]
Empathize with the“horrendous”feeling of losing child [E9a]
Rationale: at a certain point the search range become much wider and
professional help may be needed, in that case some kind of fundraising
effort usually happen
Note: maybe internal platform would be too much for the app… the op-
tion to post on the service for people to look out for and link to donate to
the effort would be helpful
Connectivity to other
resources

23reunite.
Protect privacy of underage minors
Would not put child info online [C3f]
Someone might kidnap the kid [E13b]
Can’t let other people take advantage of lost child [E5d]
Rationale: not everyone should be allowed to post photos of people they
found online especially that of an underage minor or autistic people that
cannot make decisions on their own, especially without the consent of
parents
Note: possible solution if you FOUND a person you can only post descrip-
tion not photo and parents of course have consent whether they decide
to post a photo or not
Limit on who can use the service
Rationale: don’t know if there’s a specific note on this but… it’d be bad
if a parent posted a note about can’t find child and an abductor saw
the note THEN actively looking for a little lost kid.. people with criminal
record shouldn’t be able to use the app? Is that discriminating? How can
we implement that?
Privacy

24reunite.
Low-tech connection device
Kids don’t have phones [I2e]
Find my iPhone but for people [J2e]
Find my friends [J4a]
GPS tag [J5e]
Rationale: lost-ees are often people with no technological abilities and
no not have smart phones. A no interface needed tag would be helpful to
find them from a caregiver’s perspective and no learning or risk involved
for the person most likely to get lost
Increase ability and demand of usage
Every kid that was lost was found [D13f]
Feel embarrassed for freaking out [E13f]
Rationale: venues have gotten pretty good at finding lost kids, so we
need something that will make our service relevant inside venues…
we could sell it as a easier way for parents to find their children without
alarming the store.. Save them the embarrassment and not feel/look
stupid
Note: make them feel smart for finding their kid….
Physical component /
Hardware

25reunite.
• Special geo-location device needed for physical component
• Secure portal between service and amber alert and law enforcement
• Need outside resources / sponsorship for rewards
• Maintenance and algorithm for when to delete and how long a post is kept
• Rippling effect notification system needs software development
• How do we protect user and helper’s privacy so the app doesn’t turn into a tool for abductors….
Constraints

26reunite.
Model Validation
When validating our design, we chose to present our finalized flow model to two
potential users who would assume the caretaker and general public work roles,
respectively. Though we acknowledge the ultimate need for comment from po-
lice or security to faultlessly cultivate an unambiguous picture of the missing
persons system and to validate the efficacy and success of our design, we con-
cluded that these work roles –– the caretaker and the general public –– were the
two most significant roles in terms of our proposed solution to the existing sys-
tem, and thus would dictate who we would target during the validation process.
Following the selection of the interviewees, we presented our flow model to each
within the real time public environment in which a missing persons case would en-
sue, as described by the proposed flow model. In an attempt to ensure our depic-
tion of the problem at hand from either side of the situation was accurate, relevant
and comprehensive, we reviewed the model with both interviewees and conducted
a brief dialogue in which we presented them with the model, reviewed it for the
above benchmarks and discussed its weaknesses, limitations and strengths. Any ad-
ditional comments were noted for review to help adjust and refine our understand-
ing of the missing persons system and the corresponding design-informing model.

27reunite.
Model Validation Results
The second participant, a 55 years old female, shared her experience as a care-
taker. She echoes the first participant’s answer on strengths of the model. The
model is very comprehensive. However, she felt that the model might be limited
to a specific culture or country because it uses only findings from the US systems.
She also mention that family should be added to the model as a separate unit.
From her experience, she always call all family members in the area to notify them
about the missing person as the first step, even before notifying the police. This
is especially important if the lost person has dementia, which might cause them to
head toward a place they were once fond of. A simple phone call to an older fam-
ily member might resolve the issue without getting any officials involve. In addi-
tion, she said, should the situation not resolve within a reasonable amount of time,
it is also common to call a local radio station so they could help make the announce-
ment and people driving on the road could help look out for the missing person.
The suggestions given by the two validators do not vastly affect our require-
ment statements. In fact, all the suggestions given by the interviewees fall into
three existing categories: accommodation of all users, accuracy, and physical
component/hardware. This further buttresses the notion that the existing re-
quirement statements adequately and comprehensively encapsulate the de-
sign needs of the system. Thus in order to best utilize the data from our validation
interviews, we simply have to make the following additions to each category:
Accommodation of all users
Always notify family members first
Accuracy
Set a approximated circumference of signals
Dementia patients may visit places from their past
Should call up all nearby hospitals
Call radio station directly to broadcast information
Drivers on the street can help look out for missing person
Physical Component/Hardware
Low-tech connection device
Kid-friendly cellphone that can only connect with parents
In addition, we should add“may not be applicable in all countries due to cultural,
legal, or systematic limitations”to our list of constraints.
Overall, participants who were chosen to validate the flow model seemed to agree
with the system that we have illustrated. The first participant, a college-age male,
represents the general public. When asked about the strengths of the model, he said
the model was able to capture the holistic and comprehensive network involved
in finding a lost person. The number of unique stakeholders in the model really ex-
ceeded his expectation. He felt that the model was particularly good at identifying
potential problems which may arise between different stakeholders. When asked
about the weaknesses of the model, the participant felt that some stakeholders can
actually be narrowed down more. For example, friends and companion may not
necessarily include family members. Family members may not be travelling with
the lost person but they are probably one of the first people a caretaker would call
because there is a likely chance that if the lost person cannot find the caretaker
that he or she is travelling with, they may choose to find a way to go home or to a
home of a family member they know. Another stakeholder that could be added
to the model is the hospital, which is another logical place for a caretaker to call.
Although impressed by the number of personnels and stakeholders included,
the first participant felt that this model is limited in its mention of technology and
hardware. Microchips for tracking individuals or even simple kid-friendly mobile
phone, which can only receive call from parents, should be included. In addition,
the model could elaborate more on existing system such as Amber Alert and Code
Adam. He is curious to see what happens after these systems have been activated
(for example, there should be an arrow from Amber Alert to the highway system).

29reunite.
Primary Persona
Lauren Kobayashi is a 34-years-old Japanese American freelance col-
umnist based in New York, New York. Lauren is married to Ken John-
son –– she kept her name –– who is a banker in a firm on Wall Street.
They have two lovely children: Taylor, 5, and Madison, who is only 9
months old. The family lives in a modest townhouse in Queens, where
Lauren works from home while taking care of her 9 month old. The na-
ture of Ken’s work is already very demanding, but it has intensified over
the past few months, since Ken has been selected as a candidate for
a senior manager position. Ken comes home later at night and some-
times has to leave for work on the weekend. The subway ride from their
home to Manhattan is usually around 40 minutes. The family owns one
car, which they use occasionally to go out of town to visit their rela-
tives. However, Lauren doesn’t really drive. She calls herself a control
freak, so she gets frustrated by bad drivers on the road who are out of
her control but still affect her safety and well-being. She is especially
uncomfortable about the idea of having her kids in the car with her
when she drives. The subway is her preferred mode of transportation.
Lauren writes a lot about art and culture. When she was studying at
Pomona College, she majored in English and Art History. Lauren’s cur-
rent focus is on culture, media and art. Her bi-weekly column in the
New York Times tells stories about various American fads and prac-
tices through the lens of her fictional Japanese grandmother. Lau-
ren herself is not opposed to any new trends and is more progres-
sive than her family, but coming from a traditional household, she
always approaches new things with a critical mind. Similarly, she
-gressive than her family, but coming from a traditional household,
she always approaches new things with a critical mind. Similarly, she
wants her kids to be open minded yet analytical about the ongoings
in the world. She feels that raising her kids in New York City will give
them the opportunity to become the worldly little humans she aspires
them to be. In an ideal world, Lauren would be able to take her chil-
dren to museums and art galleries and local markets every weekend.
Lauren keeps a fluid schedule due to the unexpected needs of her chil-
dren. Aside from dropping Taylor off at school at 9 a.m. and picking him
up at 3 p.m., Lauren’s weekdays are very unplanned. She usually spends
the morning working, then the afternoon napping with Madison. Al-
though Madison can’t move much on her own yet, Taylor is at the ripe
age of playfulness, and he usually runs off in every direction the moment
Lauren takes her eyes off of him –– she’s incredibly nervous about this.
Moreover,Laurentriestoavoidgoingoutwithhertwokidsbyherselfbe-
causeMadisonisstillveryyoungandsheneedsalotofattentionasitis.If
Ken goes with her, one person can take care of each child. However, with
Ken’s busy schedule lately, it’s proving to be harder than she expected.
Lauren doesn’t want to lag behind cultural trends by missing out on the
latest installments and gallery openings. All of Lauren’s friends who also
haveyoungchildrensaidsheshouldconsidergettingananny,butLauren
doesn’t trust a stranger to help her raise her children. She wants herself
andherhusbandtobethechildren’smaincaretaker.Ifsheneedstoreach
out for help, she’d prefer to keep it within her family and close relatives
only. Lauren did take up her friend’s suggestion on using a baby leash,
which she attached toTaylor’s backpack. However, asTaylor grows older,
Lauren feels increasingly embarrassed about the leash. Lauren’s parents
disapproved of the leash and teased Lauren about her parenting skills.

31reunite.
Primary Persona Rationale Lauren is a primary persona because she would have the most need for
the system. Not only is she constantly taking care of her children, but
she is also very active and enjoy visiting different public locations on
a regular basis. As a mother who has to take care of two young chil-
dren, Lauren needs a system that can help her feel safe bringing her kids
into the public. In addition, her fear of embarrassment and mistrust of
strangers means that she is not likely going to adopt traditional parent-
ing tools such as hiring a sitter, using a leash, or even constantly yell-
ing at her child to behave. She likes to be in control of the situation.
Therefore, she would benefit from a system that would let her take care
of her problems by herself by helping alert her of any possible risks
of losing track of her child. The system will also help her be better at
traveling with her young children by combining all her resources into
one compact, portable device. Additionally, since this a a more high-
tech product –– not to mention not an absolute necessity –– it would
follow that the primary persona would likely be in a middle or upper-
middle-class socioeconomic status, hence her career and education.

32reunite.
Primary Persona Goal Absolutely must include
Safe for her children
Able to know immediately if her children are at risk of being lost
Make her feel in control of the situation in the event her child is
lost
Let her quickly contact her family in case of emergency
Should include
Compatible with public transportation
Allow her travel to public spaces such as museums
Not embarrassing
Compile important contact information
Could include
Can be used by both her and her husband
Doesn’t involve leaving her children with strangers

33reunite.
Primary Persona Feedback
The subject of this validation is a stay-at-home mother. She has two
kids, a 3 year old boy and a 2 year old girl. Her husband works Mon-
day to Friday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Her 3-year-old boy goes to nursery
school, but her 2 year old girl still stays at home with her all day. The
user seemed to be satisfied with the description of the primary per-
sona. She thinks the persona is very interesting but certainly reminds
her of some of her friends and also of herself. She identifies with a lot of
Lauren’s struggles because she also feels a lot of pressure to be a good
parent. She was impressed by the list of Lauren’s goals and felt that it
was very exhaustive, so she didn’t have much to add except that the
mother’s embarrassment is certainly secondary to child’s safety. The
user’s suggestions have been incorporated into the persona’s goals.
Q: What do you agree with in this persona?
A: This is accurate. I sympathize with this mother. I am also someone
who wants my kids to be very worldly, so I take them to a lot of places.
I teach my kids a lot about not going off with stranger or running too
fast in public. I usually take my toddler with me everywhere and leave
my 4 year old with a sitter. I agree that it shouldn’t be too expensive,
because it won’t be fair for lower income mothers. They also care about
their children’s safety
Q: What do you disagree with in this persona?
A: I agree with the persona, but I don’t think parents get embarrassed
when it comes to the child’s safety.
Q: How can this persona be improved?
A: I think you should just note that young mothers today are very tech-
nology savvy, because it might influence the direction of your solution.

34reunite.
Revised Goals Absolutely must include
Safe for her children
Able to know immediately if her children are at risk of being lost
Make her feel in control of the situation in the event her child is
lost
Let her quickly contact her family in case of emergency
Should include
Compatible with public transportation
Allow her travel to public spaces such as museums
Minimize risk of public embarrassment –– must be discreet
Compile important contact information
Compatible for technology savvy mother
Could include
Can be used by both her and her husband
Not too expensive
Doesn’t involve leaving her children with strangers

35reunite.
Secondary Persona
Sarah Fuller is a 27-year-old professional nanny. Because of Sarah’s love
for children, she studied developmental psychology at the University of
California, Los Angeles. Upon graduation, Sarah had troubles finding a
job at local school districts, so she decided to save up money to attend
graduate school. Subsequently, Sarah registered with a professional
nanny agency and quickly started working with her first family. She
has been a nanny for 5 years now, and she loves it so much she doesn’t
plan on going back to school in the foreseeable future. Sarah currently
divides her week up between two well-established families in L.A. The
first family, the Gonzales, have three boys within an age range of 3 to 6
years old. The second family, the Williams, have a boy and a girl, ages 4
and 2 respectively. On a more personal front, Sarah got engaged a year
ago to a man named Mike; they are planning to wed next year and get
started on what they hope to be a two child family shortly after that.
Although she learned about how to take care of children in her classes,
she still gets flustered with all the tasks at hand. Sarah does her best to
hide her frustrations from her employers and often turns to technology
to make her job easier. She is very tech savvy and loves the latest gears
and apps: She is not shy about trying new things — especially when
savvy and loves the latest gears and apps: She is not shy about try-
ing new things — especially when they make her life simpler. When
Sarah is not working, she enjoys going to the beach and shop-
ping with her friends. She is, however, always readily on call in
case her employers have emergencies and need assistance. Sar-
ah doesn’t mind being on call 24/7 because she is a kind-heart-
ed person and genuinely cares for the children and their families.
In general, Sarah is a pretty trusting person, but growing up in L.A. she
knows that the city is not always a very safe place. She is often concerned
aboutthesafetyofthechildrenshetakescareofandavoidsgoingtolarge
publicplacesifshecanhelpit.However,thechildrenareveryactiveatthis
age and constantly demand going outside to play, which stresses Sarah
out immensely. Sarah is pretty carefree and easygoing when it comes to
herself, but she takes the children and her job very seriously. So far she
has a great record of caring for the children, so the families trust her very
much. Her goal is simple: to keep up the good job and make no mistakes
in caring for these children. She hopes that these families will then refer
her to other possible parents in need of a nanny. Sarah wants to eventu-
ally get more training and become a high-end nanny and work for a very
wealthy household. She dreams to be the Mary Poppins of modern day.

37reunite.
Secondary Persona Rationale Sarah is a secondary persona because she is satisfied by remedies that
address all of Lauren –– the primary persona’s –– needs, but also has one
other very important additional need—to communicate with the fami-
lies about whereabouts of their children even in the absence of a crisis
situation.Herjobasanannyrequireshertotakecareofchildrenandkeep
trackofthematalltimes;thefamiliesaskhertokeepthemupdatedwhen
she takes the children out to the park or to the stores. Sarah is the type of
person to be actively looking out for new products and her love for tech-
nologypromptshertotrynewthings,eventhoseoutoftheordinary.L.A.
is a big metropolitan city with various public places filled with crowds of
people, including dangerous neighborhoods and less-than-savory indi-
viduals. Sarah is incredibly motivated to continue to do a good job at
taking care of the children; her track record has been great so far and she
wants all the help she can get to keep it that way. She doesn’t have magic
like Mary Poppins, but she knows that new technologies are the closest
thing to it, and can maybe even ease some of her frustrations to boot!

38reunite.
Secondary Persona Goal Absolutely must include:
Safe and comfortable for the children
Able to locate children immediately when they go out of sight
Make her feel in control of the situation
Should include:
Communication system with parents
Ability to track multiple children
Minimal alarms sent to parents and authorities
Could include:
Social interactions with other parents or nannies using the
product
Long battery life, so as not to require constant update or atten-
tion
Easy to use functionalities to quickly attend to the matter

39reunite.
Secondary Persona Feedback
The subject of this validation is a 25-year-old woman working as a
nanny in New York City. The interview was conducted through a phone
call. She is unmarried and has no children of her own, and is in school
part-time earning a degree in fashion design. The subject currently
works for one family on the Upper West Side, taking care of two chil-
dren ages 3 and 5 on a daily basis. The subject believes that Sarah is
an reasonably accurate persona of some of her friends also working as
nannies. The subject consider herself tech-savvy, but not to the extent
of a computer scientist; she will try new things, but if they’re difficult
to grasp she would quickly give up on them. She identifies with some
of Sarah’s personal goals, and agrees with all of Sarah’s goals for the
system with the exception of minimal alarms to parents and authori-
ties. She would prefer no alarm unless initiated. From the information
gathered through the validation, we agreed to change minimal alarms
to discrete process.
Q: Do you identify with this persona?
Yes, this is an incredibly detailed description of someone! I got con-
fused for a second thinking it must be a real person. It definitely could
be, it reminds me of many nannies I know, including myself.
Q: In what ways can you relate to the persona and in what ways do you
not?
Like Sarah, I also didn’t plan on a career as a nanny. But she actually
seeks out to professional agencies; I just got referred to it through a
family friend. A lot of friends I know started out doing babysitting, even
when they were teenagers! At some point it turned into a real job; I
think it’s pretty typical for girls in metropolitan cities to work as a nanny
to save up money for school. You said Sarah doesn’t want to go back to
school, but I still do. I can relate to her goals of starting her own fam-
ily and work for a really wealthy family, but I also have more personal
goals –– like I want to be able to have my own small fashion brand
sometimes in the future.
Q: Do you agree with her goals for the product?
Yeah, I think her goals are pretty realistic. I think it would be really cool
to have the ability to communicate with other nannies and parents
nearby. There’s always other parents and nannies around the play-
grounds; it’d be nice to able to keep an eye out for each other’s chil-
dren. Sometimes us adults would chit-chat on the side and lose site of
the kids for a second, so I think being able to locate them immediately
when they go out of sight would be very nice.
Q: Any goal you disagree with?
Not really, I think they’re all pretty standard goals. Actually I feel like
the system should not alarm the parents at all unless I decide to notify
them. I would feel like their parent is constantly watching me. Most
things that happen on a daily basis are not big deals, but if alarms
keeps going off, to the parents it might make them more anxious. It
would make me anxious; I would prefer something more discrete.
Q: Any improvements you can suggest?
Unless Sarah is taking this nanny career very seriously, I feel like she
would have some other personal goals you know? Nothing really for
the system that I can think of, though.

40reunite.
Revised Goals Absolutely must include:
Safe and comfortable for the children
Able to locate children immediately when they go out of sight
Make her feel in control of the situation
Should include:
Communication system with parents
Ability to track multiple children
Discrete process to not call attention to her frustrations
Could include:
Social interactions with other parents or nannies using the
product
Long battery life, so as not to require constant update or atten-
tion
Easy to use functionalities to quickly attend to the matter

41reunite.
Served Persona
Born and raised in Miramar Florida, Edwin Suarez wasn’t always the
workhorse he is now. Raised by a single mother, Christina, who worked
often and worked late, Edwin was always a very independent child.
In high school less concerned with scholastic success as he was with
enjoying the South Florida beach scene, Edwin was always a private
man, never discussing among his friends his troubles at home, con-
cern for his mother or how being estranged from his father often tor-
mented him. Though Christina wasn’t home enough to help Edwin
with his studies or instill an appreciation for education, she was an
invaluable lesson in the value of a hard earned dollar. Eager to help
his mother and earn a little extra cash to spend with friends, Edwin
picked up a part-time job as a cashier at the local Wal-Mart superstore.
Upon his high school graduation, Edwin enrolled in the local commu-
nity college, Broward College, to study business management, and con-
tinued with his position as cashier to work his way through. Roughly
after his third year with the company, Edwin was promoted to Cus-
tomer Service Manager. He loved the management training opportu-
nities Wal-Mart provided, but moreover, he loved the warm, familial
environment offered by its corporate culture. Now 38 years old, Edwin
has worked his way up to Store Manager; he now makes a whopping
$100,000 a year and credits Wal-Mart not only with his professional suc-
cess, but also with the health of his family –– able to support his mother
and his beautiful wife and twin 16-year-old girls. Nearly two decades
health of his family –– able to support his mother and his beauti-
ful wife and twin 16-year-old girls. Nearly two decades into his ca-
reer with Wal-Mart, he now aspires to be a regional manager.
When he has the time, Edwin still enjoys hitting the beach, this time with
his wife and children in toe. It’s not so much the cool beers and soccer he
enjoys anymore, so much as watching his girls, Veronica and Penelope,
happily reading in the warm sand or running from incoming waves ––
even if they sass him every once and a while! He hopes his position at
Wal-Mart will help pay for college for both his daughters –– especially
since his wife makes a modest income as a kindergarten teacher. He
wants to see his children appreciate schooling in a way he never had an
opportunity to do, and for both of them to have the chance to attend
whateverfour-yearinstitutiontheyshouldbesoproudtobeacceptedto,
without having the worry of working their way through like Edwin once
did. Thus, in an effort to snatch that promotion, Edwin is working even
more diligently to ensure the store is running smoothly.To keep morale
up, Edwin likes to ensure his staff is inspired and positive and that he
can create the friendly, safe and family-oriented atmosphere that drew
him to the company in the first place. To maximize efficiency and order
in the workplace, Edwin is sure to run a tight –– albeit happy –– ship,
that doesn’t interfere with the quality family time he values so dearly.

43reunite.
Served Persona Rationale Though Edwin doesn’t directly benefit from the proposed product, he
expertly exemplifies a served persona, as he would reap incidental ad-
vantages. Not only are his goals for efficiency and order aided, but so
also is his penchant for privacy and pride in family-orientation. Since
lost children and Code Adams require employees to depart from their
work to survey the area, lost children are both threatening to the per-
ception of his store as a safe place and detrimental to the productiv-
ity of his staff. A parent screaming their child’s name, or reporting a
missing child on the PA is a surefire way to instill doubt in an estab-
lishment’s security. As a private person, Edwin would appreciate fam-
ily matters being remedied internally, quickly and quietly without the
involvement of others, on a personal level as much as on a profes-
sional one. And especially because he’s seeking a promotion, his vest-
ed interest in safety and efficiency would be that much greater. Also,
since his children aren’t within the target age brackets of the prod-
uct, he wouldn’t be a primary user, but as a family man, he would fur-
thermore recognize the desire to discreetly keep one’s children safe.

44reunite.
Served Persona Goal Absolutely must include:
A quiet means of locating a lost person
Stress preventative measures, rather than ad hoc attention
Foreground all necessary safety features to ensure the effective
management of the situation
Should include:
A primarily guardian-based operation
Discreet appearance and/or functionality that won’t attract un-
necessary attention from customers
Could include:
Ability to be used quickly to cut down on the length of time a
child or elderly person is at risk
Speedometer to minimize the risk of a child running off and
getting him or herself into mischief

45reunite.
Served Persona Feedback
The subject of this validation is a male store manager at Target. He has three teenage
sons, and has worked in retail for decades now. The subject largely reacted positively to
the persona and the listed goals –– overwhelmingly stressing the importance of safety
over any other consideration i.e. order, efficiency, etc. While the subject, naturally, dif-
fered from the persona, he found many of Edwin’s general qualities highly relatable, such
as his interests and work ethic –– particularly his management style. As for goals, the
subject wholeheartedly agreed with the vast majority of them and their order of impor-
tance, stressing time and time again the significance of customer safety over anything
else. He suggested increasing the importance of the “ability to be used quickly,” since
without this the product is essentially useless to a parent, and thus provides no conse-
quential benefits to him either. His one main critique however, was a large one, in that
what we assumed to be of chief importance –– covertness when handling a case of a
missing person as to not worry other customers or disturb the shopping environment
–– needed to be entirely removed. Upon interviewing the subject, we acknowledge the
“discreet appearance and/or functionality that won’t attract unnecessary attention from
customers” as a “should goal” would be sufficient in the same respect. The added stress
on quietness was determined to be an entirely unnecessary specification, unworthy
of even a “could” status, as it removes the locus of interest from safety to appearances.
Q: Do you identify with this persona? In what ways do you relate and in what ways don’t
you?
A: Unlike Edwin, I was raised in a fairly conventional household. My father worked and
my mother was at home. After getting decent grades, I took a job in Assistant Manager
in a national drug chain store –– similarly, I suppose, because it was available, and I was
determined to make a living and become independent, especially coming from a family
of modest means. I started working at Target when I moved to the area, eventually be-
coming a store manager. They offer so many opportunities here, and I make a nice living
–– that’s where a really relate, I guess –– to provide for my wife and three older sons. And
opportunities here, and I make a nice living –– that’s where a really relate, I guess –– to
provide for my wife and three older sons. And yeah, [laughs] I run a tight ship too –– per-
haps a little tighter than people would like! But I understand the importance of keeping
my staff motivated –– it’s just important they’re as productive as possible so everything
runs smoothly and we can avoid any oversights.
Q: Do you agree with these goals?
A: I absolutely, absolutely agree that preventative methods must be included. It’s better
for me and the store –– and really just everyone in general –– that there isn’t an incident,
as opposed to responding to one. It’s not just a matter of productivity –– though that’s
true because then I got to send my guys to check up on a kid or something, and then
they’re not doing their real job. But mostly, it’s just safest for the kid, you know? Same
goes for the safety features that make sure everything’s handled: That’s good too. Impor-
tant.
Q: What else do you agree with?
The discreet thing is good, so is the primarily guardian-based operation. Neither is a must,
but would be nice. I mean we have protocols; we have Code Adam and stuff, but it’s bet-
ter if we don’t have to get involved. Same with the discreet thing –– it’s really good not to
attract unnecessary attention. Like I said, it’s better, but if we’re really needed, we’re really
needed, you know? It’s not the most important thing; the most important thing of course
is that everyone is safe.
Q: What about the goals do you disagree with?
A: Well for starters, I really don’t think quiet detection should be at the top of the list:
That’s safety. So maybe that should be a “could.”Silent might be nice, but effective is the
first priority. Also, I think the ease of use part should be higher in the goals. I mean if the
device isn’t quickly and easily usable, it’s of no use to a parent and certainly of no conse-
quential benefit to me. Whats the point then, you know?
Q: Any other improvements you can suggest, or do you have any other comments?
A: Yeah I guess the only other thing is the speedometer part. That seems a bit unnec-
essary to me: It’s definitely a “could,” because it’s not really important. Though running
around like a wild child is of course a negative –- and I can tell you I hate a screaming or
hyperactive kid in the aisles of my store –– it’s not the end of the world like a lost child
could be. Really safety’s number one is all. Anything else is just icing

46reunite.
Revised Goals Absolutely must include:
Stress preventative measures, rather than ad hoc attention
Foreground all necessary safety features to ensure the effective
management of the situation
Ability to be used quickly to cut down on the length of time a
child or elderly person is at risk
Should include:
A primarily guardian-based operation
Discreet appearance and/or functionality that won’t attract un-
necessary attention from customers
Could include:
Speedometer to minimize the risk of a child running off and
getting him or herself into mischief

48reunite.
Brainstorming Session Some key ideas pulled form the brainstorming seesion:
1. An accessory with a GPS tracker for the child
15. Drones with camera that connects to hand-held technology that par-
ents or security can observe
51. Shoes with a pedometer that can track whether a child exceeds an
allotted step count, thus indicating they are straying too far
72. Fit-bit type accessories for children that can track similar data
85. Remote control surveillance robots that patrols an establishment for
wandering children
90. A bluetooth activated device that can operate without wifi and can
instead indicate when the child wanders off too far, without giving pre-
cise location
Full list of 100 brainstorming ideas can be found in Appendix (Page
79)

49reunite.
Best Ideas
This storyboard reflects the combination
of idea #90, #72 and #1 which combines a
wearable hardware with a software appli-
cation. The general idea is that the “track-
ee,” such as young child or old person,
would wear a bracelet that is synched with
the “tracker’s,” a parent or a sitter’s, phone.
The wristband has several component
such as accelerometer to track how fast
the trackee is going, a compass to track
the direction the trackee is heading, and a
bluetooth or wifi.The general idea is based
on existing technology that can track us-
er’s walking/running pattern such as the
FitBit or the UP band. The storyboard de-
picts a mother who is out shopping with
her son, but lost track of him while she was
comparing different items. She can quickly
find out where her son is by checking her
phone to verify his location, thereby ap-
proaching the problem of missing persons
slightly more preventatively and privately.

50reunite.
Best Ideas
This storyboard illustrates idea #51 –– which combines an
accessory with a phone application. The devices would co-
exist, in that the child’s sneakers would house a pedometer
of sorts and a compass, and would be able to relay the in-
formation of its wearer to the guardian’s smartphone de-
vice. The sneaker was elected as the accessory of choice in
this scenario because it is a necessary wearable that both
cannot be forgotten, and is covert enough not to draw the
attention of any nefarious individuals seeking merely to
remove any trackable devices; it also has the ability to be
customizable and fun for children. The storyboard depicts
the devices in use, with a mother fastening the“pedometer”
sneakers onto the child’s feet, and subsequently setting the
maximum step count for the child. In the next frame, the
mother, distracted by trying to reach an item on a tall shelf
at the store, turns around briefly –– allowing her little girl a
small window of opportunity to wander away. The mother
is terrified to find her child missing. And while the little girl
can be seen petting a puppy, having ostensibly wandered
off to give the dog some love, her sneakers transmit infor-
mation regarding the child’s distance to the mother’s phone
because she has exceeded the maximum step count. Judg-
ing by the distance and directionality, the mother can then
make an educated response in pursuit of her child.

51reunite.
Best Ideas
This storyboard illustrate the idea #15 (drones with cam-
era that connects to handheld technology that parents
or security can observe) and #85 (remote control sur-
veillance robots that patrol an establishment for wan-
dering children). In this storyboard, a mother goes to a
park with her two children when she sees an old friend.
As she settles in for a chat, the children wander off. When
the mother cannot find her children she approaches the
designated drone operator –– who would be featured
prominently at all large public establishments like parks,
stores, beaches and so on.This drone operator has a small
flying camera drone, which he can maneuver much faster
than a parent is able to by merely running around. Ad-
ditionally, it ensures establishments don’t squander their
resources or manpower, by assigning the duty to solely
one individual. The drone locates the mother’s children in
this scenario, and he is then able to relay their location to
the mother who can then reunite with her kids. The main
concept here, is that parents and children don’t have to
do or prepare anything, thus systemizing and unifying
the discovery process –– thereby investing in one expen-
sive –– though lasting –– resource that eliminates the
need for multiple people, organizations, parties, material
resources, etc.

52reunite.
This system includes an app and a wristband. The wristband
looks like a watch, but actually includes other crucial things
such as the compass and the pedometer, which will help the
app user keep track of the wristband user. The wristband is
also customizable using a silicone cover (similar to iPhone
covers). Therefore, it is suitable for all ages and genders. The
wristband is light and safe. Once it is on, it can only be taken
off if the correct passcode has been entered. The passcode
is entered by pressing the correct pattern on the 6 dots sur-
rounding the screen. The app can track multiple people at
the same time to accommodate caretakers who may be re-
sponsible for looking after multiple people. The app user
can track the location of the wearer as well as their speed
and direction. The app user can set when to be alerted (via
phone vibration and sound) depending on how far away the
wristband wearer is from them. They can also add a second-
ary contact person who will be notified if they themselves
do not respond to the alert after an allotted amount of time.
The user just has to swipe to acknowledge the alert. Finally,
there is a quick emergency guide page with all the impor-
tant numbers including a mass texting option to quickly
notify other family members. Non-smartphone users can re-
ceive alerts via SMS. Most notably, this design capitalizes on
GPS and diode technologies.

53reunite.
Pros
Secure strap
Customizable with cover accessories
Can add multiple people
Highly accurate due to GPS and diodes
Acknowledge alert then move to other contacts
Timed notification
Cons
Very expensive –– diodes and GPS add incredible
cost
Pedometer wouldn’t provide as much information
as accelerometer
How does one distinguish between the different
bands?
How would GPS and other location-based compo-
nents work in the absence of a smartphone –– it’s
not solely a matter of receiving the alerts
Sound alert may be too attention-grabbing

54reunite.
This sketch illustrates a similar tracking device and application combina-
tion. In this version, a device would contain a GPS (for locations further
from the base), accelerometer (for speed at which the tracker is mov-
ing), pedometer (for approximate steps the tracker took) and compass
(for direction in which the tracker moved) which would be embedded
into some wearable accessory, or perhaps the ability to embed it into
an array of accessories. The tag would require the interaction of a smart-
phone to interact with it, which would be synced with the tag to track
the information of the wearer. The tag can be embedded in an array of
different products to keep kids entertained, so they are fun, novel and
desirable for children –– some ideas include watches and hairclips. On
the smartphone interface, the homepage would be a map with the lo-
cation of where the tracked individual is located. If there are more than
one child being tracked, an activation button on the top would show
all the tracked persons locations –- allowing one to zoom accordingly.
Buttons along the bottom of the screen allow the user to see how long
the tracked individual has been in a given location, the steps they took
today and the contacts that have been granted the right to view this
tag, and so on. If the caregiver lost sight of the tagged person, he or
she would use the app to identify the movement, direction and location
of the child. The app would also have a health component that tracks
the activity level of the child. It would set a recommended activity level
based on the kid’s age and weight, much like a FitBit. In this way, the
accessory will be more than a safeguard against harm or loss, but more-
over a comprehensive assurance of overall health and wellness.

55reunite.
Pros
It’s incredibly discrete and versatile
You can track movement even in from a distance in
a more everyday way, not solely for nefarious rea-
sons –– which may be of benefit to the caretaker/
nanny persona
Can track multiple individuals
Authorization required for those wanting access to
a child’s location using the device
Cons
Certain accessories aren’t as permanent, removabil-
ity may be an issue
Cost of GPS, ability to use without Wi-Fi
Dependent on having a smart phone
Is health aspect a distraction from missing person
prevention?

56reunite.
In this iteration of the design, I chose to make the primary functional
technology bluetooth. While GPS can provide exceedingly accurate
readings of a missing persons location, I reasoned that this extreme ac-
curacy isn’t necessary if we tackle the issue of missing persons from a
preventative perspective as opposed to a retroactive one. In this way,
bluetooth connection between the device and guardian’s phone can be
used to set a radius of a given number of feet –– a radius of roughly
230 feet maximum –– rendering the lack of accuracy nearly a moot
point. The same argument goes for bluetooth’s inability to be detected
as strongly through walls: Given that parents will be setting radiuses of
likely no greater than 20 feet, a child wouldn’t likely be able to travel as
far as another room –– especially in light of the fact that the device will
be used chiefly in large, open public areas. This bluetooth alternative
will also render the product markedly cheaper and thus more accessible
to a larger audience –– nearly a $70 price difference. Also, it wouldn’t
require Wi-Fi, and thus wouldn’t be restricted by smartphone capabili-
ties or a lack of signal; it would also require less frequent charging than
a GPS device. Furthermore, the accelerometer and compass would al-
low the part to track speed and direction. With these features the coor-
dinating phone application would allow guardians to register multiple
devices to track more than one child, which could be toggled between
within the upper right hand corner of the app’s pages. The home screen
would easily display the radius setting in addition to the child’s current
distance from the guardian, speed and direction.When a child nears the
radius boundary, the device will vibrate to warn the child he is straying
too far, and in the event he altogether exceeds the radius, the device
will begin to sound an alarm –– thus allowing the parent to locate the
child. The next page provides a localized list of emergency contacts, so
in the event the child is more seriously missing, the guardian can con-
tact multiple people of interest without ever straying from the app. The
next slide, again in order or increasing seriousness, allows the guardian
to quickly contact emergency resources.The final page would work in
combination with other users of the app, using their bluetooth to indi-
cate the last place the the child’s device was seen. More superficially, the
device will be a comfortable silicon material to encourage continued
wear, with customizable bands appeal to children, and a watch face to
make the product’s chief intent more discrete.

57reunite.
Pros
Discrete
Not dependent on Wi-Fi
Doesn’t require a smartphone necessarily
Vibration warning on the child’s side
Emergency contact pages, and the ability to con-
tact multiple people of interest in-app
Doesn’t require as much energy
Wouldn’t need to be charged as frequently
Customization abilities
Less expensive
Cons
Accuracy at a distance
No exact location
Alarm on the watch can be embarrassing
How to distinguish between different bands within
the application?
Bluetooth have limited range
Map function requires other people to have the
app too

58reunite.
Proposed Concept
Link to stop motion movie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKjVqwnswac&feature=youtu.be

60reunite.
Evaluation 1
The subject of this test is a stay-at-home mother. She is a representative
of the primary persona. She has two kids, a 5 year old boy and a 3 year old
girl. Her husband is a post-doctorate student who has a fluctuating sched-
ule. Her mother lived with her for a while to help her raise her children, but
now that they both go to school, the subject does most of the work on her
own now, often taking her children around town with her to run errands
by herself.
Setting: The subject was interviewed in person at a library on campus.
Conclusions: The subject really liked the design and felt connected to it.
She said the interface is easy to use and was impressed by features such
as mass texting and secondary alert. However, she is still concerned about
the safety of the wearer and would like there to be additional verifica-
tion steps to ensure that only parents and family members can track the
wearer.Therefore, we conclude that we should focus on developing safety
mechanisms and capitalizing on the intuitive user experience.
Q: What do you like about this design?
A: I like that it is very easy to use. There are not too many functions, but
the existing functions are enough already. My favorite part is that you can
contact someone else if you don’t respond personally in a certain amount
of time. I also like the mass texting option a lot. I think kids will like it a lot
because it is not obstructive or annoying. It’s like wearing a watch.
Q: What do you dislike about this design?
A: I don’t think the contact page is necessary. You can just call people di-
rectly from your phone without going through the app.
Q: What can be improved about this design?
A: I think when you enter individual information, there should be more
information necessary to enter in, because someone might lose the wrist-
band and someone else can add it. Maybe the serial number sticker can be
removed after the purchase and registration so that it can be kept safely
at home and no one else can add the child and track them. Maybe when
you register you should also have a two step verification that notifies the
parent and ask for approval before hand to avoid random people adding
the child’s wristband number.This band should also be very light in weight
for the kids and older people.
Q: Do you have any additional comments?
A: For some reason I feel very connected to this product already. I will cer-
tainly purchase it.

61reunite.
Evaluation 2
The subject of this evaluation is a 22-year-old women living in Ithaca, New
York. She started babysitting her younger siblings when she was about
12 years old, and later for her neighbor’s families. In a non-metropolitan
city like Ithaca, she is the closest representation to our secondary persona.
Although she is a bit younger, the subject has arguably as much experi-
ence as our persona. Because the subject does not care for the children
full-time, she is considered more of a babysitter, but because she been
working with the family for 2 years now, she is equally engaged with the
children’s physical and emotional growth.
Setting:The subject was found and contacted through craigslist and inter-
viewed at Starbucks in downtown Ithaca
Conclusion:
The subject loved the design of the product and thinks it would be very
useful in looking after children.While she appreciates most of the features,
she was unsure of the usefulness of emergency contacts –– especially as
a prominent feature of the product. She suggests that parents are the pri-
mary contact, and if a situation is especially bad, the police would not be
contacted through any application, but rather, directly. The subject also
suggested a map feature might be nice, wherein other users who are
granted the access can see the whereabouts of the child and nanny. Based
on her suggestions we will re-think the essentials features of the home
screen of the app, as well.
Q: What do you like about this design?
A: I love how it’s so user friendly; I love how clean the interface is. I like that
it keeps notifying you until you do something about it. I also really like that
it sends a vibration to the kid. I can tell the kids ahead of time that if you
come back when it vibrates then you get a reward or something.
Q: What do you dislike about this design?
A: Because I have worked with bracelets before for medical applications, I
know that they can be pretty annoying. But it’s not a big deal, once you get
used to it it’s totally okay. I think a customizable outer shell is a good idea.
I don’t like how contacting the police and emergency is one of the main,
prominent features. I’ve never had to call the police or hospital when I was
babysitting; I can’t imagine being in a situation so bad that I had to contact
them before I called the parents. If I had to then I’d just call them from the
phone, isn’t that faster than going through an app?
Q: Suggestion or additional comments?
A: I think it would be cool to have a map feature on there –– it is a location
app so I think it makes sense? Like if the mom is wondering where I am
with Tom, she can look on her phone. You know how apps like Waze and
Find My Friend allow you to send notification to your friends that you have
left X location and arrived at Y location? It’ll save time and give peace to
the parents, I think, if they can see readily available where I am with the
kids. I also think the contact page can be improved. Maybe list people to
contact for mass texts? Groups like immediate family, and neighbors. Also,
this doesn’t have to be used solely for bad things –– it could be things like,
“Tom drew a wonderful painting”or something.

62reunite.
Evaluation 3
The subject of this evaluation was again, the male store manager at a Target. He is a rep-
resentative of the served persona, who has three teenage boys and a wife, who is a re-
ceptionist at a local Ithaca doctor’s office. Growing up, his father worked nights while
his mother stayed at home, and he worked at a national drug chain store as an assistant
manager prior to moving to the Ithaca area.
Setting: The subject was interviewed in person at the Target in the Ithaca Mall
Conclusions: The subject was incredibly excited by the design and usability of the prod-
uct, and especially how it stresses the responsibility of the parent and general family. He
also appreciated it’s ability to track multiple children, since often he noted larger families
often frequent the store. Despite his overwhelming satisfaction with the design, the sub-
ject did have a few lingering concerns: For one thing, he is worried about the presence
of in-app emergency resources, because it may lead users to jump over store person-
nel, when that may be the next best course of action prior to emergency service. He is
also concerned that the device is not secure enough, were someone to take a guardian’s
phone and have access to a child’s general whereabouts in his store. Also, he notes the
importance of the devices being compatible with the store’s RFID security system. Thus,
we conclude the necessity of further security measures –– like perhaps requiring a pass-
word to access the app as well as remove the bracelet, in addition to ensuring the device’s
RFID compatibility and including some method of intermediary resources involving an
establishment’s security measures to serve as a step prior to emergency services.
Q: What do you like about the proposed design and its functionality?
A: I really like the fact that this one device can track multiple people and can quickly con-
tact other family members in an emergency. In our stores it is common for people to be
in groups of three or more, frequently with two or more children. The ability to track and
identify all of them and the ability to immediate contact relatives –– which may well be
present or nearby –– are huge assets that could help us have the issue resolved quickly,
and possibly without even having to contact our store’s staff.
Q: What don’t you like about what you see?
A: I am not really crazy about the idea that our customers could be summoning emergen-
cy services prior to our store personnel being aware of the situation. I think maybe there
could be some middle ground between the family and emergency resources, something
that utilizes store personnel, because we are here. Obviously, I’d prefer my staff to do their
typical work; however, I rather a parent reach out to us if they have to, as opposed to jump
right over our heads to call the police.
Q: Do you have any concerns?
A: I am concerned that maybe the device could be subverted to track people for negative
purposes in our locations –– for instance if the parents phone were taken. Maybe the app
part should be password protected as well? Also, I am concerned that the device might
cause some interference with our RFID security system, so you’d have to make sure that
that wouldn’t be a problem.
Q: Did we leave any important features out or miss anything?
A: I don’t think so.
Q: How do you feel about the functionality in general?
A: Actually, I think it is an excellent concept –– I would love it if every parent visiting our
stores would make use of it.
Q: Does anything confuse you?
A:Yes, I am not clear how the device can alert you when a child is at risk of becoming lost.
Is it just indicating when the child or elderly person reaches a predetermined distance
from the guardian?
Q: Yes.
A: Oh, I see. Great.

63reunite.
Overall Findings
Upon interview and analysis with three representatives, each typify-
ing one of our three noted personas –– primary, secondary and served
–– we parsed through the data to cultivate a more comprehensive un-
derstanding of the strengths and weaknesses of our interface and subse-
quently what must be improved upon in our following rounds of design.
The strong points of the interface were weighted against a considerable
number of drawbacks worth reconsidering; however, we take solace in the
relative consistency of the concerns and praise –– among all personas ––
indicating that all are specific and addressable. Our strengths consistently
seemed to lay in the interface’s ease of use and simplicity –– both of which
enabled quick functionality and eliminated any unnecessary distractions,
particularly key during a stressful time such as the temporary loss of a
child, and thus cultivating a visceral sense of connectedness to the ap-
plication on at least one occasion. Other noted advantages of our design
were mass texting capabilities to family members and friends, vibration
warning, attention-demanding alerts, band customization and the abil-
ity to track multiple individuals. All strengths that highlight the comfort,
safety needs and reserve security necessary to render no issue of missing
person unnoticed –– let alone allowed to fester into a more nefarious situ-
ation.
While our successes and prevention techniques proved laudable, there
still remain quite a few kinks to iron out in our interface. Despite our un-
derscoring safety requirements, still, some concerns in this arena remain.
The chief safety concern was consistently reported as the threat for an
unauthorized individual to use the guardian’s app to track a child for
egregious purposes. To remedy this, we will need to pay greater atten-
tion to this issue in our following design cycles, perhaps by implementing
a two step verification process, a passcode feature, or a removable serial
number. Apart from this primary concern, we must also consider critical
feedback regarding the lack of a mapping feature –– which we’ll need to
finagle with bluetooth, as we elected to reject a GPS-based device –– and
emergency contact information. On multiple occasions, we were told this
feature would either be ignored –– despite our initial rounds of interviews
championing for this capability –– or disregarded an establishment’s se-
curity resources which would likely be contacted prior to the authorities.
Perhaps since we’ve now chosen to go the route of prevention rather than
post hoc management, this functionality is beyond the necessary purview
of our interface. Other concerns to keep in mind include the wrist band’s
weight, compatibility with RFID security systems and the physical arrange-
ment of the pages within the application.

64reunite.
Overview of Final Design

65reunite.
In our initial design we relied on Bluetooth technology as our primary
source of tracking. However, after careful consideration of response and
data culled from the validations and class feedback, we decided to add
GPS technology to our system. Not solely does GPS render it feasible to
simply and quickly track the bracelet hardware component from a longer
distance and allow for multiple users to track a single device, but also, GPS
will allow for backup ways of tracking in the event the user’s phone were
to run out of battery. In order to permit access to the bracelet’s informa-
tion (e.g. speed of the wearer, location etc.) from a device other than the
primary phone access, we chose to add login and web support for the
system as well. Were a user to be out of reach of their phone, they can
merely log in to the system from any available device through the Internet
–– and still access the same information. To fully take advantage of these
new features we added a map as an essential aspect of our the mobile ap-
plication component.We also re-designed the interface from the previous
mockup to allow this feature –– and the other most essential aspects of
the app –– to be more prominent on the home screen.To do so, we deem-
phasized other features that were previously deemed equivalent based
upon the prior application design’s hierarchy to display what we have now
gleaned to be the most important features: easy toggling between brace-
let wearers, location of the bracelet wearers and alerts. Thus we deem-
phasized group chat and emergency contact –– given that these features
both would play more heavily into more nefarious situation and not the
more run-of-the-mill preemptive child surveillance and safety functions
this application truly performs.
Generally, all the features from the previous version remain the same;
however, we have grouped them differently. For example the “emergen-
cy” tab has been added to the contacts section and general settings is
combined into“me.”Because we compacted these features, we no longer
needed the menu bar at the bottom, and the screen now better provide
a more comprehensive view of the bracelet wearer’s location. We decided
to use a sliding menu bar on the left and an notification center popup on
the right hand corner –– this will draw attention away from the less ma-
nipulated features such as setting, and more toward notifications. On the
bottom of the home screen is an overview of all the bracelets the device is
connected to. These design decisions all coalesce to make it much easier
for the user to see the location of her contact right from the homescreen
–– which is the most essential function we seek to accomplish.
When you click on a contact at the bottom of the screen, that person’s de-
tailed information will pull up. On that detailed screen the user can view
the battery percentage of the bracelet (also indicated from the home-
screen by the ring around the contact person’s photo, thus adding to
security and reassurance that the bracelet will be functional and not fall
below an acceptable battery charge during a necessary time of use), the
latest updates regarding the contact and the zoomed-in map view of the
contact’s location. The buttons on the bottom are as follows: send vibra-
tion to bracelet, lock the bracelet (so it can’t be taken off or attached with-
out a randomized, secure code), get directions to the contact, and settings
for this contact. In the settings, the user can turn on or off tracking, set
the distance allowed before alert is sent, maximum speed allowed before
alert is sent, and list another contact as the secondary person to alert in
case of unacknowledged messages. This personalized settings is different
from that of the general settings now so users can have more flexibility.
For example, perhaps an senile, elderly bracelet wearer will be trusted to
go further in distance than would a toddler tracked by the same device.
The secondary contacts, if turned on, can be chosen from all contacts
added without a bracelet and a timer is set for before messages are sent.
In the example shown in our visual, we used our primary persona Lauren
Kobayashi’s family. If Lauren does not acknowledge Madison’s bracelet has
been disconnected for 30 minutes (maybe she’s in a meeting, and she can’t
check her phone), then an alert will be sent to Ken (her husband’s) phone.
For bracelets that are inactive and/or disconnected, their last known lo-
cation will be shown (a new feature providing increased accuracy) from
the home screen and their appearance on the homescreen will be half
opaque. If a contact does not operate with a bracelet then the contact has
to be a smartphone or registered user. While their detailed information
page is largely the same, instead of the “lock” feature it will be messages
sent to this contact, and instead of vibration sent to the bracelet, it will be
a vibration to the contact’s phone.

Unfortunately we were unable to conduct an in-person interview with the Visitors & Information Center operator at Day Hall. We left a voicemail requesting an interview but did not receive a call back. Below is a summary of what we would have asked:Q: How often do you get complaints about a lost person at Day Hall? Q: Can you walk us through the process of recovering a lost person here?Q: What are the existing protocols for notifying others on campus in case of a lost person?Q: How do you ensure the safety of the lost person while searching for their guardian?Q: Have you ever had to contact Cornell Police for assistance with a lost person case

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (14)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)