IC Submission Template

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL UNDER THE “GENERIC INFORMATION COLLECTION
PLAN FOR THE COLLECTION OF QUALITATIVE FEEDBACK ON THE SERVICE
DELIVERY OF THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU”
(OMB CONTROL NUMBER: 3170-0024)

1. TITLE OF INFORMATION COLLECTION:
Consumerfinance.gov Top Task Usability Testing

2. PURPOSE:
The Top Task Usability Tests are part of the overall effort to optimize CFPB's public facing
website, consumerfinance.gov. CFPB’s User Research Team plans to conduct usability tests
periodically (e.g., once every two months). The goal is to receive the public's feedback on the
website (e.g., navigation logic structure, visual cues, feature functionalities, and content
clarity, etc.).
By testing and gaining benchmarked metrics on various aspects of the user experience, we can
monitor the general success of key site functionality over time, and compare and validate
design insights and look for trends. Regular testing with end-users is critical to producing
high-quality services that the public demands.
3. DESCRIPTION OF RESPONDENTS:
Respondents will volunteer for tests via an unmoderated usability testing tool called TryMyUI
(also known as Try My User Interface). We are looking for feedback from the U.S. “general
public” and will not be looking for any specific demographic criteria. Because this is a
random, opt-in sample, respondents will be of a variety of ages and backgrounds.
4. TYPE OF COLLECTION (ADMINISTRATION OF THE INSTRUMENT):
a.

How will you collect the information? (Check all that apply)

[ X ] Web-based or other forms of Social Media
[ ] In-person
[ ] Small Discussion Group
[ ] Other, Explain ______________________

[ ] Telephone
[ ] Mail
[ ] Focus Group

b. Will interviewers or facilitators be used?
[ ] Yes [X ] No [ ] Not Applicable
Page 1 of 4

5. FOCUS GROUP OR SURVEY:
If you plan to conduct a focus group or survey, please provide answers to the following
questions:
a. Do you have a customer list or something similar that defines the universe of potential
respondents and do you have a sampling plan for selecting from this universe?
[ X ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Not Applicable
b. If the answer is yes, please provide a description below. If the answer is no, please
provide a description of how you plan to identify your potential group of respondents and
how you will select them?
People who are interested in participating in User Research sign up as volunteer testers on
TryMyUI.com. Then, organizations who wish to test with this population enter testing questions
into the TryMyUI online tool’s web interface. The Tool then sends out an email to whatever
members of the TryMyUI community about the opportunity. Participants can volunteer for
whatever tests they want to on a first-come, first-served basis. This is similar to how other user
experience tools work, such as Utest.com and Usertesting.com.

6. PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION:
a. Is personally identifiable information (PII) collected? [X ] Yes [ ] No
b. If Yes, is the information that will be collected included in records that are subject to
the Privacy Act of 1974? [X ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Not Applicable
If applicable, what is the link to the Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA)?
http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201406_cfpb_consumer-experienceresearch_pia.pdf
c. If Applicable, has a System or Records Notice (SORN) been published?
[ X ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Not Applicable
If yes, cite the SORN.
Title:_ CFPB.021- CFPB Consumer Education and
Engagement Records__79_ FR __78839________.

7. INCENTIVES:
a. Is an incentive provided to participants? [ X ] Yes [ ] No
b. If Yes, provide the amount or value of the incentive? $__10_________.
c. If Yes, provide a statement justifying the use and amount of the incentive.
An incentive of at least $75 for a 60-minute session, or pro-rated for 30 minutes at $37 per session,
Page 2 of 4

is the standard amount typically offered by usability researchers for this type of session. Without
an incentive, we would not be able to recruit a quality and diverse pool of participants. Incentives
must also be high enough to equalize the burden placed on respondents with respect to their time
and cost of participation as well as provide enough motivation for them to participate in the
session. 

Incentives paid through online tools are typically much lower than $75 per hour. For our test using
the TryMyUI testing tool, we paid incentives of $10 per person for a 30 minute online survey.
This rate is not adjustable by us – it is set by the tool. The total cost for us, including use of the
tool, came to $28.30 per person. The tool stops the test at 30 minutes, so we know participants will
not be able to spend more than 30 minutes on this exercise.
This avenue provides significant savings to the government in two ways:
1. The tool removes the need for both a paid moderator and lab space, which are
typically upwards of $10,000 for a day session, not including video output and
reporting.
2. Many private sector labs routinely pay $80-$120 for a usability test session, versus
our $28.30 per person.
We feel that this incentive for a test that requires no active moderation and easy data
analysis is an ideal arrangement for our team.
In our experience, incentives allow for successful recruitment by reducing the amount of
time required to recruit (i.e., it is more difficult and takes longer to recruit participants
when we offer a lower incentive), increasing the participation rate, and increasing the
diversity of the recruitment pool (i.e., a lower incentive will be less likely to attract a
diverse range of participants).

8. BURDEN ESTIMATES:
Information
Collection

TryMyUI (testing tool)
Totals

Number of
Respondents

Frequency
Number
Response
(Responses
of
Time
per
Annual
(hours
Respondent) Response
)
s
60
1X
1
0.5
60 ////////////////////
1 ////////////////////////

9. FEDERAL COST: The estimated annual cost to the Federal government is

Burden
Hours

30
30

$1,698

Page 3 of 4

10. CERTIFICATIONS:
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 5 CFR 1320.9, AND THE RELATED PROVISIONS
OF 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3) :
By submitting this document, the Bureau certifies the following to be true:
(a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;
(b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;
(c) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to
respondents;
(d) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and
recordkeeping practices;
(e) It indicates the retention period for recordkeeping requirements;
(f) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3):
(i) Why the information is being collected;
(ii) Use of information;
(iii) Burden estimate;
(iv) Nature of response (voluntary);
(v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and
(vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;
(g) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and
effective management and use of the information to be collected;
(h) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and
(i) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

CERTIFICATION FOR INFORMATION COLLECTIONS SUBMITTED UNDER A
GENERIC INFORMATION COLLECTION PLAN









By submitting this document, the Bureau certifies the following to be true:
The collection is voluntary.
The collection is low-burden for respondents and low-cost for the Federal Government.
The collection is non-controversial and does not raise issues of concern to other federal
agencies.
The results are not intended to be disseminated to the public.
Information gathered will not be used for the purpose of substantially informing influential
policy decisions.
The collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have
experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the future.
The data collection is not statistically significant, the sample is not intended to be
representative, and the results will not be used to make inferences beyond the survey
sample.
The results will not be used to measure regulatory compliance or for program
evaluation.

Page 4 of 4