AIMA Ajuda
Helping immigrants understand where they stand before they enter the system.
A guided orientation tool integrated into AIMA’s official website, helping immigrants understand their likely legal framework, relevant documents, and next steps before any formal application begins.
Role
UX Research, Interaction Design, UI Design
Team
Margarida Marçal, Inês E., Ana C., Catarina N.
Timeline
Feb - Mar 2026
Tools
Figma, Miro, Adobe Illustrator
Type
Academic project, EDIT. Disruptive Digital School
CONTEXT
AIMA, in brief
AIMA is Portugal’s immigration authority, responsible for residency authorisations, visa renewals, asylum, and integration support. Since 2023, it has worked as a single point of contact for some of the most complex administrative processes a person can face: legal residency.
A system built around legal categories, not user situations
AIMA’s digital experience organises information around legal articles, not user situations. Users are expected to know which process applies to them before the system has helped them understand where they stand.This gap became the starting point for AIMA Ajuda.
RESEARCH FOUNDATION
Evidence from the places users were already asking for help
To understand where users were getting stuck, we combined public complaint data, community analysis, direct user research, and UX benchmarking.
Because immigrants in active legal processes can be difficult to recruit through conventional methods, we looked at the places where uncertainty was already visible: Reddit threads, Facebook groups, immigrant forums, survey responses, and one exploratory focus group. We also reviewed the official AIMA website through a heuristic benchmark and compared it with international immigration platforms.
Evidence sources:
Portal da Queixa data
International benchmark
Survey (N=10)
Focus group (3 participants)
AIMA heuristic benchmark
Community analysis
Public complaint data helped quantify the pressure on the system. The qualitative research helped explain what was happening before users reached those failure points.
45%
communication failures
or no response
15%
document
submission errors
30%
delays in residence
card delivery
18%
overall
satisfaction rate
The numbers pointed to a system under pressure, but the research showed that many problems started earlier. Users were already lost before knowing which legal process applied to them, which documents mattered, or where to begin.
INSIGHTS
Five patterns shaped the solution
The research showed that users were not struggling because information was missing. They were struggling because the system expected them to understand which information applied to them before helping them make sense of their situation.
INSIGHT 1
The problem started before AIMA
Users were still trying to understand their own situation when the system already expected them to know which process applied to them.
INSIGHT 2
Information existed, but did not orient
Users could find content, but struggled to identify the right legal article, portal, documents, and order of steps.
INSIGHT 3
Legal language made mistakes feel risky
A misunderstood requirement could delay a residency process by months, affecting work, family stability, and legal status.
INSIGHT 4
Users relied on informal guidance
WhatsApp groups, Facebook communities, Reddit threads, TikTok videos, and informal advice became primary sources of orientation.
INSIGHT 5
Users wanted clarity, not automation
They did not want the system to decide for them. They wanted to understand which framework may apply, what documents matter, and what to expect next.
SYNTHESIS
Confusion had become part of the experience
The AS-IS benchmark gave the research findings a structural frame. Cognitive load and deadline predictability were the two weakest criteria, both scoring 1 out of 5. The issue was not only that users felt confused. The interface repeatedly shifted responsibility onto them through ambiguous calls to action, dense legal text, hidden next steps, inconsistent interfaces, and weak feedback after key actions.
The opportunity was not to redesign the institution, simplify the law, or automate decisions. It was to add the missing layer between information and action.
A guided entry point.
USERS
Two very different users, one shared uncertaintyt
The research did not produce a single user archetype. It produced two, and the distance between them matters.
Priya and Lucas sit at opposite ends of the spectrum: different languages, different levels of digital confidence, different devices, and different risk profiles. But neither of them could look at the AIMA platform and say with certainty: this is my process, and this is what I need to do.
What they reveal
One user struggles to access the system. The other struggles to trust its logic. But both reach the same point of uncertainty: the platform expects them to understand the process before it has helped them understand where they stand.
That became the design challenge: creating a guided starting point that could support both users without flattening their differences.
DESIGN CHALLENGE
AIMA’s digital experience was built for people who already know what they need. Our users don't yet.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
How might we help immigrants understand their legal standing in Portugal, within a system that was never designed with them in mind?
GUIDING QUESTION
SOLUTION OVERVIEW
A guided entry point before formal actiont
AIMA Ajuda is a guided orientation tool designed to sit inside the official AIMA website, before any formal application begins.
Instead of asking users to read legislation and identify the right process on their own, it leads them through a short, structured orientation flow and returns a guided result they can use to prepare for their next interaction with AIMA.
AIMA Ajuda
Helping immigrants understand where they stand before they enter the system.
A guided orientation tool integrated into AIMA’s official website, helping immigrants understand their likely legal framework, relevant documents, and next steps before any formal application begins.
Role
UX Research, Interaction Design, UI Design
Team
Margarida Marçal, Inês E., Ana C., Catarina N.
Timeline
Feb - Mar 2026
Tools
Figma, Miro, Adobe Illustrator
Type
Academic project, EDIT. Disruptive Digital School
CONTEXT
AIMA, in brief
AIMA is Portugal’s immigration authority, responsible for residency authorisations, visa renewals, asylum, and integration support. Since 2023, it has worked as a single point of contact for some of the most complex administrative processes a person can face: legal residency.
A system built around legal categories, not user situations
AIMA’s digital experience organises information around legal articles, not user situations. Users are expected to know which process applies to them before the system has helped them understand where they stand.This gap became the starting point for AIMA Ajuda.
Evidence from the places users were already asking for help
To understand where users were getting stuck, we combined public complaint data, community analysis, direct user research, and UX benchmarking.
Because immigrants in active legal processes can be difficult to recruit through conventional methods, we looked at the places where uncertainty was already visible: Reddit threads, Facebook groups, immigrant forums, survey responses, and one exploratory focus group. We also reviewed the official AIMA website through a heuristic benchmark and compared it with international immigration platforms.
RESEARCH FOUNDATION
Evidence sources:
Public complaint data helped quantify the pressure on the system. The qualitative research helped explain what was happening before users reached those failure points.
The numbers pointed to a system under pressure, but the research showed that many problems started earlier. Users were already lost before knowing which legal process applied to them, which documents mattered, or where to begin.
Portal da Queixa data
International benchmark
Survey (N=10)
Focus group (3 participants)
AIMA heuristic benchmark
Community analysis
45%
communication failures
or no response
15%
document
submission errors
30%
delays in residence
card delivery
18%
overall
satisfaction rate
INSIGHTS
Five patterns shaped the solution
The research showed that users were not struggling because information was missing. They were struggling because the system expected them to understand which information applied to them before helping them make sense of their situation.
INSIGHT 1
The problem started before AIMA
Users were still trying to understand their own situation when the system already expected them to know which process applied to them.
INSIGHT 2
Information existed, but did not orient
Users could find content, but struggled to identify the right legal article, portal, documents, and order of steps.
INSIGHT 3
Legal language made mistakes feel risky
A misunderstood requirement could delay a residency process by months, affecting work, family stability, and legal status.
INSIGHT 4
Users relied on informal guidance
WhatsApp groups, Facebook communities, Reddit threads, TikTok videos, and informal advice became primary sources of orientation.
INSIGHT 5
Users wanted clarity, not automation
They did not want the system to decide for them. They wanted to understand which framework may apply, what documents matter, and what to expect next.
SYNTHESIS
Confusion had become part of the experience
The AS-IS benchmark gave the research findings a structural frame. Cognitive load and deadline predictability were the two weakest criteria, both scoring 1 out of 5. The issue was not only that users felt confused. The interface repeatedly shifted responsibility onto them through ambiguous calls to action, dense legal text, hidden next steps, inconsistent interfaces, and weak feedback after key actions.
The opportunity was not to redesign the institution, simplify the law, or automate decisions. It was to add the missing layer between information and action.
A guided entry point.
USERS
Two very different users, one shared uncertaintyt
The research did not produce a single user archetype. It produced two, and the distance between them matters.
Priya and Lucas sit at opposite ends of the spectrum: different languages, different levels of digital confidence, different devices, and different risk profiles. But neither of them could look at the AIMA platform and say with certainty: this is my process, and this is what I need to do.
What they reveal
One user struggles to access the system. The other struggles to trust its logic. But both reach the same point of uncertainty: the platform expects them to understand the process before it has helped them understand where they stand.
That became the design challenge: creating a guided starting point that could support both users without flattening their differences.
DESIGN CHALLENGE
AIMA’s digital experience was built for people who already know what they need. Our users don't yet.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
How might we help immigrants understand their legal standing in Portugal, within a system that was never designed with them in mind?
GUIDING QUESTION
SOLUTION OVERVIEW
A guided entry point before formal actiont
AIMA Ajuda is a guided orientation tool designed to sit inside the official AIMA website, before any formal application begins.
Instead of asking users to read legislation and identify the right process on their own, it leads them through a short, structured orientation flow and returns a guided result they can use to prepare for their next interaction with AIMA.
AIMA Ajuda
Helping immigrants understand where they stand before they enter the system.
A guided orientation tool integrated into AIMA’s official website, helping immigrants understand their likely legal framework, relevant documents, and next steps before any formal application begins.
Role
UX Research, Interaction Design, UI Design
Team
Margarida Marçal, Inês E., Ana C., Catarina N.
Timeline
Feb - Mar 2026
Tools
Figma, Miro, Adobe Illustrator
Type
Academic project, EDIT. Disruptive Digital School
CONTEXT
AIMA, in brief
AIMA is Portugal’s immigration authority, responsible for residency authorisations, visa renewals, asylum, and integration support. Since 2023, it has worked as a single point of contact for some of the most complex administrative processes a person can face: legal residency.
A system built around legal categories, not user situations
AIMA’s digital experience organises information around legal articles, not user situations. Users are expected to know which process applies to them before the system has helped them understand where they stand.This gap became the starting point for AIMA Ajuda.
Evidence from the places users were already asking for help
To understand where users were getting stuck, we combined public complaint data, community analysis, direct user research, and UX benchmarking.
Because immigrants in active legal processes can be difficult to recruit through conventional methods, we looked at the places where uncertainty was already visible: Reddit threads, Facebook groups, immigrant forums, survey responses, and one exploratory focus group. We also reviewed the official AIMA website through a heuristic benchmark and compared it with international immigration platforms.
RESEARCH FOUNDATION
Public complaint data helped quantify the pressure on the system. The qualitative research helped explain what was happening before users reached those failure points.
Portal da Queixa data
International benchmark
Survey (N=10)
Focus group (3 participants)
AIMA heuristic benchmark
Community analysis
Evidence sources:
45%
communication failures
or no response
15%
document
submission errors
30%
delays in residence
card delivery
18%
overall
satisfaction rate
The numbers pointed to a system under pressure, but the research showed that many problems started earlier. Users were already lost before knowing which legal process applied to them, which documents mattered, or where to begin.
INSIGHTS
Five patterns shaped the solution
The research showed that users were not struggling because information was missing. They were struggling because the system expected them to understand which information applied to them before helping them make sense of their situation.
INSIGHT 1
The problem started before AIMA
Users were still trying to understand their own situation when the system already expected them to know which process applied to them.
INSIGHT 2
Information existed, but did not orient
Users could find content, but struggled to identify the right legal article, portal, documents, and order of steps.
INSIGHT 3
Legal language made mistakes feel risky
A misunderstood requirement could delay a residency process by months, affecting work, family stability, and legal status.
INSIGHT 4
Users relied on informal guidance
WhatsApp groups, Facebook communities, Reddit threads, TikTok videos, and informal advice became primary sources of orientation.
INSIGHT 5
Users wanted clarity, not automation
They did not want the system to decide for them. They wanted to understand which framework may apply, what documents matter, and what to expect next.
SYNTHESIS
Confusion had become part of the experience
The AS-IS benchmark gave the research findings a structural frame. Cognitive load and deadline predictability were the two weakest criteria, both scoring 1 out of 5. The issue was not only that users felt confused. The interface repeatedly shifted responsibility onto them through ambiguous calls to action, dense legal text, hidden next steps, inconsistent interfaces, and weak feedback after key actions.
The opportunity was not to redesign the institution, simplify the law, or automate decisions. It was to add the missing layer between information and action.
A guided entry point.
USERS
Two very different users, one shared uncertaintyt
The research did not produce a single user archetype. It produced two, and the distance between them matters.
Priya and Lucas sit at opposite ends of the spectrum: different languages, different levels of digital confidence, different devices, and different risk profiles. But neither of them could look at the AIMA platform and say with certainty: this is my process, and this is what I need to do.
What they reveal
One user struggles to access the system. The other struggles to trust its logic. But both reach the same point of uncertainty: the platform expects them to understand the process before it has helped them understand where they stand.
That became the design challenge: creating a guided starting point that could support both users without flattening their differences.
DESIGN CHALLENGE
AIMA’s digital experience was built for people who already know what they need. Our users don't yet.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
How might we help immigrants understand their legal standing in Portugal, within a system that was never designed with them in mind?
GUIDING QUESTION
SOLUTION OVERVIEW
A guided entry point before formal actiont
AIMA Ajuda is a guided orientation tool designed to sit inside the official AIMA website, before any formal application begins.
Instead of asking users to read legislation and identify the right process on their own, it leads them through a short, structured orientation flow and returns a guided result they can use to prepare for their next interaction with AIMA.