Evaluating the Trussell Trust Website
A usability study uncovering barriers that make it harder for people to donate food, support the charity, or access help.
The Trussell Trust supports more than 1,300 food banks across the UK, but their website plays a crucial role in helping users donate, fundraise, and find services.
This project examines how well the website supports real people attempting to complete these tasks.
Over two rounds of moderated usability testing (remote + in-person), I evaluated how effectively the Trussell Trust website supports key user journeys: donating food, donating money, learning about the charity, and finding fundraising ideas.
The study revealed major navigation confusion, unclear terminology, and friction in completing essential donation-related tasks.
🎯 GOAL
Evaluate usability of key charity tasks: donating, fundraising, and accessing information.
👥 PARTICIPANTS
5 participants - mix of experienced charity supporters and first-time donors.
🧪 METHOD
Moderated usability testing (6 tasks), think-aloud protocol, observation + post-task interviews.
⏱ DURATION
The Challenge
The Trussell Trust website has strong visual design and clear messaging. However, real users frequently struggled to complete core tasks.
Key challenges included:
Complex navigation with multiple similar links
Ambiguous wording (e.g., “Put in Your Money”)
Difficulty locating donation options
Unclear task pathways during donation and fundraising flows
How can we reduce friction for users trying to donate food, give money, or support the charity?
My Role in this Project
🔍 Research & Recruitment
Designed interview questions & consent forms
Selected 5 participants
Prepared testing plan & tasks
🧭 Moderated Testing
Facilitated 5 think-aloud sessions (remote + in-person)
Guided participants through structured scenarios
📊 Analysis & Synthesis
Converted session notes into a rainbow spreadsheet
Rated issues by severity
Identified patterns across tasks
📝 Reporting
Compiled all findings into a structured audit
Created actionable, prioritised recommendations
Delivered a clear insights report
Methodology- How I Ran the Evaluation
I followed a structured usability evaluation process:
Task Planning
Defined 6 realistic charity-related tasks (donate food, donate money, find fundraising ideas, etc.)
2. Recruiting Participants
Recruited 5 participants with mixed levels of charity experience.
Moderated Testing
Conducted remote + in-person sessions using the think-aloud method.
Task Observation
Captured behaviours, moments of confusion, and comments.
Rainbow Spreadsheet Analysis
Categorised findings by severity level (1–4).
Insight Mapping
Identified recurring patterns across participants.
Rainbow Spreadsheet
What We Discovered
A summary of the most impactful usability issues identified during testing.
Severity: Level 1
Hard to Find “Donate Food” Page
Users struggled to locate the Donate Food section because similar donation links appeared across multiple menus.
“I can’t tell which of these donation pages is for food.”
Severity: Level 2
Confusion Between ‘Donate Money’ and ‘Put in Your Money’
Participants assumed “one-off donation” meant donating raised money.
“Put in Your Money” was completely misunderstood.
“I’m not sure what ‘put in your money’ means… is this a personal donation?”
Severity: Level 3
Fundraising Flow Is Unclear
Users thought they needed to sign up before donating raised money.
Severity: Level 3
Difficult to Return to Previous Pages
Users frequently became “stuck” or uncertain of how to go back.
Severity: Level 4
Food-Bank Item Requirements Were Unclear
Participants wanted simple lists and clearer instructions.
Where Users Got Stuck
A walkthrough of the most problematic journeys users attempted during the evaluation.
Donating Food
Couldn’t identify the correct donation link
Confused by overlapping navigation terminology
Multiple pages appeared to lead to the same place
"4 similar donation links appear here simultaneously"
Fundraising
Users clicked “Donate Money” instead of “Put in Your Money”
Fundraising options were scattered across different pages
Unclear what the next steps were
"Put in Your Money" button- Participants consistently misread this as a personal donation.
Supporting the Charity
Campaign-related pages didn’t make the desired action clear
Users wanted a simple, guided path
A set of actionable improvements aligned with UX best practices and WCAG standards.
Navigation Improvements
Before | After |
|---|---|
| "Donate Food" buried in sub-menu | "Donate Food" in top-level navigation |
| 4 overlapping donation links | Simplified to 2 clear categories |
| No visual hierarchy in menu | Clear labels with supporting descriptions |
Clarity & Wording Fixes
Before | After |
|---|---|
| "Put in Your Money" | "Donate Raised Funds" |
| "One-off donation" (ambiguous) | "Give a personal donation" |
| No supporting text under options | Short description under each donation type |
User Flow Improvements
Before | After |
|---|---|
| Non-linear donation journey | Simple step-by-step linear flow |
| No breadcrumbs | Breadcrumb navigation added throughout |
| Food Bank Finder hard to locate | Prominently linked from homepage |
Impact at a Glance
56%
Completed successfully
31%
Completed with difficulty
13%
Failed
Top issues were addressed through clear recommendations and simplified flows.
Task | Success | With Difficulty | Failed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Donate Food | 40% | 40% | 20% |
| Donate Money | 80% | 20% | 0% |
| Find Fundraising Ideas | 60% | 20% | 20% |
| Support the Charity | 40% | 40% | 20% |
Participant Feedback:
“I want to donate food, but I genuinely don’t know where to click.”
“Why are there so many donation pages?”
“I thought this button was for something else.”
Final Thoughts
This project taught me how even visually strong websites can fail users when task pathways aren't clear. It sharpened my ability to evaluate, synthesise, and communicate usability issues in ways that teams can act on, not just read.
It also reinforced something I'll carry into every project:
Clarity is not optional - it's essential, especially when people want to do good.
