1. Reflect back on the objective of the tool you built: did you exceed it, or fall short? If so, why?

The tool covers all the needs of wheelchair user (and of course the elderly, and our relatives and friends) tourists, willing to come to Ljubljana. It’s information is also valuable for people living here. It enables a simple search of relevant touristic information about Ljubljana for a wheelchair user. It includes various information about accessibility of the city and other necessary info (public transport, toilets, parking,…) and it offers categorized search of accessible locations. 

I believe we met our objectives – we answer all the questions someone on a wheelchair might have before travelling to Ljubljana. We also list 130 accessible locations, categorised under groups: EAT, SEE, DRINK, SLEEP, DO, SHOP and TOILET. Based on my personal travels some tool like this is the most appropriate to use. Without it you are lost in a sea of various information, that’s not true anc checked. 

2. What are the tools’ metrics for success and what does metric say – how well did the tool do?

On the one hand we have feedback from our community, that has been only good and positive. Basically no negative opinions. And on the other we have speciOc exact data, numbers of downloads. Until now the app was downloaded about 700 times on Android system, and about 500 times on iOS. Mainly, around 70% of downloads come from Slovenia, others from abroad, mostly Italy, Germany, USA, and others. Me personally had no idea or even goal with downloads. As I am also leading a website (directory of accessible locations in Slovenia) www.pridem.si , I knew it’s a very small market. Still I wished for about 1.000 downloads within few years, which we accomplished (the app was published in August 2018). 

3. Were your assumptions that the tool you built would: increase participation/engagement or tackle an issue/raise awareness correct? Do you think you chose the right approach – and what would you do differently?

I still think an application is the best solution, easy to use, simple, and offers all the information on one place. As this was my Orst app (anyway I outsourced programming, this wasn’t done by me, just all the content), I would try to make it even more friendly and easy to use, simple, and clear. The app increases participation in a sense that encourages people to travel, and gives them time to explore the city, instead of wasting hours and hours just for planning and gathering info. It doesn’t really raise awareness, as it lists only the accessible places. Maybe indirectly – businesses hear about it, and if they aren’t accessible, they put up a ramp, and then they can be listed in the app. 

4. What are you hearing from users? What do they enjoy in tool? What do they find challenging?

As mentioned the feedback has been nothing but positive. Users are greeting such a valuable solution and it’s information. It’s something they haven’t seen in other cities/countries.

5. Did your tool deliver what you were hoping for? Are they useful for your key user audience? Are they being adopted?

Yes, the information we wanted to share is shared in the application. And all the needs of our key users – mobility impaired – are being met. Now someone that’s on a wheelchair comes to Ljubljana carefree, and can Ond everything he might need inside the app, even where he can Ox his wheelchair!

6. What worked well through the implementation process? What areas have room for improvement?

Passing out information works and worked well. Rooms for improvement – even clearer app, with small and big fonts for example, easier language used, search directory would be a nice Ot. Also including other disabilities (info for the deaf and visually impaired, together with accessible locations), more visually accessible application,…