01 — Context
Yolle Institute is a healthcare training school in Haines City, Florida, with two programs: Practical Nursing (LPN) and Home Health Aide. The site speaks to people who want to reach a stable clinical job soon.
The brief was to present the school as a serious option for a specific career path, without the generic language of an academic brochure, and to have navigation lead straight to programs and admissions. I designed the UX/UI and built the site in WordPress and Elementor.
02 — My role
I defined the information architecture and the order of the home page, designed the home, about, admissions and contact templates, and built them. I set up GA4 and reviewed heatmaps in Clarity. The client supplied the copy and photography.
03 — Diagnosis
The problem was order, not looks
It was a new site with no previous version, and the risk came from the brief itself: that the school would read like one more academic brochure. I read that as a matter of content order. When a site like this starts with the institution instead of the career outcome, visitors have to work out on their own whether a program fits them and what the next step is.
That would have hurt both sides. Prospective students, who would probably hesitate to get in touch because they wouldn’t know what happens next or what it costs. And admissions, who would get enquiries with no context on which program the person wants.
04 — Decisions
A. Lead with the career outcome and two intents
- Problem
- Visitors don’t yet know whether they want to see a program or talk to someone.
- Decision
- The hero promises hands-on training for a clinical job and offers two actions: "Explore Programs" as primary, leading to the programs page (/programs/), and "Contact Admissions" as secondary.
- Why this one
- I weighed a single "Apply" in the hero; I chose two actions because "Apply" asks for high commitment from someone still comparing. The cost: people ready to apply take one more step, since "Apply Online" lives on the admissions page.
- What I expected
- That people who had decided would find contact without searching, and the rest would move on to the programs instead of drifting down the page.
B. Three menu items and contact always within reach
- Problem
- With two programs, a big-institution menu dilutes the path to admissions.
- Decision
- Programs, with both programs in a submenu, About Us and Admissions; "Contact Us" as a separate button. On mobile the panel repeats those items and pins "Speak with an Advisor" at the bottom.
- Why this one
- I weighed listing each program at the top level; I chose a submenu because it keeps the menu from growing with every new program. The cost: one extra click to reach each one.
- What I expected
- Contact one tap away from any page, mobile included.
C. Admissions told as a four-step process
- Problem
- The doubt before reaching out is usually what happens next and how to pay.
- Decision
- The admissions page sums up the process in four numbered steps: Apply Online, Financial Review, Advisor Interview and Begin Your Training.
- Why this one
- I weighed a page of requirements in running text; I chose four steps because the process reads at a glance. The cost: less detail (requirements, dates), which is left for the interview.
- What I expected
- Fewer "how does this work" enquiries and more applications with intent.
D. A short form with direct channels beside it
- Problem
- Some people prefer to call, and a long form slows down everyone else.
- Decision
- Five fields (name, email, phone, program of interest and message) with the address and map, phone and admissions email alongside.
- Why this one
- I weighed a multi-step form; I chose a single one because with five fields splitting it wasn’t worth it, and the program selector gives admissions context without adding questions. The cost: admissions gets little beyond the program and fills in the rest in conversation.
- What I expected
- Enquiries arriving already sorted by program.
05 — System
The result was templates for home, about, admissions and contact, plus one per program, built from the same blocks: a header with a contact button (Fig. 0, B), program cards with a single link (Fig. 1), numbered steps (Fig. 3), a form with direct channels (Fig. 4) and a footer that groups programs, contact details and the school’s two accreditations.
The scope ended at delivery and instrumentation, not impact reporting, so this case reports no figures.
06 — What I’d test now
Today the hero sends people to an intermediate page, /programs/, before each program. I’d test putting both programs in the hero, each with its own button.
- Hypothesis
- If the hero names both programs and links to each, more sessions landing on the home page will reach a program page and, from there, the form.
- Primary metric
- Contact form submissions per session landing on the home page, measured in GA4.
- Secondary
- Clicks to each program page from the first screen.
- Control
- The current hero, with "Explore Programs" and "Contact Admissions". 50/50 split until the sample size calculated from the GA4 baseline is reached, not until a date.