100% left
Rent Panda
UX/UI · Product Interaction

Simplifying Tenant Screening

Smart Screening was designed to help landlords move through tenant screening without feeling overwhelmed and compare applicants without losing the context they needed to make a decision.

Smart Screening applicant review interface
01 · Overview
Challenge

A high-stakes decision without a clear structure

Landlords were collecting applicant information across fragmented platforms, conversations and manual screening steps. The information existed, but comparing it clearly was difficult.

The product needed to bring that process into one guided experience without making the final decision for the landlord.

My Role
Turning landlord research into product decisions

As the sole UX/UI designer on the project, I translated landlord research debriefs and testing feedback shared by the CMO and CEO into the user flow, wireframes, interface directions and final interaction decisions.

Outcome
Early usage after launch

By March 2023, Smart Screening was averaging 87 weekly active users with an average time on platform of 6:17. Those numbers were an early usage signal rather than long-term retention or conversion data.

02 · Challenge

Understanding Where Screening Broke Down

The research debriefs pointed to the same underlying problem from several directions. Landlords had plenty of information, but very little structure for turning that information into a confident decision.

01
Screening felt overwhelming

Evaluating applicants was a high-stakes task without a clear process to lean on, making the experience stressful and time-consuming.

02
Information was fragmented

Applicant details were spread across messages, listing platforms and separate screening steps, making comparison difficult.

03
More applicants did not create more clarity

The real problem was not generating more candidates. It was helping landlords understand which applicants were worth examining more closely.

03 · Define

Turning the Insights Into Two Design Questions

Once the main friction points were clear, I used two questions to guide the hierarchy, flow and interaction decisions that followed.

01
How do we guide landlords without making the process feel rigid?

The flow needed to keep landlords aware of where they were and what came next, while still allowing deeper screening when it became relevant.

02
How do we make applicants easier to compare without losing context?

Landlords needed to move between candidates quickly while keeping enough information visible to understand the differences between them.

04 · Flow

Mapping the User Flow Before Designing the Screens

Before moving into detailed interface design, I mapped the user flow to understand how landlords would move through the screening process. The flow helped identify where guidance was needed and where more advanced screening options could appear without interrupting the main path.

Smart Screening user flow showing key screening steps and decision points
The details have been intentionally blurred for this public portfolio.
Decision Point 01
Choosing how deeply to screen

The beginning of the process was a natural moment to introduce screening options because the landlord was already making a setup decision.

Decision Point 02
Reviewing a specific applicant

Additional checks could appear again when a landlord moved from browsing candidates into evaluating one person more closely.

05 · Compare

Keeping Context While Moving Between Applicants

I explored two ways of presenting applicant information. The difference was not primarily visual. Each layout changed how much context a landlord could keep while moving from one candidate to another.

01:Table View
01
Table View

The table created an efficient overview, but landlords still needed to open applicants separately to see the detail behind each row. Moving between candidates meant repeatedly leaving the broader comparison context.

02:Split View
02 Selected
Split View

Keeping the applicant list visible while details changed beside it allowed landlords to move between candidates without losing their place or the broader comparison context.

Why It Changed
Feedback moved the design toward the split view

I presented both directions to the CMO and CEO, who reviewed them with the leasing team and landlords and brought the feedback back into the design process.

The preference for seeing the applicant list and full details at the same time made the split view the stronger direction. It matched how landlords wanted to compare people: move between candidates without repeatedly losing context.

06 · Interaction

Showing More Complexity Only When It Became Useful

I designed the interaction around pacing complexity rather than showing every choice at once. The goal was to keep landlords oriented through the screening process while making additional options available when they became useful.

Onboarding flow
01
Break setup into clear steps

Instead of one long form, onboarding was divided into focused screens with a visible progress indicator so landlords always knew where they were in the process.

02
Introduce depth at decision points

Advanced screening options appeared when landlords were already making a related choice, keeping the main flow simpler without removing access to deeper evaluation.

07 · Final Experience

A Screening Experience Built Around the Decision

The final experience kept the main path understandable while giving landlords enough depth to evaluate candidates more closely when needed. The interface was organized around reducing uncertainty rather than simply displaying more data.

Smart Screening applicant review interface
01
Guided onboarding

Focused steps and visible progress helped make the setup process easier to follow without presenting everything at once.

02
Stronger candidates surfaced earlier

Ranking and screening signals helped landlords identify applicants worth examining more closely without replacing their final judgment.

03
Comparison without losing context

The split layout kept the applicant list available while full details changed alongside it, making movement between candidates more fluid.

08 · Outcome & Reflection
Outcome

Early Usage After Launch

By March 2023, Smart Screening was averaging 87 weekly active users. Average time on platform was 6:17 across an experience centered on reviewing and comparing applicants.

These figures were early usage signals rather than evidence of long-term retention or conversion, but they showed that landlords were actively spending time with the screening experience after launch.

87
Average weekly active users by March 2023
6:17
Average time on platform
Reflection

What I Took Forward

This project reinforced how important it is to map the decision process before polishing the interface. The strongest interaction decisions came from understanding where landlords needed guidance, where they needed more information and where the interface needed to stay out of the way.

It also showed me the limitation of working from research debriefs rather than direct observation. The feedback loop materially changed the product, particularly the move toward the split view, but in future product work I would want to be closer to the interviews and usability testing whenever possible.