In Element C we determined design requirements and design benchmarks for our discreet personal safety device. Our process included devising a matrix with five similar solutions, determining that products on the market distinctly lack independence from existing infrastructure, often requiring a working bluetooth connection or remaining in a stationary radius to contact local dispatchers. Next, we interviewed additional experts, including a clinical psychologist. This aided us in our preparation for the presentation of our solution design requirements to a panel of experts within various engineering fields, presenting the information coalesced from our research, survey data, and expert interviews. We analyzed the feedback from our project proposal to refine existing design requirements and generate additional criteria. This element ultimately culminated by composing a decision matrix that compared similar solutions and six of our original designs to help us choose a final design to work on. 

 Domestic abuse victims often face significant barriers when seeking help. Even if they have some mobility,  71% of victims' report that abusers monitor their communication, restrict their movements, and/or manipulate them in a manner that prevents them from reaching out in an indiscreet manner. Current safety tools are either too visible, inflexible, or too dependent on established infrastructure or law enforcement, leaving victims without discreet, reliable, and comfortable ways to signal for help. 

       We implemented 5 personal safety devices, heeding their similarities and differences—LifeAlert, InvisaWear, Silent Beacon, ROAR, and Oura Ring as solutions in our matrix. Criteria with the highest weight include incorporation of location tracking services, long lasting battery, and reliability of alerting authorities and trusted contacts. We generated several key findings from using this similar solution matrix. Products with the highest score were the Silent Beacon and InvisaWear discreet panic devices. However, both of them possessed a obstrusive lack of independence, rendering them virtually useless in many situations they are needed in. Thus, independence is the niche we must intend to fill in the market. 

In this element we generated many key findings. Using a matrix comparing similar solutions, we have identified a universal obstrusive lack of independence from existing infrastructure for products in the panic button market; they often require a working bluetooth connection or proximity to a stationary console. Key feedback from our presentation of solution design requirements include the incorporation of panic button into highly mobile existing infrastructure such as an airtag(Cameron Shaeffer, electrical engineering) as well as ensuring that our design includes variable inputs(Dr. Matta, clinical psychologist), enabling victims that do not feel comfortable with contacting authorities and trusted contacts at the same time. Additionally, we have decided to research further into the legal efficacy of our product. We also analyzed data from our consumer survey to add another criteria: feedback via vibration. Using this input we devised a second matrix, analyzing which criteria weighs greater, comparing our initial concept designs to products on the market, and finally choosing the discreet panic ring as the solution we intend to primarily pursue.