The one project in this portfolio I didn't code — I made it happen. Scoping, business requirements, cost analysis, and the delivery timeline for Emversity's VR simulation platform.
Emverse puts healthcare students inside their subject — a full human anatomy they can walk around, take apart, and reassemble — alongside procedural simulations for wound dressing and hygiene protocol. Built by a development team; scoped, specced, costed, and scheduled by me.
Emversity wanted anatomy taught in VR, but a headset-only build would gate learning behind hardware many students lack.
I scoped, specced, costed, and scheduled three simulations, splitting open exploration from two step-by-step procedures.
Shipped 3 simulations live on Quest and web with full parity, so no student needs a headset to learn.
A VR build lives or dies on decisions made months before anyone puts on a headset. My job was the paper layer — turning "we should teach anatomy in VR" into something an engineering team could actually build, on a budget leadership could actually approve.
Three simulations made the cut: Basic Wound Dressing, Hand Hygiene & PPE Protocol, and Human Anatomy. The critical scoping call: the first two are step-by-step procedures, Anatomy is an open exploration — two fundamentally different interaction models, scoped as such from day one instead of forcing everything into one template.
The BRD translated "students should understand anatomy spatially" into concrete requirements: 8 toggleable anatomical systems, 3 interaction modes, male and female models, grab-and-examine with snap-back reassembly, and full onboarding — safety instructions and controller mapping — before first entry.
Costed the build per simulation and weighed the delivery economics: a headset-only experience means every learner needs hardware. The web access path became the cost lever — the same simulations, running in a browser inside the Emverse app, meant the platform could scale to every enrolled student without scaling the headset fleet.
Structured the delivery timeline across the three simulations and both platforms — sequencing what shipped when, keeping onboarding and safety flows inside the first release rather than a fast-follow, and holding the line on VR-web parity so neither path launched as a second-class experience.
The single most consequential scoping decision: don't gate learning on hardware. Every simulation is reachable through the headset and through the browser — same catalogue, same experience, same anatomy.
A headset per student doesn't scale. A browser tab does — and the learning shouldn't wait for the hardware budget.
What the paper layer became: a full 3D anatomy environment. A central human model, a system control panel on the left, an information panel on the right, and three interaction modes that map to how students actually study.
Which structures do students actually isolate? Where does exploration stall? Per-structure interaction analytics would turn the anatomy environment into a curriculum signal — showing educators exactly which systems students avoid or misunderstand.
A simple assessment comparison between VR-taught and 2D-taught cohorts on the same anatomy module would give the "improved engagement and retention" promise a real ROI line to point to — the next phase's first deliverable, not an afterthought.
Three simulations shipped; the roadmap wants more. A repeatable spec-to-ship pipeline — templates for procedural sims, a structure-authoring process for exploratory ones — matters more than any individual fourth simulation.