What One School Learned from DOJ/OCR Rulings at Other Institutions Sheryl Burgstahler Terrill Thompson Accessible Technology Services

What do they have in common? University of Cincinnati Youngstown State University CSU Fullerton University of Colorado-Boulder California Community Colleges University of Montana-Missoula Ohio State University UC Berkeley University of Kentucky South Carolina Technical College System … Louisiana Tech University MIT Harvard University Florida State University Maricopa Community College District uw.edu/accessibility/requirements

What is the legal basis? Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act The Americans with Disabilities Act & its 2008 Amendments State & local laws & policies (WA Policy #188)

Definition of “accessible” “Accessible” means a person with a disability is afforded the opportunity to acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, & enjoy the same services as a person without a disability in an equally effective & equally integrated manner, with substantially equivalent ease of use. The person with a disability must be able to obtain the information as fully, equally & independently as a person without a disability. -DoJ, OCR

Approaches to access: Accommodations Both are important! Universal/inclusive design Both are important!

Universal design = “the design of products & environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design.” The Center for Universal Design www.design.ncsu.edu/cud

UD on a continuum Interpreter for deaf student Captioned & audio described video Uncaptioned video Captioned video

UW efforts guided by: DoJ & OCR resolutions at other campuses 2015 EDUCAUSE report IT Accessibility Risk Statements & Evidence State of Washington Policy #188 – IT Accessibility

Lessons learned from resolutions Conduct an audit of the accessibility of IT, and develop a corrective action strategy to address problems identified in the audit. Set institutional standards relating to accessible technology and create a method to monitor compliance. Terrill

Lessons learned from resolutions Provide training and education about accessibility to anyone on campus who is responsible for creating or procuring IT, as well as those responsible for creating content. Institute procedures for addressing accessibility as a requirement within the procurement process. Terrill

Lessons learned from resolutions Provide and publicize a mechanism by which students, faculty, staff, and members of the public can report access barriers. Terrill

Applying lessons learned Gain high-level buy-in Undertake efforts that are both reactive & proactive; both top-down & bottom-up Develop policy/guidelines Conduct IT accessibility inventory Engage advisory, task force, special interest groups Terrill

Applying lessons learned (continued) Create concrete plans; annual reports Build on existing policies/processes/responsibilities Develop web resources, consulting, training, promotional activities Address development & procurement processes Work with vendors Develop grievance procedure

It’s not just disability support services! Who should be involved? President, academic affairs, provost, deans, dept chairs Academic senate, college council, council of chairs… Central campus IT unit Marketing Student affairs Students Online learning programs ADA compliance officer Libraries Procurement It’s not just disability support services!

Key aspects of UW approach (without civil rights complaint) Promote accessibility within context of UD, civil rights, & inclusive campus culture With UW-IT’s Accessible Technology Services as lead, resource, catalyst, & community-builder: support efforts of Disability Resources for Students develop & evolve “ideal state” & gap analyses create list of IT products developed, procured & used; prioritize; determine strategy; assign staff lead a top-level IT accessibility task force with key stakeholders, clear direction, regular reports Sheryl

Key aspects of UW approach With UW-IT’s Accessible Technology Services as lead, resource, catalyst, & community-builder, cont.: develop partnerships & empower stakeholders within their roles in a distributed computing environment provide guidance on an IT accessibility website develop IT accessibility guidelines & standards offer training & consultation, support user group host captioning parties & other events proactively test websites, PDFs & offer remediation

Key aspects of UW approach Prioritize efforts when WA Policy #188 was approved in August, 2016 Policy, processes due December 31, 2016 Comprehensive plan, including IT accessibility audit due March 31, 2017 Conduct state-wide Capacity-Building Institute, November 29-30, 2016; & Community of Practice Develop internal roadmap document

Internal roadmap: Develop aspirational policy & procedures linked to guidelines & resources Build on current policies & procedures regarding IT developed, procured, used Model IT accessibility compliance after IT security compliance efforts Build on past accomplishments Offer incentives (e.g., video captioning project)

Terrill

Resources University of Washington IT Accessibility uw.edu/accessibility/ Sheryl Burgstahler sherylb@uw.edu Terrill Thompson tft@uw.edu