Over the past several years, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Office for Civil Rights (OCR) have completed dozens of rulings on IT accessibility at institutions of higher education. The University of Washington has used lessons learned from these settlements, agreements, and resolutions to shape their own accessibility services and policies. Presented by Sheryl Burgstahler (Director of Accessible Technology Services at UW) and Terrill Thompson (Technology Accessibility Specialist at UW), this session will address issues related to ensuring the accessibility of IT to all faculty, students, staff, and visitors with disabilities. This presentation will cover: Lessons learned from DOJ/OCR resolutions How accessibility laws apply to IT in higher ed The challenges of making IT accessible at postsecondary campuses nationwide How UW has shaped their accessibility services and policies based on rulings at other schools Useful resources and tips to help build accessibility at your institution Who should be involved in accessibility?

1. Lessons Learned from DOJ/OCR Rulings
at Other Institutions
www.3playmedia.com
twitter: @3playmedia
live tweet: #a11y
 Type questions in the window during the presentation
 This presentation is being recorded and will be available for replay
 To view live captions, please follow the link in the chat window
Sheryl Burgstahler
Director, Accessible
Technology Services
University of Washington
Terrill Thompson
Technology Accessibility
Specialist
University of Washington
Lily Bond (Moderator)
Director of Marketing
3Play Media
lily@3playmedia.com

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

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

4. 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)

5. 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

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

7. 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

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

9. 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

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

11. Lessons learned from resolutions
3. 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.
4. Institute procedures for addressing
accessibility as a requirement within the
procurement process.

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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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!

16. Key aspects of UW approach
• 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
- engage IT accessibility liaisons across campus

17. 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, captioning parties, capacity
building institutes, & other events
– support multiple user groups
– proactively test websites, PDFs & offer remediation

18. 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

19. 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)

20. uw.edu/accessibility

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

22. Q&A
Upcoming Webinars:
 Jan 26: Getting Colleagues to Adopt UDL
 Feb 2: A Centralized Approach to EIT Accessibility
 Feb 9: The State of Captioning in Higher Ed
 Feb 16: Accessibility at Blackboard
 Feb 23: Best Practices for Accessible Videos
You can register for our free webinars at:
www.3playmedia.com/webinars/
Panelist Contact Info
Sheryl Burgstahler
University of Wisconsin
sherylb@uw.edu
uw.edu/accessibility/
Terrill Thompson
University of Washington
tft@uw.edu
uw.edu/accessibility/
Lily Bond
3Play Media
www.3playmedia.com
lily@3playmedia.com
Please type your questions into the window in your
control panel. A recording of this webinar will be
available for replay.