In a recent notice to consultants, the state's Department of Information Technology announced that all consultants will be required to take Web-site accessibility training "in accordance with the state guidelines for achieving universal accessibility." The guidelines will be used in the creation of any state Web site. The state's IT department has the guidelines posted online.
The directive includes all consultants currently under contract with the state who work in a number of areas, including Internet management and development; design; application server administration; Internet graphics; and as webmasters.
Contractors and IT consultants frequently present themselves as qualified to build sites that are accessible to persons with disabilities, said Cynthia Waddell, a consultant of CIBER's Accessibility Center of Excellence. However, the results have often not measured up to standards such as the W3C guidelines or Section 508 regulations.
"There is a lack of information and education about what accessibility is," Waddell said. "The fact that Connecticut had to make it a requirement speaks volumes. People want to do it but they haven't had the tools and education."
Currently, all federal purchases of electronic equipment must be accessible to adaptive technologies, such as screen readers for the blind or alternatives to using a mouse to navigate, according to Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act.
Shortly after the regulations took effect last June, states began looking more seriously at access issues. California, New York and Texas have implemented strict standards in providing for accessibility, not only in Web design, but also in the procurement of other equipment, such as facsimile and copy machines.
As some jurisdictions move voluntarily to meet standards, others are waiting to see if Section 508 will eventually filter down to the state and local levels. One way this may happen is through litigation. In Arkansas, the Federation of the Blind filed a lawsuit claiming a $19 million computer system purchased by the state is inaccessible and alleging that the state is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The application at the center of the suit is the Arkansas Administrative Information System, which employees can use to examine their payroll information. Two blind employees who each worked for the state for 20 years found they were no longer able to access this confidential information when the new system was installed in 2001.
How Section 508 may, or may not, play into this litigation is still unclear. However, access experts are carefully watching the progression of the case.
Some states, such as Connecticut, have taken a proactive approach, according to Kathleen Anderson, purchasing service officer, Department of Information Technology.
"Any consultant that is doing Internet or Web work for the state must have the accessibility training," she said. "We are giving them until July 1. Anyone on contract and not trained can no longer work."
Anderson said the training is free and will assist vendors.
"We want to make sure that they pay attention to our guidelines - it should benefit the whole firm," she said.
Daniel Goldstein, an attorney with the firm that is representing the Federation of the Blind in the Arkansas case, said the state had also been diligent in setting standards, calling the Arkansas guidelines a "mini Section 508."
According to the statute, all software contracts must contain accessibility features. Goldstein said the human resources solution in Arkansas did not meet the criteria in the original RFP. However, the vendor was working with some legacy issues.
"Here is the problem: It is a lot more difficult to put an elevator in a building that's already built," he said. "The same is true of software. It's not that hard in the initial design."
Goldstein, whose firm litigated one of the nation's first accessibility lawsuits (Connecticut vs. AOL, which was settled out of court) said a government's or company's culture often dictates how this issue is handled.
"The companies that don't run into trouble are the ones who have someone fairly high up in the management structure that cares about accessibility issues," he said. "If there is no champion, no one is getting the monetary reward for making the application accessible."
In addition, Goldstein said, good Web design depends upon the specific needs of the user group.
"An advisory committee of people with disabilities can tell you what works and what doesn't," he said. "One point that gets missed is this step will save you from doing something expensive - 'cause you thought the disability group wanted it, but they didn't."
Many software companies are afraid to contact disability groups to ask for help, fearing a call might trigger a lawsuit, he said.
"Companies that want to fix the problem will get a warm reception," he suggested. "They are not painting a target on themselves."
Waddell said states need to overcome the barriers to creating accessible Web sites, barriers that, at times, are built from false information.
"There are a lot of myths out there about how complicated this is, terrible misinformation and overkill," Waddell said. "I don't think people need to be afraid creating true accessibility."
Darby Patterson, Editor in Chief
