# Presentation: 053815

## States & IT Accessibility

- Deborah Buck, Executive Director
- November 8, 2006

- Association of Assistive Technology Act Programs

## States & §508 Requirements

- History of §508 requirements for States
- Tech Act- 1988
- Required Assurance
- Lack of Clarity- “State” as a State defines it!!
- Disparate interpretations of 508 applicability to States
- State & Local Government compliance with §508 is not required by ADA
- §508 does not apply to direct recipients of Federal funds (grants) unless a federal agency or department specifically requires conformance

## Exception- AT Act of 1998, as amended

- The application shall include assurances that ...
- (G) activities carried out in the State that are _authorized under this Act, and supported by Federal funds received under this Act_, will comply with the standards established by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (20 U.S.C. 794d); and...

- Assistive Technology Act of 1998 as amended, PL108-364
- SEC. 4. State Grants for Assistive Technology (d) Application (6) Assurances

## IT Spending: 			States vs. Feds

| State & Local Gov’ts* | Federal Agencies** |
| --- | --- |
| 
Spent $48 billion on IT in 2005
 | Expected to spend $64.7 billion on IT in fiscal 2007 - slight decrease from last year.  |
| 
IT spending will reach $70 billion by 2010
 | 
Expected to reach $74 billion by fiscal 2012
 |

**Source: CDWG*
***Government Electronics and IT Association (GEIA)*

## State of the States

- Almost all States have policies & laws relative to web access
- 18 States have IT Access laws
- 1 State has an Executive Order (1993)
- 2 States have Executive or Administrative Order for web access alone
- 4 States have adopted policies or addressed E&IT accessibility through Enterprise Architecture or Policy

## Web Accessibility

- States are all over the place- laws, policies, statements of commitment
- Standards
- §508, W3C, State Standards
- State may have statute adopting §508, yet have Web Accessibility Policy/Guidance that goes beyond §508
- Industry is responsive to states taking hybrid approach– developing customizable validation & testing tools
- Usability

## States with “508” Statutes

- Arizona 2004			Arkansas  1999
- California 2002		Colorado  2000
- Florida 2006			Indiana  2001
- Kentucky 2000		Louisiana 2001
- Maryland1998		Minnesota 1998/2002
- Missouri1999			Montana2001
- Nebraska 2000		North Carolina 2001
- Oklahoma 2004		Texas	 2005
- Virginia 2004			W. Virginia 2001

## Executive Orders &Policies

**Executive Orders**
- Massachusetts 1993
-  **CIO Office Policy**
- Oregon 2001
- Georgia*
- Maine*2003
- Wisconsin*??1997
- Michigan 2006 *Draft Policies**	*

## State Statutes, Executive Orders, Technical Architecture, Policies,

- State Statute
- Executive Orders (MA)
- Can be rescinded
- Some EOs automatically expire on a set date or upon change in Governor.
- Knowledge of EO can be nonexistent
- Policies & Standards
- Policies
- Don’t have full force & effect of law
- Technical Architectures
- Integrated approach

## Adopting §508

- Civil Rights/Accommodation vs. E&IT Infrastructure Accessibility
- Civil Rights / Non-discrimination Laws
- IT Statutes & Procurement Statutes

## Adopting §508- Options

-  Adopt §508 in full
-  Adopt §508 components in statute
-  Adopt statute to ensure IT accessibility
- Designated entity given authority and responsibility to develop standards
- Maintain state control adopt standards via rulemaking or policy
- Adopt §508 standards or descriptive standards based on §508
- Several did not adopt functional performance standards (MO,OK,NE,IN)
- Some did not adopt self-contained closed products standards and modified other parts of technical standards
- Some cases- can’t distinguish between IT accessibility and individual accommodations
- Some cases- no standards adopted

## Target Beneficiaries

- Majority of state statutes benefit all people with disabilities
- Six State Statutes  limited to people who are blind or have other visual disabilities - Non-visual access
- States that adopted non-visual access changed to ensure access for all
- Virginia
- Texas

## Scope of Applicability

- Varies by state to state- covered entities may be extended by policies
- State governmental entities
- Public Schools and Universities
- Judicial branches of state government
- Entities in receipt of state funds
- Unfunded Mandates??
- Requirement follows the dollar
- Entities supported in whole or part by the state required to comply.
- Efforts and ability to enforce are unclear

## Lead Authority

- Implementation
- No responsibility for implementation
- CIOs office or comparable agency
- Responsibility shared with finance entity.
- Entity given authority to implement may not have authority over covered entities making enforcement a challenge.

## 
Consideration of accessibility
Priority- 1st screen – or
Considered as part of the acquisition- subservient to business & technical needs
Definitions
Undue Burden- different approaches
Vendor determination?
5% Rule
Compliance not required if the cost of modifying the information technology to support for compatibility with software and hardware for nonvisual access would increase the cost of the procurement by more than 5 percent.
Accessible 
Easy to get to, approachable, available

- Consideration of accessibility
- Priority- 1st screen – or
- Considered as part of the acquisition- subservient to business & technical needs
- Definitions
- Undue Burden- different approaches
- Vendor determination?
- 5% Rule
- Compliance not required if the cost of modifying the information technology to support *for compatibility with software and hardware for* nonvisual access would increase the cost of the procurement by more than 5 percent.
- Accessible
- Easy to get to, approachable, available

- Procurement-Implementation

## Procurement-Implementation

- Access Clause required in contracts
-  Statement of conformance by vendor or submission of Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) _[http://www.itic.org/reports/508/Sec508.html](http://www.itic.org/reports/508/Sec508.html)_
- Testing
- Lack of widely accepted testing protocols
- Internal versus external testing
- User testing- testing the product or the users knowledge and ability to use the technology or their AT
- Leveraging Federal Progress
- Federal Supply Schedule