Copies of this Report are available from the United States Department of Labor's Office of

Disability Employment Policy (www.dol.gov/odep). The United States Department of Labor

is located at 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room S-1303, Washington, DC 20210; (202)

693-7880 (Main Voice); (202) 693-7881 (Main TTY); (202) 693-7881 (Main Fax).

Alternative formats of this Report are available by contacting the Office of Disability

Employment Policy.

Any modification(s) to the Report, or to material contained in this Report, must be clearly

specified. In addition, a description of the modifications must be provided. Notice of the

modification(s) must be displayed prominently and must contain, if applicable, a notice that

the modification(s) may compromise the validity and readability of the information and/or

conclusions in this Report.
An Interagency Seminar of Exchange 

for Federal Managers

Summary Report

April 2004

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABOUT THIS REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iv

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

SCOPE AND IMPORTANCE OF THE ISSUE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

BACKGROUND ON THE SEMINAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

PART I: OPENING AND KEYNOTE REMARKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

OPENING REMARKS BY W. ROY GRIZZARD, JR., 

ODEP ASSISTANT SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR . . . . . . . . . .6

KEYNOTE REMARKS BY SECRETARY ELAINE L. CHAO, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

PART II: PLENARY SESSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

SETTING THE STAGE: THE IMPORTANCE OF 

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS IN A TIME OF UNCERTAINTY . . . . . . . . . . .10

LESSONS LEARNED: PERSPECTIVES FROM FEDERAL 

MANAGERS AND EMPLOYEES WITH DISABILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

FEDERAL AGENCY SHOWCASE: EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 

PLANS THAT INVOLVE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Department of Labor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Department of Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Department of Defense, Defense Intelligence Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

SITUATIONS AND SOLUTIONS: EXCHANGING INNOVATIVE IDEAS . . . . . .19

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER: STRENGTHENING 

YOUR AGENCY’S EMERGENCY PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Maintenance and the Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
PART III: BREAKOUT SESSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

A. Communicating with Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

B. Equipment Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

C. On-Site Virtual Tour of Department of Labor’s 

Emergency Preparedness Effective Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

D. Egress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39

E. Support Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44

F. Regional and Field Office Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48

G. Individualizing Emergency Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51

CONCLUSION: PREVAILING THEMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55

Communication with Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56

Agency Budget and Personnel Commitment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57

Flexibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57

Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58

RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59

APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63

ii
iii

ABOUT THIS REPORT

On December 2-3, 2003, the Department of Labor’s Office of Disability Employment

Policy (ODEP) hosted Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities: An

Interagency Seminar of Exchange for Federal Managers at the Washington, DC headquarters. This report summarizes the proceedings from the day and a half event and is

meant to serve as a source of practical information on developing, implementing, and

maintaining emergency preparedness plans for people with disabilities. 

The document has been compiled using session transcripts, presenter presentations, and

rapporteurs’ notes. It is intended to provide an overview of the themes, ideas, questions,

and practices exchanged during the Seminar rather than a word-for-word or minute-byminute account of the event. More importantly, the information and opinions related to

strategies, products, and issues presented should not be regarded as endorsements or

policy statements ODEP or the Department of Labor (DOL). 

While the report structure closely reflects the official Seminar agenda, some sections have

been added or modified to enhance both the readability and usability of the document.

Space has been devoted to each Seminar session rather than integrating the information

based on themes or topics. This was done for two reasons: 1) to assist readers in putting

the information in perspective; and 2) to preserve—as much as possible—both the context

in which the information was shared and the flow of the Seminar. 

Finally, it is hoped that this report provides readers a better understanding of the common

themes that emerged over the day and a half, as well as practical resources and information related to emergency preparedness for people with disabilities.
iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Department of Labor’s Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) would like to

thank all of the participants of the Seminar of Exchange, whose open sharing and expertise contributed to the event’s overall success. Many federal experts provided critical contributions to shaping the program, including Margaret (Peg) Blechman of the U.S.

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, and Alan Clive of the U.S.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. Invaluable guidance and involvement in the

event was provided by distinguished national experts in the field, including Elizabeth Davis

of the National Organization on Disability, Edwina Julliet of the National Taskforce on

Fire/Life Safety for People with Disabilities, and June Isaacson Kailes with the Center for

Disability Issues and the Health Professions at Western University of Health Sciences.

Finally, special thanks is warranted for the contributions of the following entities, for without their input and involvement, this Seminar of Exchange would not have been possible:

■ Office of the Secretary (Department of Labor)

■ Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Department of Labor)

■ Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management 

(Department of Labor)

■ Department of Labor Emergency Command Center 

■ Office of Personnel Management

■ Department of Homeland Security

■ Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

■ Disability Preparedness Center

■ Department of Transportation

■ Department of Defense, Defense Intelligence Agency

■ Department of Housing and Urban Development

■ Department of Agriculture

■ Job Accommodations Network

■ U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board 

■ Northern Virginia Resource Center for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Persons
INTRODUCTION
ple with disabilities have been of keen interest,

stimulated by accounts of people in wheelchairs

being trapped and left to die in the smoke-filled

stairwells of the World Trade Center in New

York. 

The ability to evacuate and/or find shelter during

an emergency situation for an employee with a

disability can be a daunting task not only for the

person with the disability, but also for his or her

employer. Consequently, emergency preparedness plans that do not address the unique needs

of people with disabilities can limit the employment, promotion, and retention possibilities of

an applicant or existing employee with a disability. Specifically, employers may be hesitant to

recruit people with disabilities as a result of liability concerns surrounding the ability to secure

their safety during an emergency situation.

Similarly, people with disabilities may be reluctant to seek employment in certain locations due

to a fear of being trapped or not being accommodated in a dangerous situation.

As federal agency emergency plans continue to

evolve, it is important to evaluate all scenarios to

ensure they include the requirements for people

with disabilities. By anticipating such needs during the emergency preparedness planning

process, fear and panic can be mitigated and

lives can be saved.

Like other federal agencies, the Department of

Labor has been actively preparing its office

SCOPE AND IMPORTANCE

OF THE ISSUE

Americans enjoy relative security in their

everyday lives. Yet, the threat of emergency situations caused by natural disasters, technological accidents, or acts of terrorism

always looms on the fringes. For Federal

Government employees, the threat has been

made reality in recent years. Examples include

the shutting down of federal offices due to

Hurricane Isabel on September 18-19, 2003; the

terrorist attacks on the Pentagon on September

11, 2001; and the bombing of the Oklahoma

City federal regional building on April 19, 1995.

Emergency situations impacting Federal

Government employees rarely announce their

imminence. Therefore, it is important for

Government agencies to assume a position of

preparedness for a disaster or threat to human

life, through specific and established plans of

action. This condition of preparedness can only

be achieved through thoughtful planning, collaboration, and steadfast commitment by federal

managers, who have been vested with the

responsibility of the safety of their employees. 

Research and experience in the last decade

demonstrate that the needs of federal and private

sector employees with disabilities are often omitted during the emergency preparedness planning

process. However, since the tragic events of

September 11, 2001, the specific needs of peo2

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

“Research and experience in the last decade demonstrate that the needs of

federal and private sector employees with disabilities are often omitted 

during the emergency preparedness planning process.” 
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

The agenda was divided into five general (plenary) sessions and seven breakout sessions, which

repeated over the course of a day and a half.

Nationally and locally recognized experts provided information and facilitated an exchange of

experiences between federal managers aimed at

promoting consistent and effective emergency

preparedness practices that afford equal protection for people with disabilities. As such, the following were specific objectives of the Seminar:

■ To facilitate an exchange of information 

and dialogue between federal agencies 

regarding emergency preparedness for 

people with disabilities;

■ To provide a forum where federal 

agencies could discuss the topic with their

regional offices;

■ To provide an opportunity for interagency 

exchange of effective practices related to 

emergency preparedness in general, and 

specifically to people with disabilities; and

■ To enhance existing employer emergency 

preparedness plans to include the needs 

of people with disabilities through the 

sharing, preparation, and dissemination of resources.

spaces and buildings for emergency situations

for all employees, including employees with disabilities. While much has been done, there

remains much to do, in the Department of Labor

and throughout the Federal Government, in the

Washington, DC area and, particularly, in the

regions. The Seminar of Exchange and this

Summary Report are a significant step forward.

BACKGROUND ON THE

SEMINAR

On December 2-3, 2003 the U.S.

Department of Labor Office of

Disability Employment Policy hosted

Emergency Preparedness for People with

Disabilities: An Interagency Seminar of

Exchange for Federal Managers at the

Department of Labor headquarters in

Washington, DC. The Office of Disability

Employment Policy (ODEP) was created to

enhance employment opportunities for people

with disabilities through the development of

sound policy regarding youth and adults with

disabilities, public and private sector employers,

employment supports, and employer-focused

research.

ODEP’s goal in hosting the Seminar of

Exchange was to highlight the importance of

developing emergency preparedness plans in the

federal workplace that include the needs of

employees with disabilities. The agenda for the

day and a half Seminar of Exchange was

designed to allow more than 200 participants—

consisting of federal managers and other personnel involved in emergency preparedness—to

obtain and share information about specific

issues in the development, implementation, and

maintenance of emergency preparedness plans

for people with disabilities. 

3

PART I:

OPENING AND

KEYNOTE

REMARKS
ing employment of people with disabilities in all

sectors, Dr. Grizzard remarked that the

Federal Government “should be a shining

example for all employers for how to prepare

the workplace for people with disabilities in

case [an] emergency does come [about].” 

KEYNOTE REMARKS BY

SECRETARY 

ELAINE L. CHAO, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT 

OF LABOR

L

abor Secretary

Elaine L.

Chao delivered the keynote

remarks on the first

day of the Seminar.

She congratulated

the sponsoring

agencies, presenters, and participants for convening

this first of its kind

seminar on emergency preparedness

for federal employees with disabilities. Secretary Chao characterized emergency preparedness planning that

includes employees with disabilities as a priority for the Department of Labor (DOL). She

added that “making the federal workplace a

model workplace by assuring a safe and

secure environment for employees with disabilities” is a critical element in meeting President

George W. Bush’s challenge to remove the

barriers that impede Americans with disabilities from leading full and independent lives.

Secretary Chao pointed out that “every single

The following are highlights of the Seminar

Opening and Keynote Remarks. Please see

the Appendices for the full text of the prepared

remarks.

OPENING REMARKS BY 

W. ROY GRIZZARD, JR.,

Ed.D., ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY, OFFICE OF 

DISABILITY EMPLOYMENT

POLICY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Office of Disability Employment Policy

Assistant Secretary, Dr. W. Roy

Grizzard, Jr., Ed.D., opened the

Seminar with remarks welcoming the more

than 200 participants to the Department of

Labor. He stressed that emergency preparedness planning for people with disabilities is

important to employment opportunities for

this group in the Federal Government, as well

as in the private sector. “If people with disabilities are going to be in the workplace, then, it

becomes paramount

that they feel comfortable.... If we are

going to encourage

employers across the

country—private, nonprofit and Government

entities—to hire people

with disabilities, that

workplace should be

one that is comfortable, healthy and safe

and that feeling

should be conveyed to

those ...[employees].”

In support of promot6

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

W. Roy Grizzard, Jr., Ed.D.,

ODEP Assistant Secretary,

encouraged federal managers to

help ensure the workplace is

safe for all employees, including

people with disabilities.

Secretary of Labor, Elaine L. Chao,

stressed the Department’s 

commitment to the safety of all

federal employees.
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

day, more than 120,000 employees with disabilities go to work in national headquarters

buildings, regional offices or field offices that

are owned by or leased by the Federal

Government.” She continued, “Their safety,

the safety of all federal employees, is our number one priority.” Secretary Chao charged

participants to remain committed to including

employees with disabilities in their agencies’

emergency preparedness efforts, because their

preparation and creative planning will make a

difference in the lives of their colleagues. ■

7

“[E]very single day, more than 120,000 employees with disabilities go to

work in national headquarters buildings, regional offices or field offices

that are owned by or leased by the Federal Government.... Their safety,

and the safety of all federal employees, is our number one priority.”

PART II:

PLENARY 

SESSIONS
present since the events of September 11, 2001.

However, he urged people to stand against fear,

saying the best way to do this is to be prepared.

“If we are [fearful], they are winning, giving

them victory. [You] need to be doing what

you’re doing, planning and thinking ahead and

be ready for what is coming. The job of preparedness is not only the job of professionals. It

is not just their job, but all our responsibility to

be prepared. And why is that? They can’t do

everything, be everywhere.” 

Mr. Sutherland also commented on DHS’s goal

of being a model

employer for people with

disabilities, through the

full implementation of

Section 508 of the

Rehabilitation Act of

1973, as amended. This is being accomplished

by improving internal and external communications, actively recruiting people with disabilities,

challenging DHS managers to provide “reasonable accommodations,” and developing effective

emergency preparedness plans. As to the latter,

he applauded

ODEP’s efforts. 

Nevertheless, Mr.

Sutherland

acknowledged

that emergency

preparedness for

people with disabilities deserves

more attention for

several reasons.

First, “if we in the

federal workforce

SETTING THE STAGE:

THE IMPORTANCE OF

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS IN A TIME OF

UNCERTAINTY

The plenary sessions began with remarks

from Daniel Sutherland, U.S.

Department of Homeland Security,

Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. The

purpose of Mr. Sutherland’s remarks was to “set

the stage” regarding the importance of developing, implementing, and maintaining emergency

preparedness plans for

employees and customers

with disabilities.

The U.S. Department of

Homeland Security (DHS)

focuses on mitigating the

threat of terror in advance of emergencies by

promoting the concept of disaster-resistant communities. DHS has set an aggressive pace in

developing and managing national training and

evaluation systems to design curriculums, set

standards, evaluate, and reward performance in

local, state, and federal training efforts. Federal

agencies have responded favorably to these and

other initiatives by establishing and improving

their respective emergency preparedness plans.

Additionally, through keen observation and

awareness, federal agencies and their employees

are doing their parts in combating terrorism.

However, even the best security measures can be

overcome, so federal agencies and their employees must adequately prepare to address any

emergency situation.

In his presentation, Mr. Sutherland remarked

generally about the “terror” element that is ever10

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

Dan Sutherland, DHS Officer for

Civil Rights and Civil Liberties,

addressed the importance of

emergency preparedness.

“The job of preparedness is not

only the job of professionals...

but all our responsibility...”
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

The goal of this particular session was to develop a clearer understanding of the level of detail

required from federal managers to promote

safety for their employees with disabilities. The

strength of an emergency preparedness plan

can never be fully measured until it has been

tested in an actual emergency situation.

However, it is possible to create new plans and

fortify existing emergency plans to ensure they

are as comprehensive as possible in securing

the safety of employees and customers with disabilities. Some of the most valuable resources

in developing such plans are the experiences of

federal managers who have addressed the emergency preparedness needs of a significant number of employees with disabilities or who have

been involved in an emergency situation. 

The central theme of Mr. Roffee’s remarks consisted of the eight rules of emergency preparedness planning for people with disabilities.

During his presentation, Roffee admitted that

have an effective emergency preparedness plan,

it is going to make federal managers much

more comfortable hiring people with disabilities.” He explained that having effective emergency plans reduces the barriers that people

with disabilities encounter in pursuing employment opportunities. Finally, Mr. Sutherland

stated that the challenges identified, and eventually eradicated, in emergency preparedness

planning for people with disabilities will have

an immeasurable positive impact on emergency

planning overall. “The problems that people

with disabilities face in the context of emergency preparedness can shed so much light on

so many related problems. And, the solutions

that we develop to solve those problems can

shed so much light on other situations.”

LESSONS LEARNED: 

PERSPECTIVES FROM

FEDERAL MANAGERS

AND EMPLOYEES 

WITH DISABILITIES

S

eminar participants next heard from

Lawrence Roffee, Executive Director, U.S.

Architectural and Transportation

Compliance Board (Access Board), and Mary Ann

Wilson, Director, U.S. Department of Housing

and Urban Development (HUD) in Richmond,

VA. These federal managers shared their unique

perspectives with Seminar participants—representing the experiences of an agency with a workforce

that is 50% disabled (Access Board) and an

agency office that has actually endured an emergency situation resulting from terrorism (HUD). 

11

Larry Roffee, U.S. Access Board, and Mary Ann

Wilson, U.S. HUD Office in Richmond, VA, shared lessons learned regarding emergency preparedness for people with disabilites.

“...[C]hallenges identified, and eventually eradicated, in emergency preparedness planning for people with disabilities will have an immeasurable

positive impact on emergency planning overall.”
■ Rule #2:

Inform the local

fire department

about any particular issues that

you have identified with respect

to the employees

with disabilities.

More importantly,

be sure to let the

fire department

know where

employees with disabilities are located in the

facility. According to Roffee, “Fire officials really do not want a bunch of people carrying a

bunch of other people with disabilities out of

the building.” Doing so may cause more chaos

and actually impede fire officials from stabilizing the situation. It is important to “work with

the local fire department” to develop plans that

are not cumbersome. 

■ Rule #3: Communicate with building

managers and engineers about the various

communication, alarm and sprinkler systems

in the building, as well as the designated

location of “areas of rescue assistance.” The

importance of being familiar with these systems

cannot be over emphasized, as they will have a

vast impact on the design of an emergency preparedness plan. 

■ Rule #4: Do not rely on a “buddy system.” A buddy system typically consists of

assigning an able-bodied employee to assist an

prior to September 11, 2001, his agency did

not have an adequate emergency preparedness

plan, despite the fact that more than half his

staff had at least one targeted disability.1

Following an emergency situation in the privately owned building where the Access Board

is located, he became acutely aware of the

agency’s deficiencies in this area. He set

about to rectify the situation. From this

process, Roffee identified eight rules to developing effective emergency preparedness plans.

He explained that although these rules were

gleaned from the experiences of the Access

Board, they could be applied to other agencies,

where appropriate.

■ Rule #1: Make sure people with disabilities are an integral part of the planning

process. Roffee explained that a person with a

disability knows best what he or she may

require in the event of an emergency. Indeed,

the contributions of an employee with a disability can be advantageous to the overall emergency preparedness planning effort. As Roffee

quipped, “I’m guessing that [a blind] person

[is in a better position to lead someone] out in

a dark smoky stairwell much easier than a

sighted person.” Moreover, Roffee urged people to “never make assumptions about what a

person with a disability [cannot] do” and do

not hesitate to ask an employee with a disability about the kinds of assistance he or she may

need in the event of an emergency.

12

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

“...‘[N]ever make assumptions about what a person with a disability [cannot] do’ and do not hesitate to ask an employee with a disability about the

kinds of assistance he or she may need in the event of an emergency.”
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

■ Rule #8: Practice, practice, practice!

Roffee regarded practicing as an essential component of emergency preparedness. It is impossible to adequately prepare for an emergency situation without having practiced. Roffee also

stated that apathy about practicing weakens a

good emergency preparedness plan. Therefore,

it is very important to practice regularly, and to

ensure that each practice session is taken as

seriously as an actual emergency.

Mary Ann Wilson’s remarks were based upon

her experiences on September 11, 2001, while

assigned to the HUD office at the World Trade

Center in New York. She depicted a scene of

unwavering uncertainty that was augmented by

the lack of a comprehensive plan. The deficiencies were numerous. Wilson told participants

that she was unaware of the following issues at

the time: the evacuation policy; the members of

her staff who were in the office; who had a disability and the nature of those disabilities; an

accessible door designed to accommodate a person with a disability did not work; the communication system was inaudible; and the service elevator, used by people unable to take the stairs,

was experiencing problems.

Like Roffee of the Access Board, Wilson provided participants with a checklist of important items

she considered critical to emergency preparedness. In many respects, they were similar to the

eight rules presented by Roffee. For example:

■ Wilson implored participants to practice. 

However, she added that employees should

be debriefed after every drill to find out 

how the emergency plan succeeds, and, 

more importantly, how it fails. 

employee with a disability in the event of an

emergency. Roffee emphatically maintained that

the “buddy system simply does not work” for several reasons. It can lead to “not-my-job syndrome.” Or, at the very least, the buddy assigned

to the employee with a disability may not be in

the office the very day, hour, or moment an

alarm sounds. A better more effective alternative,

suggested Roffee, is to have the volunteers and

the employees with disabilities convene in a predetermined area and wait for further instruction.

■ Rule #5: Purchase evacuation chairs, and

plan to evacuate any mobility devices (e.g.,

wheelchairs) that evacuation chair users may

require once they have been removed from

the emergency situation. According to Roffee,

many fire departments have ladders that cannot

reach the entire height of a multiple story building. By having evacuation chairs available, people with disabilities can, at the very least, be

moved to an area or floor where emergency

response personnel can assist them further.

Additionally, having a plan in place that provides

for the evacuation of mobility devices makes for

a smoother transition for the employees who use

these devices. Otherwise, employees will be

“basically helpless” once they have left the emergency situation.

■ Rule #6: Plan for communications. This

includes not only developing a system of communication that is accessible to and useable by

everyone, but also knowing how to utilize the

system.

■ Rule #7: Designate an emergency situation room. This room should have windows

that face the street, along with a “HELP HERE”

sign. This room should also be equipped with

telephones and other equipment pertinent to

your communication plan.

13
ly addresses its unique circumstances? A universal first-step is to engage in dialogue with other

federal agencies to assess some of the processes

instituted, barriers encountered, and noteworthy

resources available. In this session, participants

heard from three federal agencies about the rudimentary elements of their emergency preparedness plans, which adequately include people

with disabilities: U.S. Department of Labor

(DOL); U.S. Department of Transportation

(DOT); U.S. Department of Defense, Defense

Intelligence Agency (DOD/DIA).

Each of these agencies was chosen because of

their specific processes and unique circumstances. For example, DOL is a medium-sized

agency with field offices across the United

States. DOT is a somewhat larger agency, with

a significantly more intricate institutional structure. DOD/DIA is a large office within the

largest federal agency that employs a significant

number of people with disabilities. 

In many ways, each of these federal agencies’

plans was similar. In just as many ways, their

plans were different. Of greater importance for

this session was the discussion related to how

they developed, implemented, and maintain these

plans in order to ensure the safety of their employees with disabilities. The objective was to provide

a comprehensive summary of the various

approaches to developing an emergency preparedness plan that includes people with disabilities.

Department of Labor

Al Stewart, the Director of Business

Operations, presented the DOL’s plan to

participants. Stewart explained that the

creation and designation of an emergency

■ She suggested that agencies have a 

regularly updated continuity of operations 

plan that not only considers the needs of 

people with disabilities, but that also 

makes them a part of the planning process. 

■ Her next suggestion was to make sure the

evacuation plan is posted and accessible—

and strongly encourage all employees to be

familiar with it. 

■ Another suggestion proffered was to 

establish a policy where employees should

take necessary items (e.g., a purse and car

keys) when attending meetings or 

conducting other business away from their

desk, even if it is in the same building. 

■ Wilson also urged participants to remain

flexible at all costs. “Don’t count on any

thing. Be prepared, because so many 

things are not going to work. And, you are

just going to have to be flexible and 

prepared to go at it another way.” 

FEDERAL AGENCY

SHOWCASE: EMERGENCY

PREPAREDNESS PLANS

THAT INVOLVE PEOPLE

WITH DISABILITIES

When it comes to developing, implementing and maintaining an emergency preparedness plan that

includes people with disabilities, there is no

standard formula. Federal agencies vary in size,

location, structure design, and budget.

Moreover, within any given federal agency,

whether in the District of Columbia metropolitan

area or in the regions, the number of employees

with disabilities varies substantially. So then,

how can an agency develop a plan that adequate14

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

also utilizes “designated Floor Wardens and

Zone Monitors” equipped with radios on every

floor to ensure “that all the offices in evacuation

are cleared and that individuals who may need

assistance... have that assistance in reaching

their destination.” 

In developing, implementing and maintaining the

emergency preparedness plan at DOL, Stewart

underscored three critical points: 

■ First, emergency preparedness requires 

continuous training and review, because 

there are always upgrades that can be 

made. 

■ Second, the importance of two-way 

communication cannot be over 

emphasized. Collecting and analyzing 

feedback from people within the agency 

who have participated in drills makes the 

emergency preparedness plan much 

stronger. 

■ Third, Stewart asserted, “Practice is key to

having a successful emergency plan for a 

federal agency.” Practice should occur on

a regular basis, so it becomes second 

nature to all employees. 

Department of

Transportation

The development and implementation

strategy of the DOT Emergency

Preparedness Plan was presented by

John Benison, Disability Policy Advisor, DOT

Office of Civil Rights. According to Benison, the

development and implementation of an emergency preparedness plan that addresses people

with disabilities is necessary to be in compliance

with Sections 501 and 504 of the Rehabilitation

response team

(ERT) was the

first element of

establishing DOL’s

current emergency

preparedness plan.

The ERT is “comprised of a broad

array of officials

from within the

Department” to

ensure that all

essential issues are

addressed.

Additionally, the DOL Office of the Inspector

General conducted assessments of the DOL

national and regional facilities. This activity

resulted in the conclusion that a “cookie-cutter”

approach was not appropriate. Instead, DOL

officials determined that it was a better and more

efficient practice “to tailor and address the

needs, based on what the situation was for the

specific population of people,” to include people

with disabilities. A key element of the updated

DOL plan is the shift in focus from the security

manager force to the building occupants. As

part of this shift, DOL revised its evacuation

handbook to include blueprints of the DOL facilities and an illustration of collection points for

people evacuating the building. 

The plan also includes two shelter-in-place policies. The first shelter-in-place policy (Posture I

Advisory) requires employees to go back to their

designated areas and wait for more instructions.

The second policy for shelter-in-place (Posture II

Advisory), used in instances that are deemed

highly critical, requires employees remain in the

building in a pre-designated secure area. DOL

15

Al Stewart, DOL Director of

Business Operations, talked about

the agency’s plan.
■ Ensuring that everyone at DOT has

a responsibility in emergency preparedness: The senior management has

oversight responsibility. Supervisors are

responsible for ensuring the safety of their

employees, and employees with disabilities

are responsible for their own safety, which

includes providing needed information to

personnel responsible for assisting them in

the event of an emergency. Finally, the

facility, emergency, and security personnel

have the responsibility of planning for

emergency situations in general, as well as

considering the unique needs of people

with disabilities.

■ Managing emergency information:

According to Benison, DOT’s plan provides specific details on the kind of information that can be requested from a DOT

employee with a disability and how that

information can be used. However, the

plan also stresses assumptions should not

be made about whether an individual

needs assistance. In addition, the information should be given voluntarily, and any

information obtained about an individual’s

disability should be kept confidential.

Benison regarded the most important

aspects of this portion of the DOT emergency plan as information collected about

the kind of assistance needed, the individual’s work schedule, and his/her contact

information. The plan also requires this

information be compiled for emergency

management personnel (e.g., supervisors

and security personnel).

■ Communicating with and training

employees: Benison emphasized that at

DOT it is a requirement that a specific

communication plan related to emergency

Act of 1973, as amended.

At DOT, emergency preparedness is seen as an

accommodation for

employees, and therefore,

“essential.” Furthermore,

the basic philosophy of

the Department is that

“individuals with disabilities, DOTemployees, and

other employees should

not feel any more vulnerable than anyone else in an

emergency situation.”

Benison outlined six specific procedures and

practices that went into the development and

implementation of the DOT emergency 

preparedness plan:

■ Obtaining support from the highest

level: At DOT, this critical step was

accomplished through a Secretarial memorandum to top leaders. The memorandum, by its very existence, demonstrated

both the significance of this issue to all the

Departmental employees and the

Secretary’s commitment to individuals

with disabilities. For example, the memorandum designated specific roles and

responsibilities in developing the emergency preparedness plan. It also required

that people with disabilities be involved in

the plan development, and mandated that

the DOT Secretary be provided a summary of steps that had been or would be

taken (to fulfill the responsibilities and

roles delineated). Accordingly, implementation and maintenance of the plan met

with little resistance.

16

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

John Benison, 

DOT Disability Policy Advisor,

highlighted key aspects of the

agency’s planning process.
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

the Access Board, the National

Organization on Disability (NOD), and the

Federal Emergency Management Agency

(FEMA).

■ Making sure the emergency preparedness plan remains as current

as possible: One of the ways this is

accomplished is by reviewing the lessons

learned from drills, practices, and other

issues that present themselves. Additionally,

Benison noted that the DOT emergency

preparedness plan is continually updated;

employees are regularly educated on the

substance of the plan; and the equipment

is as current as possible. 

Department of Defense,

Defense Intelligence

Agency

The last presentation of this plenary session came from Pamela Butler, Deaf and

Disabled Persons Program Manager in

the Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity

Office at the Department of Defense, Defense

Intelligence Agency (DOD/DIA). While DIA’s

plan proved to be similar in many ways to the

other plans presented, there were some distinct

nuances. 

According to Butler, the development of DIA’s

emergency plan required the consideration of

many factors. First, DIA is a 24-hour worldwide

operation, which requires that the emergency

plan be “conducive to daytime, nighttime, anypreparedness be issued to all employees, in

an accessible format. The plan itself provides information on required procedures

in emergency situations—such as allowing

individuals with disabilities to report to

work before, during, and after regular business hours. Benison advised Seminar participants that DOT is developing a training

program on the existing emergency 

preparedness guidelines. It will be available to all DOT employees through e-learning technology and other means. Under

this program, the DOT operating administration will be required to provide training

to new DOT employees. Additionally, anytime the plan is updated training will be

mandatory for all employees.

■ Developing the emergency preparedness guidelines: Benison identified this

as an effective practice in and of itself.

The development of the DOT guidelines

began with the creation of a workgroup,

consisting of representatives for the DOT

operating administrations, employee

groups, and specific employees with disabilities. The workgroup served as a vehicle for obtaining input and feedback on

procedures under development. By establishing a workgroup and utilizing the information generated through their research

and discussion, the guidelines are comprehensive and thorough. Some of the

resources that have been explored include

information from Federal Government and

non-Federal Government entities, such as

the Job Accommodations Network (JAN),

17

“...[E]veryone—from agency employees to experts and external stakeholders—

needed to be involved in the emergency preparedness planning process.” 
Commanders,

respectively. They

are held responsible

and accountable for

their office, their

directorates, and for

all employees in that

area. Another component of the plan

is an alert messaging system that overrides the DIA computer networks to advise individuals of an emergency situation. Additional components of the

DIA emergency plan are the routine, but mandatory, “quick mass training” sessions and the

one-on-one training sessions for every DIA

employee, including those with disabilities. 

Also coming out of the DIA plan is an innovative

system of evaluating the drills conducted

throughout the year. According to Butler, the

purpose of the drill evaluation system is to

assess the strengths and weaknesses of DIA’s

emergency preparedness plan. DIA uses a red,

yellow, and green grading system. A grade of

yellow indicates that modifications in specific

areas are needed, while a grade of red requires

all personnel involved in an area to be retrained

regarding the DIA emergency preparedness plan.

Additionally, DIA has developed a communication and information dissemination plan that

includes conducting regular information sessions

and publishing information in a variety of formats. Yet another process born out of the plan

is identifying training programs geared toward

DIA emergency personnel (e.g., Floor Wardens)

and requiring them in turn to train other DIA

employees.

time, weekends, [and the] regular work week.”

Second, DIA has an older workforce and a significant number of employees with temporary

and permanent disabilities. Third, DIA is

undergoing construction and is surrounded by

a berm2 for security reasons. Each of these situations presents unique challenges related to

emergency preparedness planning for people

with disabilities. 

Given these challenges, it was quickly decided

that everyone—from agency employees to

experts and external stakeholders—needed to be

involved in the emergency preparedness planning process. Some of the actions DIA took

included:

■ Soliciting advice and counsel from 

the entire Department of Defense (DOD)

network; 

■ Obtaining information from the local fire

department; and

■ Working closely with DIA senior leadership

and others that have access to the DIA

facility or are otherwise involved.

As a result of

this open planning process, the

DIA emergency

plan requires

that SES personnel and their

deputies be designated as Area

Assembly

Commanders

and Deputy

Ar ea Assembly

18

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

Pam Butler, DIA Deaf and Disabled

Persons Program Manager,

described steps taken by the agency.
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

facilitated by Dr. Beth Loy and Linda Batiste,

was designed to promote creative solutions to

unique situations related to the development,

implementation, and maintenance of an emergency preparedness plan that involves people

with disabilities. In this unconventional session,

Loy and Batiste, Human Factor Consultants with

the Job Accommodations Network (JAN), presented participants with various workplace scenarios, involving people with an array of disabilities. They were then asked to brainstorm about

the appropriate solution to implement in an

emergency preparedness plan. Additionally, the

participants were afforded an opportunity to

learn about the ODEP-sponsored JAN and the

services it offers, which include resources for

building and maintaining disability-friendly

plans. 

Loy and Batiste presented an array of situations

and solutions and facilitated a general discussion of possible solutions proffered by Seminar

participants. Some examples of the issues discussed are below. Please note that while the various examples may not necessarily apply to specific federal jobs, the concepts may be applied

where appropriate. 

Situation 1:

An individual has post-traumatic stress resulting

from a burn injury sustained at work. This individual works on the third floor of a multi-story

building. However, since sustaining the injury,

he has had difficulty returning to the building

due to anxiety. 

Making employees feel comfortable about their

responsibilities and the established plan is an

integral part of DIA emergency preparedness.

For example, DIA conducts drills where instead

of employees physically evacuating from an area

or floor, firemen go to where the employees are

located. The firemen talk to employees, either

as a group or individually, about perceived next

steps and give advice in accordance with the

employees’ specific limitations. DIA’s plan also

calls for the provision of counseling by trained

personnel for individuals who may have a debilitating emotional or psychiatric reaction to the

stress of an emergency.

Through the process of developing and implementing the DIA emergency preparedness plan,

many lessons have been learned, said Butler.

Foremost of these lessons is that communication

and accountability are essential to the success

of an emergency preparedness plan. It is vital

that every person be accounted for, with

mandatory cooperation. Added Butler, teamwork is fundamental to a plan’s success: everyone must work together. 

SITUATIONS AND 

SOLUTIONS:

EXCHANGING 

INNOVATIVE IDEAS

Creativity and access to appropriate

resources are integral aspects of developing a successful emergency preparedness plan. The next general session, Situations

and Solutions: Exchanging Innovative Ideas,

19

“...[C]ommunication and accountability are essential to the success of an

emergency preparedness plan...”
■ Utilize sign language. (Loy and Batiste

pointed out that this is useful only if the

individual knows sign language.)

■ Install closed-captioned television in designated areas of the building. (Loy and

Batiste pointed out that this may be of no

use if the person with the speech impairment will need to do the communicating.)

■ Provide the individual with a flashlight for

an established Morse code-type communication system or to see pre-written notes (in

the dark).

■ Provide the individual with battery-operated text services.

■ Provide a bullhorn or other speech amplification/enhancer device.

Situation 3: 

A secretary, who works on the 21st floor of an

office building, is blind and uses a service animal. The building design is a complex maze of

hallways and cubicles. 

Solutions:

■ Locate the individual’s desk reasonably

close to the exit and practice evacuation

techniques. (Loy commented that assigning

a person with a disability, to a specific location based on the fact that the individual

has a disability might be seen as discriminatory segregation, despite the fact that it is

done solely to ensure the person’s safety.

However, this potential problem can usually be overcome by involving the employee

with the disability in the decision-making

process. If the employee prefers to be

moved to a location closer to an exit, then

this accommodation is likely appropriate. 

Solutions:

■ Place the individual near an exit, so they

will have comfort in knowing they will not

have to go too far to evacuate the building.

■ Relocate the individual to the first floor.

■ During drills, this individual does not have

to participate. (Regarding this issue Loy

and Batiste noted that this solution is very

controversial. An alternative would be to

conduct individual drills for the person,

breaking each element of the drill into

small steps.)

■ Encourage the individual to work with an

Employee Assistance Program (EAP)3

■ Talk with the individual, asking what would

help increase his comfort level.

■ Utilize a “buddy system.” Connect the individual with someone whom he will feel comfortable with and who will personally escort

the individual during an emergency situation. 

■ Allow the individual to work from home as

much as possible, depending on the

required job duties. 

Situation 2: 

A guidance counselor who has a speech impairment must communicate her needs to people

during an emergency situation.

Solutions:

■ Provide the individual with pre-written

notes regarding things she may need to say.

■ Provide the individual with a laminated card

(in case it gets wet) that has pictographs,

so that she can point to various things.

20

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

Solutions:

■ Install strobe lights strategically throughout

the warehouse.

■ Install mirrors on all intersections within

the warehouse.

■ Install a device in a strategic location that

vibrates or provide the individual with a

vibrating pager to alert them of an emergency.

■ Inform other employees of the situation, so

that they can be watchful and careful as well.

■ Provide the individual with a brightly colored

vest or hat. (Loy and Batiste commented

that this is a controversial solution, as the

individual may not want to be pointed out.

The best thing to do is talk with the employee about the available options and determine

the option that works best for all involved.)

Situation 5: 

A clerical assistant with mental retardation has

difficulty quickly evacuating her workplace.

Solutions:

■ Implement the buddy system, consisting of a

team of colleagues to assist the individual.

Another consideration advanced by a

Seminar participant on this issue was that

placing the individual next to the exit and

making this her main means to evacuate

may cause more problems. Specifically, the

exit door may be impacted by the emergency, and the individual may not have any

other recourse.)

■ Provide the individual with tactile maps

and clues, so that she becomes familiar

with the alternate exits and can locate them

on her own.

■ Provide the individual and service animal

with plenty of one-on-one training, to

include mobility training, so that she

becomes familiar with the tactile signals.

■ Provide the service animal with equipment

or devices that will allow it to assist the

employee. For example, provide a service

dog with booties for his feet. This may

help the dog negotiate hot surfaces or

broken glass.

■ Install an alarm system that signals where

an exit is located. 

■ Tape record simulations. (Loy and Batiste

built on this concept, explaining to

Seminar participants tape-recorded simulations could be provided to the employee.

The recording would advise the individual

of alternative exit routes throughout a

building.)

Situation 4:

A warehouse employee, who is deaf, works in an

environment where heavy pieces of machinery

move at high speeds. Because of the fast-paced

environment, the worker has difficulty recognizing emergency signals.

21

Seminar participants listened as common situations were

presented, and then provided possible solutions.
Health

Professions,

Western

University of

Health

Sciences; and

Edwina Julliet,

Co-Founder,

N ational

Taskforce on

Fire/Life Safety

for People with

Disabilities. 

Development

The first set of points concerned the development of emergency preparedness plans and was

delivered by Davis, who stressed the importance

of avoiding emergency preparedness planning in

a vacuum. Davis stated that: 

1. Often those charged with developing an

emergency preparedness plan are doing so

on the basis of a directive to create a plan,

but with little support, guidance, or commitment from within the agency. As such,

they are often unaware of other issues

impacting plan development and/or implementation. This can lead to duplication of

efforts, general chaos, and confusion. 

2. In order to develop the best plan for an

agency, it is imperative that federal agencies

share information about all aspects of their

specific planning processes, including successes and failures. Davis explained, “We

want to make sure we replicate the successes and we don’t replicate the failures. So,

the sharing of information across agency

■ Utilize a series of pictograms to help the

individual understand that there is an emergency situation or a drill and describe what

steps must be taken to get to safety.

■ Make emergency preparedness a part of the

individual’s job coaching experience.

■ Color code fire doors.

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER:

STRENGTHENING YOUR

AGENCY’S EMERGENCY

PLAN

Throughout the Seminar of Exchange, participants were provided an opportunity to

explore a number of specific issues related to emergency preparedness planning for people with disabilities, ranging from communicating with employees to individualizing emergency

preparedness plans. Each of these topics is

important in and of itself. However, an effective

emergency preparedness plan requires that these

elements be thoroughly and appropriately integrated to ensure the safety of all employees. 

The objective of the final plenary session was

to summarize the discussions held throughout

the Seminar, as well as to help participants

manage expectations and remain grounded in

the reality of the planning process as they move

forward. To this end, a three-person panel outlined specific points that participants should

keep in mind. The panelists, national experts

in the field of emergency preparedness planning for people with disabilities, were Elizabeth

Davis, Director, Emergency Preparedness

Initiative (EPI), National Organization on

Disability (NOD); June Kailes, Associate

Director, Center for Disability Issues and the

22

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

Elizabeth Davis, Director of NOD’s

Emergency Preparedness Initiative

(EPI), listened as other panelists

addressed plan implementation and

maintenance.
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

final tool and policy under development.

The point is something can often be better than nothing, as long as it is carefully

considered and properly implemented. 

Implementation

The second set of points targeted implementation of emergency preparedness plans for people

with disabilities. Kailes stressed that the impetus for the successful implementation of an emergency preparedness plan is to ensure that all the

targeted individuals of an inclusive plan are

taken into consideration. 

1. Make it as comfortable as possible for people to self-identify that they may require

assistance during an emergency situation.

Kailes insisted, “Many people who

need assistance will never, ever identify as having a disability or having...a special need.” As such, according to

Kailes, the effectiveness of emergency preparedness plans can be thwarted by an

individual’s failure to self-identify that he or

she has a disability. She surmised that this

can be primarily attributed to the fact that

“unfortunately, m any 

people still

attach a

broad

amount of

stigma to

disability

and do whatever they can

to stay away

from that

effort.” 

lines is critical.” Sharing also ensures that

agencies are not relying on the same

resources or setting protocol that will conflict with other plans. This is especially true

in situations where agencies share office

space or are housed in close proximity. 

3. “Planning is a constant, ongoing effort.”

As such, plans and other associated documents should be regarded as living documents or latest versions, but never as

final or complete. Said Davis, “The

minute [the plan] says it’s the final version, is the minute it gathers dust and

cobwebs.” 

4. At all times, strive to exceed the minimum

standards set by the plan. For example,

if a plan calls for having one drill a year

on a regular schedule, respond proactively. Raise the bar to one regularly scheduled drill and one unannounced drill per

year. In doing so, Davis said that weaknesses in the plan will be revealed.

5. “Successful plans and efforts come about

when we involve all levels of an organization, both in the planning as well as the

actual implementation stage.” According

to Davis, you never know who will find

themselves in a position where they need

to respond. 

6. Seek out creative solutions, which incorporate tools, equipment, resources and

new property in ways well beyond the

original intended use. Nevertheless, solutions do not have to be high-tech or

expensive. Often low-tech interim protocols can have as much of an impact as the

23

June Issacson Kailes, Associate

Director of the Center for Disability

Issues and Health Professions at

Western University of Health and

Sciences.
es in emergency planning, through a comprehensive analysis of employee feedback.

To this end, it is imperative that all people

participate and provide feedback regarding

the successes and failures of a drill. While

impromptu drills are an excellent way to

solidify employees’ grasp of the plan, it is

also helpful to “actually appoint key people

that know when the next surprise drill happens, so as to be able to evaluate everything that happens, and...develop action

steps accordingly.”

Maintenance and the Future

Juillet’s presentation focused on the maintenance of emergency preparedness plans in light

of looking toward the future. The emphasis was

on alarms, elevators, and evacuation devices.

Her primary point was that engineering trends,

Government codes, and industry standards will

shape emergency preparedness plans by requiring increased egress safety for the building occupants with disabilities.

Alarms. With respect to alarms, Juillet

explained that design and performance requirements are governed by “NFPA-72” (National

Fire Protection Association). NFPA-72 permits

voice annunciation override of alarms.

Nevertheless, there should be the incorporation

of more “intelligent” messaging, which would

convey additional information—other than evacuation and sheltering in place—and consider the

needs of persons with hearing impairments and

cognitive impairments. 

2. Ensure the plan is understandable and

readable. This will impact plans positively. Specifically, emergency preparedness

plans should be formatted with bullets and

pictures, as well as be available in Braille,

large print, cassette tape or electronic text

versions. 

3. Establish support networks. Kailes specifically referenced the “buddy system” as a

perfect illustration of support networks

being beneficial. Recognizing that buddy

systems are flawed in a number of ways,

Kailes implored the participants to

“rethink” the buddy system in broader

terms. This means ensuring that everyone, including individuals with disabilities,

is trained in various aspects of the emergency plan, despite any obvious limitations.

For example, while an individual in a

wheelchair may not be able to take someone down the stairs in an evacuation chair,

that individual could instruct someone else

on doing so. In developing implementation

processes such as this, people who require

assistance during an emergency situation

will “have a much broader network they

can rely on.” 

4. Practice emergency plans through a variety

of drills. Kailes’ fourth point re-emphasized the importance of practicing emergency plans through planned and

impromptu drills. Drills unveil weakness24

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

“Planning is a constant, ongoing effort.” 
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

Juillet expressed the paramount need for an

active committee or council on these issues related to evacuation equipment, alarms, and, particularly, elevator use for emergency egress in order

to assure these developments will be realized as

quickly as possible. ■

Elevators. On the issue of elevators, Juillet

acknowledged the inconsistent messages

regarding the use of elevators during an emergency. Historically, elevator use during an emergency has been regarded as dangerous, prohibited in virtually all instances. 

However, some elevators are indeed operable

during an emergency situation. Specifically,

Juillet stated that such elevators share several

characteristics intended to ensure safety and reliability: they must be installed in a smoke-proof

hoistway constructed to a two-hour fire resistance and pressurized against smoke infiltration,

with enclosed lobbies having a two-hour resistance (one-hour in buildings fully equipped with

sprinklers) and being pressurized.

Evacuation Devices. The final issue discussed by Juillet was evacuation devices. She

defined evacuation devices as the “devices people can transfer (in)to, to get up or downstairs to

be able to evacuate the building.” Juillet noted

that currently there are no require ments for the

manufacture, use, or operation of this class of

devices. The National Fire Protection

Association (NFPA) technical committee “Means

of Egress” (chapter 5 of the Life Safety Code

101) has convened a task group, Evacuation

Devices in Stairwells, to examine use, specifications for equipment and operations, etc.

25

Edwina Julliet, Co-Founder of the

National Taskforce on Fire/Life Safety

for People with Disabilities, explained

the current state of alarms, elevators,

and evacuation devices.

“Historically, elevator use during an emergency has been regarded as

dangerous, prohibited in virtually all instances. However, some elevators

are indeed operable during an emergency situation.”

PART III:

BREAKOUT

SESSIONS
28

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

consistent with the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,

as amended.

According to Dr. Carl Cameron, founder of The

Disability Preparedness Center, several factors

can impact communication in the emergency preparedness process. First and foremost, people

with disabilities are not included in the planning

process. Little, if any, communication exists

between planners and the disability community.

This may be due in part to a lack of training or

understanding regarding the needs of people

with disabilities. Because of the varying communication, support, and health considerations

among people with disabilities, emergency planning and response personnel may not know how

or where to begin in considering this segment of

the workforce. Cameron offered these suggestions to emergency management personnel and

federal managers:

■ Involve people with disabilities in the

planning process: Take into account

both the meeting space and materials.

Make sure they are accessible to personnel

with disabilities.

■ Include disability specific procedures:

This may entail reviewing the emergency

plan, securing input from individuals with

disabilities as to what accommodations are

necessary, and developing procedures and

practicing them.

■ Train response personnel: It is important to include information for assisting

individuals with disabilities in emergency

preparedness training, but be prepared for

The Seminar breakout sessions provided

participants an opportunity to discuss

specific emergency preparedness issues

that impact employment opportunities for people

with disabilities. The objective of these sessions

was to facilitate an information sharing exchange

about the impact of current policies, rather than

the development of policy recommendations. A

pre-selected facilitator led each session and discussions were documented and summarized at

the close of each day by an assigned rapporteur.

A. Communicating with

Employees

The ability to communicate effectively with

all employees is vital to the development,

implementation, and maintenance of any

emergency preparedness plan. Communication or

lack thereof can impact the establishment of emergency plans, maintenance of an effective plan, and

response to drills and/or an actual emergency. In

short, it directly impacts an individual’s ability to

remain safe in an emergency, and can mean the

difference between life and death. 

The Communicating with Employees forum

gave participants the opportunity to learn about

communication strategies that can be used to

ensure employees with disabilities are part of

the emergency preparedness process. Topics

that were addressed included specific considerations for communicating with employees who

are deaf or hard of hearing, identifying employees requiring assistance, and obtaining necessary information from employees in a manner

“Communication or lack thereof...directly impacts an individual’s ability

to remain safe in an emergency, and can mean the difference between life

and death.” 
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

away from their desks or office. As Heppner

noted, an emergency plan is useless unless an

individual understands the type of emergency or

shelter-in-place. She provided the following

example:

A deaf individual had no knowledge of what had

happened at the Twin Towers or the Pentagon.

A co-worker hand-signed the word, “war” and

told him to get out. When he was outside the

building, he didn’t see any of his co-workers, so

he went back into the office. One co-worker,

who was still there, again spelled out in sign

alphabet the word “war” and told him to go

home. He had no detailed information on what

was going on.

This experience was not unique. Reports from

organizations “indicated that widespread difficulties were experienced across the nation”

(Heppner, 2003, p. 2).4 A national follow-up

survey in Spring 2003 asked what plans or procedures had been implemented. “This second

survey found that only a few isolated attempts

had been made across the U.S. and that there

was little or no sharing of information or coordination of efforts” (Heppner, 2003, p. 2).

Given these findings, she sees five key points

when communicating with employees who are

deaf or hard of hearing:

■ Implement a variety of systems to communicate, not just one;

■ Develop strategies for communicating with

people who are away from their desk;

■ Involve people who are deaf or hard of

hearing in the planning process;

disagreement—particularly within the disability community. Involve individuals with

disabilities as trainers. 

■ Provide pro-active information: Make

sure information is readily accessible in a

variety of formats (e.g., in a Word document, via the Web). Secure and share materials regarding emergency preparedness for

people with disabilities with emergency management personnel and employees.

■ Create a special needs list

Cheryl Heppner, Executive Director of The

Northern Virginia Resource Center for Deaf and

Hard of Hearing Persons, addressed some of the

unique considerations for communicating with

employees who are deaf or hard of hearing.

Plans need to include ways to relay the same

level of detailed information to all staff at all

times. This involves determining such considerations as how information will be conveyed to

deaf or hard of hearing employees when they are

Sharon Rennert, EEOC Attorney, looked on while Cheryl

Heppner, Executive Director for the Northern Virginia

Resource Center for Deaf and Hard of Hearing,

described communication strategies.

“Plans need to include ways to relay the same level of detailed information

to all staff at all times.” 

29
30

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,

does not bar agencies or federal contractors

from gathering pertinent information (e.g., the

type(s) of emergency assistance an individual

needs and how it relates to the individual’s disability), or disseminating it to necessary personnel; nevertheless, there are some guidelines as to

how and when the information can be obtained,

and the exact nature and with whom the data

can be shared. Employers are permitted to get

employee medical information for use in emergency planning. It is important to reassure

employees of confidentiality: that the information

will be shared only with those responsible for

safety and emergency evacuation. Rennert

stressed the value of having a dialogue with

employees, and clearly sharing the reason for

collecting information. 

There are three key opportunities to obtain information that may be critical for emergency purposes:

1. After the job offer is made but before an

individual begins work, the agency may

ask the person to complete a questionnaire

regarding emergency evacuation needs.

2. An agency may periodically survey the

entire workforce.

3. If the manager knows that an individual

has a disability, he or she can ask whether

the individual might need assistance during an emergency. For example, consider

a shelter-in-place: does an employee have

dietary or medical needs? Also, keep in

mind that there may not be an interpreter

in the shelter. Determine what accommodations are needed to communicate with a

person who is deaf. 

■ Ensure that the emergency-planning manual has information specific to people who

are deaf or hard of hearing; and

■ Advocate for a variety of communication

methods.

However, Cameron also pointed out that persons

with disabilities must take responsibility for their

own well-being and should play an active (not

passive) role in the process. Clarifying roles and

responsibilities of both the emergency management staff and building occupants, having a plan

of action, and practicing the plan to make sure

it is effective are essential elements to emergency

planning. The worst-case scenario must be considered when making plans.

Additional elements include the psychological

and human factors that impact plans. People

with cognitive disabilities and/or some psychiatric issues may have difficulty understanding

what is happening or dealing with the need to

alter routines in an emergency situation. Others

may require assistance, such as someone to help

during an evacuation or a shelter-in-place.

Talking directly to individual employees about

their needs is imperative. Just as one emergency

plan does not fit every agency, one employee

with a disability does not represent all employees

with disabilities in an agency.

Agencies can talk to employees about their

needs and involve people with disabilities in the

planning process consistent with the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act. Sharon

Rennert, Senior Attorney Advisor with the U.S.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

(EEOC), explained there are two main issues

related to employee information and emergency

planning: 1) obtaining information from employees and 2) sharing the information with others. 
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

31

size, structure, and location among agencies.

Nevertheless, agencies may be working individually to strengthen emergency preparedness plans.

For example, the Federal Communication

Commission (FCC) has an initiative to improve

access to technology.

B. Equipment Decisions

One of the most critical aspects of implementing and maintaining an effective

plan is determining the type of equipment necessary to keep employees safe, whether

it be during a shelter-in-place or an evacuation.

Equipment Decisions provided an overview of

emergency preparedness equipment and the various resources available to assist agencies during

the selection and procurement decision-making

process. Employee needs, architectural realities,

budgetary constraints, and agency characteristics

undoubtedly impact such decisions. The goal of

this session, therefore, was not simply to supply

attendees with an equipment checklist or identify the “best” products, but rather address the following issues:

■ The various types of disability-specific

equipment;

■ The resources available to make equipment

decisions; and

■ Ways to promote appropriate equipment

use in the event of an emergency.

Dr. Beth Loy and Linda Batiste, the presenters

for this breakout session, work as Human Factor

Consultants at the Job Accommodation Network

(JAN). As they explained to Seminar participants, the mission of JAN is to provide information to employers and employees with disabilities

regarding job accommodations, the 1990

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the

employability of people with disabilities. 

With regard to sharing the information with others,

here are several important points to keep in mind:

1. Designate an individual at your agency who

knows and clearly understands these

needs. Ensure that someone is responsible

for providing the necessary assistance.

2. Share only necessary and appropriate information regarding emergency needs—not

irrelevant disability-related information—

with safety and emergency evacuation personnel. 

Following the presentations, the discussion and

questions centered around the need for employees to take an active role in preparedness efforts

and the steps being taken to improve plans and

technology access in the Federal Government. 

Although plans may exist, there is often an element of the unknown during an emergency.

More importantly, emergency personnel may be

unable to meet every need immediately.

Employees must also take active steps to prepare

on a personal level. Consideration must be

given to what will happen not only during, but

also following an emergency. For example, how

will employees get home if public transportation

is not operating? What happens if an employee

requires medication during a shelter-in-place?

Effective practices may include keeping extra

supplies and medication at the office. Several

concerns included storing such items, and

whether or not additional medication would be

approved and covered by doctors and insurance

companies.

With regard to efforts being made by the Federal

Government to ensure plans are inclusive, it was

noted that no federal agency is tasked with this

responsibility. Evaluation standards for such

plans would be difficult given the differences in
32

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

employment practices, conditions, and privileges:

the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as

amended. Private employers with 15 or more

employees are subject to the ADA, while federal

agencies and their contractors must comply with

the Rehabilitation Act. The ADA does not

require an employer to develop an emergency preparedness plan, but if one is implemented, it

must include people with disabilities. Employers

who do not have emergency evacuation plans

may still have to address emergency evacuation

for employees with disabilities under Title 1 of

the ADA, which requires employers provide “reasonable accommodations.” Specific industry

employers may also be obligated to develop emergency plans based on the Occupational Safety

and Health Act (OSH Act), state, or local law.

Whether the development of such a plan is mandatory or voluntary, Loy and Batiste offered practical

advice for involving employees with disabilities in

the process. They said the key is communication,

along with the following practices:

Identify the needs of employees and visitors.

This can be done by directly requesting information from employees, in accordance with Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

guidelines. It may also be helpful to conduct

evacuation and hazard drills, as well as to develop a means of identifying visitors requiring

accommodations in emergency situations.

Choose effective accommodations. Often

employees with disabilities are a good

resource for accommodation ideas. Remember

to consider temporary impairments and hidden disabilities. Employers may also contact

local first responders and community organizations (e.g., fire and police departments,

Centers for Independent Living (CILs)). JAN

also provides specific accommodation ideas

on a case-by-case basis. 

Although JAN staff responds to a variety of questions, Loy said the number of inquiries related to

workplace safety and emergency preparedness

issues have certainly increased since the events of

September 11, 2001. The year prior to September

11th, JAN received approximately 35 calls regarding accommodations in the event of an emergency. The following year, the organization

received nearly 2.5 times (94) the number of

inquiries on the topic. That number has remained

consistently high in successive years, with the

majority of calls originating from the East Coast. 

JAN developed the Employer’s Guide to

Including Employees with Disabilities in

Emergency Evacuation Plans in response to the

most commonly asked questions, and it served

as the basis for the breakout session presentation and discussion. Topics addressed in the

guide include the legal requirements for developing plans that include people with disabilities;

guidelines for implementing and maintaining

such plans; and accommodation considerations

for individuals with different types of disabilities.

Legal Requirements

Two laws prohibit employers from discriminating

against people with disabilities in regard to any

Beth Loy, JAN Human Factors Consultant, provided practical

steps in making equipment decisions.
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

33

when selecting accommodations. There is no

“one-size-fits-all” when it comes to making equipment decisions, and as illustrated below, participants offered differing perspectives on some of

the accommodations discussed. 

Accommodation Suggestions:

General

■ Install emergency alarms and signs showing the emergency exit routes. These

alarms and signs should be accessible and

in proper working order.

■ Implement a “buddy system” for all employees. A buddy system involves employees

working in teams, so they can locate and

assist each other in emergencies. There

was some discussion regarding the effectiveness of buddy systems. For example, a

buddy may not be available at the time of

an emergency. Having back-ups or cross

training staff was offered as an alternative.

■ Designate “areas of rescue assistance.” Loy

and Batiste admit this is also a somewhat

controversial accommodation, but as participants themselves pointed out, not everyone may feel comfortable being assisted by

co-workers. Whatever the decision, Loy

said the important thing is that a plan is in

place, and that all personnel are aware of

the plan. This topic is specifically

addressed in the Access Board’s ADA

Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG).

Distribute the plan to all employees, staff, and

key personnel. This should include writing the

plan, familiarizing staff with it through practice

drills, and integrating the plan into the agency

operating procedures. 

Maintain the plan. Practice the plan regularly

and update the accommodations from time to

time. It is often beneficial to maintain a relationship with local fire, police, and other emergency

response personnel. Equipment should be

inspected periodically to make sure it is in proper working order.

Evaluating Equipment Options

Participants wondered how they could best evaluate equipment options. While the U.S. Army

has done an evaluation of masks, there have

been few, studies of evacuation chairs and other

types of equipment. One consideration with

evacuation chairs, for example, is that they have

weight limits. The LifesSlider®, on the other

hand, does not have a weight limit, according to

their sales representatives. Loy and Batiste

encouraged talking with other federal agencies,

and working with local emergency response personnel and community organizations to determine the most appropriate solutions. It is also

imperative to communicate with these entities in

order to educate new emergency response personnel and to keep abreast of new technology or

procedures.

The following accommodations are simply suggestions; Loy and Batiste reiterated that talking

directly to employees is of the utmost importance

“Loy and Batiste encouraged talking with other federal agencies, and

working with local emergency response personnel and community organizations to determine the most appropriate solutions.” 
34

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

weight of such a wheelchair, and an individual’s

ability to maintain his or her balance in the

evacuation chair. 

One participant recommended that manufacturers put better straps on evacuation chairs.

Using freight elevators to evacuate the building,

rather than the standard passenger elevators,

was offered as another solution. Wheelchair

users often want to remain with their chair or

obtain it as soon as possible after evacuating,

since it is their main means of mobility. While

power wheelchairs are often costly, Loy and

Batiste reminded participants that they can be

replaced; getting out of the building safely is

more important. Leaving manual wheelchairs

stationed in various stairwells and in the main

lobby ensures that individuals have at least a

temporary means of getting around in the event

of an evacuation in which they cannot take their

own wheelchairs.

Sensory Impairments:

■ Lighted fire strobes and other alerting

devices to supplement audible alarms.

Lighted strobes should not exceed five

flashes per second due to risk of triggering

seizures in some individuals. 

■ For a participant who asked about alternatives to strobe lights, vibrating pagers were

recommended. There was concern that

such devices do not work, because individuals may not carry their pagers or receive

the message in time. Other participants

stressed the value of having multiple

means to communicate with all employees.

■ Alerting devices, vibrating paging devices,

wireless communicators, or two-way paging systems to alert individuals who are

deaf or hard of hearing.

If these areas do not have escape routes, they

should have the following: 

■ An operating phone, cell-phone, TTY (teletypewriter), and two-way radio so that

emergency services can be contacted;

■ A closing door;

■ Supplies that enable individuals to block

smoke from entering the room from under

the door; and

■ A window and something to write with

(e.g., lipstick, marker) or a “help” sign to

alert rescuers that people are in this location, and respirator masks.

Motor Impairments:

Evacuation devices help move people with motor

impairments down the stairs or across rough terrain. If evacuation devices are used, both coworkers and response personnel should be

trained to operate and maintain them.

Manufacturer representatives may be willing to

assist with training. Make sure to develop barrier-free paths out of buildings by removing any

physical barriers (e.g., boxes, supplies, and furniture) from exit routes. Consider keeping heavy

gloves, tire repair kits, and extra batteries on

hand for those who use manual or battery-powered wheelchairs. Gloves may protect individuals’ hands from debris when pushing manual

wheelchairs. Arrangements should also be made

to have wheelchairs available after an evacuation. 

Attendees discussed the issue of evacuating an

employee and his or her power wheelchair.

Most believed that evacuating the person

should be the first priority, although plans

should be made to get the chair out if at all

possible. Concern centered on the cost and
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

35

rescue assistance until emergency personnel

arrive was also suggested as an option. 

Whatever the disability, Loy said it is important

for employees, managers, and emergency

response personnel to work together in implementing the evacuation plan and prioritizing

evacuation options. 

C. On-Site Virtual Tour

of Department of

Labor’s Emergency

Preparedness Effective

Practices

This forum provided a multi-media and tactile presentation of significant enhancements made to the Department of

Labor’s Frances Perkins Building following the

events of September 11, 2001. These enhancements to the facilities included the addition of

new equipment and tools, and recruitment of

scores of volunteers. The intent was, and continues to be, to provide effective and responsive

emergency planning and procedures in order to

ensure the safety of all building occupants. 

Zoë Fearon, who works as a Program Specialist

in the Department of Labor’s (DOL) Office of

the Assistant Secretary for Administration and

Management (OASAM), presented the agency’s

plan. She underscored that while DOL has

developed an effective plan for the employees in

the Frances Perkins Building, each federal

agency has its own characteristics that influence

emergency preparedness plans and procedures.

Fearon reviewed key aspects of the DOL plan

and highlighted the basic principles that guide

the agency’s on-going emergency preparedness

planning process.

■ Braille signage, audible directional signage,

and pedestrian systems for employees who

are blind or have low vision. These products may also benefit others in navigating

smoke-filled corridors and hallways.

■ Alphanumeric pagers or other communication devices may assist individuals with

speech impairments in communicating with

emergency management personnel.

Cognitive/Psychiatric Impairments:

Find ways of communicating with people who

have cognitive impairments. Some individuals

may benefit from pictures of buddies, color-coding of escape doors and areas of rescue assistance, or listening to the information on tape or

CD-ROM. 

Keep in mind that some employees with psychiatric disabilities may benefit from frequent emergency drills, while others may find them anxietyproducing. In any event, give employees the

option of participating. Not taking part in such

drills may be seen as a “reasonable accommodation,” in which case an alternative method of

practicing emergency evacuation procedures may

be required (i.e., providing detailed written

instructions).

Respiratory Impairments:

Employees with respiratory impairments may

have difficulty breathing when walking distances

or descending stairs. Smoke, dust, fumes,

chemicals, and other odors often exacerbate

such limitations. Consider purchasing products

such as emergency evacuation hoods, masks,

and respirators. Keep in mind that some individuals may have difficulty putting on or taking off

a hood or mask. In such situations, practice

and/or assistance are helpful. Using areas of
36

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

continue to be conducted on a more regular

basis. The following additional enhancements

were made:

■ Establishment of the emergency response

team (ERT). The team was established by

Secretary Chao and is chaired by the Deputy

Secretary and the Assistant Secretary for

Administration and Management. The main

goal of the team is “to develop and implement strategies to safeguard occupants of all

Department of Labor facilities.” The team

met frequently following September 11th and

still meets on a quarterly basis.

Recommendations are implemented with

input from a number of agencies within the

Department to ensure that all necessary

issues are appropriately addressed. 

Initially, forums were conducted to discuss

emergency evacuation strategies for people

with disabilities. These forums served several functions. First and foremost, they

gave individuals from the Department’s disability community the chance to provide

valuable input/recommendations for

enhancing procedures. Such meetings also

served as an opportunity to update personnel on ERT evacuation planning for people

with disabilities, respond to concerns, conduct trainings/demonstrations, and hear

rationales for recommendations.

■ Assessments by the Office of the

Inspector General of national and

regional facilities. This activity resulted

in the conclusion that a “cookie cutter”

Prior to September 11, 2001, evacuation drills

occurred once a year and were both predictable and not taken seriously. In addition,

emergency preparedness procedures mainly

addressed fires. There was also a lack of

employee knowledge regarding the Frances

Perkins Building Evacuation & Emergency

Response Handbook, and procedures related

to evacuation, what to do once outside, and

re-entry into the building. Furthermore, people with disabilities were often told to “stay

put” or were confused about exactly where

they should go.

Plan Enhancements

Fearon stressed that plan enhancements are ongoing, but following the September 11th attacks,

significant enhancements were made at the

Department of Labor. These included strengthening security measures, communication and

accountability, alarm systems, and the designation of exit/re-entry routes. Drills were and

Zoë Fearon showcased the Department of Labor emergency

preparedness system.

“The intent was, and continues to be, to provide effective and responsive

emergency planning and procedures in order to ensure the safety of all

building occupants.” 
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

37

Zone Monitors, in conjunction with Floor

Wardens, help supervise evacuation of personnel into hallways leading to exits. Zone

Monitors wear brightly colored baseball caps.

Floor Wardens, identified by yellow hard

hats and orange vests, assist in the evacuation of building occupants from the hallways and related areas of the building, out

through the exit stairwells and main exits.

Basic Principles

Below are some key principles DOL has kept in

mind as it continues to implement and upgrade

procedures that are both effective and responsive

to the needs of all its employees at the

Washington, DC headquarters: 

■ Be aware of everyone in the building: Be

aware of employees’ needs; however,

remember to consider the needs of others

in the building. This may include children

in the daycare center, cafeteria workers,

contractors, sales representatives, and personal visitors.

■ Communicate, Relate, Educate: Fearon

urged participants, “Train, Train, Train! If

the plan is not practiced, it won’t work!”

Refining the plan, then practicing it is

essential.

■ Make a commitment to awareness, improvement, and constantly rethinking safety:

Agencies must respond to emerging issues,

including new threats. Fearon acknowledged

Secretary Chao’s commitment to continuously rethinking and developing DOL’s

emergency preparedness plan. She

expressed appreciation that Secretary Chao

understands the plan must be flexible and

can always be improved upon, especially as

workplace circumstances or threats change. 

approach was not appropriate. Instead,

DOL officials determined that it would

be more effective to address the specific

situation and develop procedures that

considered the needs of all employees,

including people with disabilities.

■ Shift from a “security manager force”

to a “building occupant force.”

Previously, the focus had been on the

roles and responsibilities of security personnel in the event of an emergency,

rather than ensuring employees were

aware of emergency procedures. So,

greater emphasis was placed on equipping employees with appropriate knowledge. As part of this shift, DOL revised

its evacuation handbook to include general floor plans of the DOL facility, and

an illustration of collection points for

people evacuating the building.

■ Formalized program for Floor

Wardens and Zone Monitors. This

involved establishing a volunteer program to “recruit, train, and equip” Floor

Wardens and Zone Monitors as well as

ensuring that every floor had radios,

making it easier to verify the building is

clear and all who may need assistance

receive it. 
38

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

DOL has implemented two separate procedures

for a shelter-in-place, depending on the nature of

the emergency. Posture I Advisory requires that

employees remain at their individual workstations

and wait for further instruction. Posture II

Advisory, used in situations deemed highly critical, requires that staff move to the nearest designated shelter-in-place. Employees are given laminated cards that provide written reminders of the

procedures and designated areas. In both cases,

no one is allowed to leave or enter the building;

the doors are locked for everyone’s protection.

Fearon explained, “If DOL is in lock down,

chances are your spouse’s or children’s facilities

are as well.” Additionally, staff is not free to

move about the building (e.g., go to the restroom), except under extenuating circumstances.

Each shelter-in-place area has telephone(s),

food, other emergency supplies that are stored in

secured cabinets. There is enough food and

supplies for both employees and visitors. Floor

Wardens, Zone Monitors, and security personnel

have key access to these cabinets. Although

agencies should prepare for their employees and

visitors, she also urged staff to store any specific personal supplies (e.g., medications, supplies

for service animals) they may need at their

desks. Fearon reminded attendees that typically

the length of time for a shelter-in-place is relatively short. “The need to shelter-in-place [due to an

airborne substance] only lasts for 4-6 hours.”

When the need for a shelter-in-place has passed,

authorities explain the reason for it. 

Working with Local Entities

Fearon said communication and coordination

are keys to working with local emergency personnel and nearby agencies. DOL has its own command center, but is also connected to the police

department. The agency has worked closely

with authorities to establish protocols regarding

Following each drill, OASAM distributes

surveys to the employees to gauge the effectiveness of the current plan. Based on feedback changes are made. Agency emergency

preparedness handbooks and other materials are revised as emerging issues arise

and as additional equipment (i.e.,

LifeSliders®, evacuation chairs, and emergency packets) are purchased.

■ Redefine “Disability”: Agencies should preidentify staff with disabilities, including those

with specific needs. Fearon suggested that

perhaps agencies should reconsider their definitions of disability, or at least the means of

identifying who will need assistance during

an emergency. She offered this definition

with regard to emergency planning: “a debilitating condition that causes one not to be

able to keep up with the standard flow of traffic during an evacuation and/or those who

may impede the flow of the traffic, thus causing harm to themselves or others.” Examples

include the elderly, overweight, and persons

with temporary disabilities (e.g., a broken leg,

a sprained ankle) or episodic conditions

(e.g., panic attacks, asthma, seizures).

Seminar participants had a variety of questions

and comments related to the DOL plan, as well

as its implementation and maintenance. The topics addressed below summarize the discussion:

Shelter-in-Place

The designation of shelter-in-place rooms was

made based on the location and characteristics

of the area. DOL officials generally selected

internal areas with no windows; on the 6th floor,

though, there are some areas that do have glass

windows. This is due to the design of the building rather than a conscious decision to have

areas with windows. 
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

39

were deemed unsafe, Fearon said, “We would use

our last line of defense [the stairwell and a

LifeSlider®] to evacuate people with disabilities

from the building.” There were questions regarding the effectiveness and usability of the

LifeSlider®. Fearon stressed that the device was

chosen because it met “the global needs” of the

Department. She said each agency must make a

determination what works best given its unique

characteristics. Training and practice are also critical to ensure the equipment is properly used.

Once everyone is out of the building, an accountability tree is used to make sure all are safe.

Staff determine who is at the assembly area, off

site, or out sick. Once the “all clear” is given by

security guards and/or emergency response personnel to the security guards or Floor Wardens

in each of the designated assembly areas via

radio, employees are allowed to re-enter the

building, but must display their identification

cards upon doing so.

D. Egress

Egress is defined as “the act of coming in

or going out [especially from an

enclosed area]; emergence.” It is also

defined as “a path or opening for going out; an

exit.” Therefore, it makes sense that developing

an effective emergency preparedness plan

involves considering specific egress options.

This breakout session provided participants the

chance to explore the pros and cons of various

evacuation procedures, including the use of elevators and the establishment of safe areas. For

example, it has become widely accepted to avoid

using the elevators for evacuation purposes in

the event of a fire, but there are situations in

which elevator use is appropriate. Specific discussion included determining, evaluating, and

prioritizing evacuation options.

who will respond in specific situations.

Sometimes the trained DOL staff (e.g., security

personnel) handles issues, while at other times

local entities are called in. The Department has

also worked with nearby employers and first

responders to designate assembly areas following an evacuation. Information, resources, and

other assistance are provided to regional and

field offices. “We dialogue,” said Fearon.

Medical staff from the Department’s Health Unit

also serve as first responders in certain situations. Even though their radios are single-channel frequency, they work closely with local emergency response personnel in the event of an

emergency.

Department of Labor Egress

The Department has an “everyone out” policy,

and does not utilize “areas of refuge.” There are

five entrances and twelve stairways for use during an evacuation. Text messaging conveys information to employees who are deaf or hard of

hearing, either via pagers or via a desktop computer. Currently, the message is sent out manually, but the Department is working on linking

the system directly to the alarm system. Braille

signage is in place for those who are blind.

Extra wheelchairs are kept in the stairwells and

in the main lobby for use if necessary. Specific

accommodations are also made on the basis of

need. “It helps to have a “buddy system” [or

other type of support system] in place.”

The use of elevators depends on the nature of the

emergency. Due to the steel and stone makeup of

the elevators, there is a low incidence of burning.

In the event of an emergency, some elevators

return to the first floor. Others are manually operated by Emergency Elevator Operators (EEOs)

and serve as a means of assisting persons with

disabilities out of the building. If all the elevators
40

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

using elevators during an emergency.

However, elevators can be used in certain

circumstances. Consequently, safe use of

elevators needs to be a learned response. 

Following an emergency (where an alarm is

activated), elevators automatically move to

the main floor (or floor exiting to the outside) and lock down in Phase I. According

to The American Society of Mechanical

Engineers (ASME), Phase I is also referred

to as Emergency Recall Operation. It is

defined as “the operation of an elevator

where it is automatically or manually recalled

to a specific landing and removed from normal service because of activation of firefighters’ service” (ASME A17.1). Once fire personnel arrive and ensure the elevators are

safe to use, authorized personnel can operate them manually (Phase II). New elevators

have buttons (marked with a red fire hat)

that flash when they are unsafe for use.

One participant, who oversees security in

several buildings near the Capitol,

explained that his agency developed the following procedures regarding elevator use: 

The [specific agency personnel] have been

trained to evaluate the safety of elevators in

these buildings and operate them in Phase

II, if appropriate. They then stop at each

floor to determine if there is anyone with a

mobility impairment who needs to use the

elevator. Those requiring assistance are

instructed to board designated elevators

only if they are operated by [specific

agency personnel]. Building occupants

The breakout session consisted of presentations

by June Issacson Kailes and Edwina Juillet.

Kailes serves as the Associate Director of the

Center for Disability Issues and the Health

Professions at Western University of Health

Sciences. Juillet is the Co-Founder of the

National Taskforce on Fire/Life Safety for People

with Disabilities. 

As Kailes and Juillet reminded participants, the

first step in determining egress options is planning. Agencies must consider such issues as elevator use, “areas of refuge,” the type of equipment available, and who will require assistance.

Training, practice, and research are essential in

helping both agencies and individuals determine

the most effective practices and evaluate the

options. Moreover, engaging in drills and soliciting feedback allow an agency to continually

refine its practices. Finally, when evaluating and

prioritizing options, it is also critical to consider

the nature of the emergency.

Planning

According to Kailes, the disability community

motto, “Nothing about us without us” should

be a guiding principle in emergency preparedness planning. Employees with disabilities must

actively participate throughout the decisionmaking process. Kailes identified the following

as primary issues to be considered in egress

planning:

■ Determining appropriate instances for elevator use. Juillet reminded attendees that

we, as a society, are conditioned to avoid

“According to Kailes, the disability community motto, ‘Nothing about us

without us’ should be a guiding principle in emergency preparedness

planning.”
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

41

■ Carrying and lifting people with disabilities:

Participants had questions about assisting

an employee who uses a wheelchair out of

a building. Kailes and Juillet recommended

talking with the individual in order to develop a plan with that person. Some people

have a preference. They said there are several choices: using an evacuation chair or

carrying the person out. Make sure people

are trained on the use of evacuation chairs,

and have regular practice sessions.

Carrying a person can be somewhat cumbersome and even dangerous. Talk with the

individual to determine the best way to

move them, and again, make sure to

rehearse the procedure. If there is absolutely no one available to assist the individual,

instruct him or her to go to a designated

area and contact emergency personnel.

■ Selecting appropriate devices: There is no

one model or piece of equipment that is

appropriate for every situation or for every

individual. In fact, with regard to evacuation

chairs there has been little, if any, research.

Juillet and Kailes underscored the importance of agencies doing their own research,

talking with other organizations, and working with local fire departments. 

One participant, for example, said his

agency found that evacuation chairs were

difficult to use and required extensive training. As a result, the agency issues them

only when the person with a disability

agrees and the staff is trained. Another

accommodation has been the smoke hood.

This agency has distributed smoke hoods to

some people with mobility impairments, in

the event that it takes them longer to evacuate the building. Employees have also been

instructed to evacuate to other buildings,

since several are connected by passageways.

know that in an emergency the elevators

are to be used only by people who have

mobility impairments. However, if necessary, those with temporary disabilities can

also use the elevators.

■ Designating “areas of refuge” or “areas of

rescue assistance”: Juillet pointed out that

(while there is no such requirement in the

ADA), the Access Board’s ADA

Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) define

areas of refuge or areas of rescue assistance as a part of the requirements for

“accessible means of egress.” Such areas

are only necessary in new buildings.

Structures with an approved sprinkler system are an exception and do not require an

area of refuge. 

ADAAG has six configurations, each with

specifications for signage, communication,

etc. Juillet stated her bias for only three of

these configurations: elevator lobby, exit

stair landing, and the horizontal exit (e.g.,

where two buildings are connected by a

fire-rated corridor (or bridge)). If an aerial evacuation (fire department equipment

with a ladder and/or a “cherry picker”) is

utilized, be sure the equipment can reach

the room window. The rule of thumb is

that the equipment can reach up to the seventh story. However, that is only when the

area below the window is perfectly level

and has a solid “footing.” 

■ Developing personal support networks (in

lieu of the “buddy system”): Substitute

the buddy system with a personal support

system. Encourage employees to build

relationships with a number of individuals, so they will not be without assistance

in an emergency. Facilitate this through

staff training.
42

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

tance will self-identify. Cast a broad net.

Word questions in a manner that encourages the greatest number of employees to

respond. For example, avoid using the

word disability, since individuals with such

conditions as asthma, panic attacks, significant allergies, heart conditions, and agerelated conditions may not consider themselves disabled. However, even the most

carefully crafted inquiries will not cause all

to self-identify, so plans should take into

account these individuals, as well as visitors.

Participants had questions regarding both

individuals who may be reluctant to selfidentify and planning for visitors. There are

individuals who feel strongly about being

identified as having a disability or medical

condition. There are also those who think

they will not need assistance. Questions

surfaced regarding how to account for

these individuals. The presenters reminded attendees to be observant and take note

of who takes more time to exit than his/her

peers. Plan for several additional individuals, including guests and visitors, when

purchasing devices and training employees

to assist with egress. 

With regard to planning for visitors, Juillet

and Kailes recommended putting a map

and emergency numbers on the back of

Visitor’s badges. But, as one participant

explained, this could be a problem, especially if there is a high volume of visitors

per day. Agencies may not have the funds

to produce the badges. In addition, visiAnother participant pointed out that egress

planning is complicated by the fact that federal agencies often occupy only portions of

a building, which are shared by private

companies. Coordination can be difficult

unless you have a strong landlord. It was

suggested that agencies encourage landlords to use a coordinated emergency evacuation plan as a selling point for lease of

space.

Kailes cautioned that planning should not be

seen as a one-time event with beginning, middle,

and end, but rather as an on-going process. An

agency plan should be viewed as a living document. If necessary, additional plans should be

developed for those who work after hours or on

the night shift. The plan must be continually

revised and updated to reflect changes in technology and procedures. Both research and practice drills are essential to continuously strengthening a plan.

Implementation 

The following aspects are key to the implementation phase. Keep in mind that an agency plan

should be available in a variety of formats. The

plan should be reader-friendly (bulleted lists versus long paragraphs) and available in languages

other than English. 

■ Identifying employees who will need assistance during egress: Kailes reminded participants that no one knows better than

employees with disabilities the type of

accommodations needed in an emergency

situation. She stressed it is critical to keep

in mind that not everyone needing assis-

“...even the most carefully crafted inquiries will not cause all to self-identify, 

so plans should take into account these individuals, as well as visitors.”
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

43

imbedding “stumbling blocks” is vital to

helping employees prepare for the unexpected. Both announced and unannounced

drills should be conducted several times a

year. Drills should vary (evacuation and

shelter-in-place) and pose a variety of challenges, such as closed off hallways,

blocked doors, or unconscious individuals,

along designated evacuation routes. 

Practice also makes a difference. In 1993,

during the World Trade Center bombing, a

woman could not figure out how to leave

the building until two co-workers came by

and reminded her about the evacuation

chair under her desk. Human factor studies support the idea of practice: people

tend to come and go from the same place

using the same route. It is important that

employees practice using the stairways,

because in many cases, they may not know

the location of the stairs until they are

required to use them.

There are three types of drills: walkthrough

drills, scheduled drills, and unannounced drills.

■ Walkthrough drills: These allow personnel

to discuss possible difficulties and slowly

practice evacuation techniques. For example, people might practice using an evacuation chair or carrying someone.

■ Scheduled Drills: Such drills provide an opportunity to practice evacuating people with disabilities in a slow and controlled environment. The

procedures are methodically practiced by all.

tors may forget to return them. However,

as another attendee pointed out, the same

could be said of current Visitors’ badges.

Some agencies use paper badges and/or

ask visitors to temporarily surrender identification. Another recommendation was

that visitors be escorted at all times. In the

latter scenario, the escort would assist

his/her visitor out of the building in the

event of an emergency. 

■ Training for both those requiring assistance

and those providing assistance: Training

and cross training is essential. Individuals

(and their co-workers) needing to use emergency evacuation devices, such as evacuation chairs, should be trained regarding

their proper operation. This will allow

these employees to better direct others on

the use of the equipment, in the event that

“trained” personnel are not available.

Keep in mind that separate training may be

necessary for those who work after normal

business hours.

Some participants raised the issue of

embarrassment or self-consciousness on

the part of individuals who need assistance

in egress. For example, there may be individuals who are uncomfortable practicing

evacuation procedures in a group setting.

For these employees, consider one-on-one

training or trying out different evacuation

methods and devices.

■ Conducting various types of drills: Juillet

explained that while conducting standard

drills are important, varying the drills and

“...[W]hile conducting standard drills are important, varying the drills and

imbedding ‘stumbling blocks’ is vital to helping employees prepare for the

unexpected.”
44

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

research. The primary technology areas for egress

are alarms, elevators, and evacuation chairs. 

Alarms. The National Fire Protection

Association (NFPA-72) sets the standards for

alarms. 

Elevators. The protocol regarding elevator use

during emergencies is changing; in fact, Juillet

made reference to an upcoming conference that

will address elevator issues. Europe is developing standards that will enable elevator use during emergency evacuations. These standards

will address fire ratings and the need for water

protection (e.g., waterproof components, safety

brakes, switches). 

Evacuation chairs. Kailes stated that there are

no objective evaluations or ANSI (American

National Standards Institute) standards regarding evacuation chairs, leaving emergency managers responsible for independently researching

and selecting them. 

E. Support Mechanisms

Using the U.S. Architectural and

Transportation Barriers Compliance

Board (Access Board) and the U.S.

Department of Agriculture (USDA) emergency

preparedness plans as case studies, this session

examined factors related to determining whether

to establish a cross-training system, a “buddy

system”, or to rely extensively on high-tech informational alert systems.

Additionally, many fundamental principles related to support mechanisms in the workplace were

to be highlighted. For example, because many

Access Board employees have varied work and

travel schedules, it is difficult to predict which

employees may be in the office in the event of an

emergency. Thus, the Access Board has focused

■ Unannounced Drills: It is critical that unannounced drills occur only after scheduled

drills. This ensures that the kinks are

worked out and people do not practice

incorrectly. In addition, do not hold surprise drills when emotions are high (e.g.,

around the anniversary of September 11th or

the sniper attacks). Juillet recommended

that emergency response staff (e.g., Floor

Wardens) be notified prior to such drills, so

that they can practice their responsibilities. 

There were additional questions related to

both staff and visitors participating in

drills. Since there are no penalties for not

participating, many employees ignore or

avoid the drills. Suggestions included

developing creative educational techniques,

such as fun exercises, or making participation in drills part of the annual performance evaluations. Additionally, visitors may

not want to be detained during a shelter-inplace drill. Those who intended to be in

the building for only a brief time (e.g.,

delivering a document), and have other

commitments, may protest about participating in such drills. Consider establishing a

safe exit route for such exceptions.

■ Debriefing and asking for feedback: Make

sure to conduct debriefings after drills.

Revise and update the plan based on feedback then redistribute the plan. It may also

be beneficial to request assistance from a

local fire department. The Arlington

County Fire Department, for example, was

described as being helpful in evaluating

procedures and providing feedback.

Research

Since technology is constantly evolving, it is critical to keep abreast of new devices and current
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

45

3. Building characteristics: This includes the

stairways, landings, exits, alarms, elevators, etc. This is important in developing

plans, identifying problems (i.e., trash in

stairways), and establishing methods to

address these issues. It is best to do so

prior to an emergency or incident.

4. Building management: Talk with the building management and security staff.

Determine the building plan, relationships

with police and fire departments, location

of the building command center, etc. 

The Access Board learned that the police and

fire department go to the front desk first. This

gives them an overview of what is happening in

the building. It is here the Access Board posted

a list of all the people with disabilities and their

preferences for evacuation (i.e., staff members

who preferred to wait in the office’s safe area for

firemen or police rather than use an evacuation

chair). Briefings were held for local fire departments regarding Access Board plans.

Additional follow-up action included the purchase of appropriate equipment (e.g., evacuation

chairs, radio walkie-talkies) and the establishment of offices designated as “waiting areas”

and assembly areas. Emergency equipment is

stored in the “waiting area” offices when not in

use. Blechman noted the agency consistently

practices, revises, and updates its plan. She

said, “The key is practice, practice, practice.”

McFarlane highlighted several fundamental principles to emergency preparedness planning:

■ Timely and accurate information: People

with disabilities need timely and accurate

information in order to make decisions.

on cross-training in order to ensure that as many

employees as possible can provide assistance

and perform the various roles called for in their

emergency preparedness plan. 

Bruce McFarlane, Director of the USDA’s TARGET Center, explained how the USDA

embarked on its road to emergency preparedness. The process began after a 1993 fire drill

where multiple employees with disabilities were

left behind or not able to evacuate. Following

that event, a panel consisting of six employees

convened to ensure this would not happen again.

Fortunately, there were key management personnel who were personally affected by the issues

related to having a disability. They took interest

in the topic and began to listen. In 1994, the

panel prepared Occupant Emergency Plan

Review for Employees with Disabilities. A key

recommendation of the report was the call for

autonomy and independent decision-making

authority in emergency planning.

Peg Blechman, Compliance Specialist at the

Access Board, said the events of September 11,

2001 led her agency to re-examine its plan. Staff

took an inventory of the following, which she

believes is key to planning and development:

1. Who is on-site (i.e., staff, board members,

and visitors): The Access Board relied on

individuals to self-identify, then worked

with each person individually to determine

their needs, choices, and preferences. The

office flow pattern, number of staff, and

out-of-office frequency were also studied. 

2. Location of the building and office: For

example, the offices of the Access Board

are located on the 10th floor of a building

near the White House. 
46

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

emergency. Discussion followed about

the fact that sometimes it is necessary to

have personnel remain in place or inform

those outside the building not to return.

McFarlane reiterated that in any event all

notification systems should have backup

alternatives. For example, messages

should be repeated at least two to three

times and kept very short when

announced over the PA system. 

The USDA uses a pager system to notify deaf

employees about emergencies. These pagers

have two numbers: one for the pager itself, and

the other to let individuals know that there is

an emergency. All other pagers are dialed

remotely. Nevertheless, McFarlane admitted

that the USDA still has unresolved issues with

this system. About one third of deaf employees refuse to wear the pagers, due to either the

stigma or the fact that it does not fit on their

clothes. Despite these problems, Blechman

commented that the USDA had gone further

than many agencies in developing notification

strategies.

Notification Systems

Agencies must ensure that a variety of notification systems are in place. These should be

well understood by all employees. Below are

some systems, and the situations in which they

can be utilized. 

■ Fire alarms: Evacuation only

■ HIPS Pagers (persons who are deaf or

hard of hearing): Fire alarms only.

■ Representation: Emergency planning/policy

committees should include people with disabilities, and others familiar with the needs

of this segment of the workforce. It is

important that all types of disabilities are

represented (i.e., vision, mobility, cognitive,

and hearing), and that these committee

members present a broad perspective

rather than an individual one. Key to successful negotiations on such committees is

that the person(s) who represents people

with disabilities should not do so “in a

demand mode.” McFarlane said members

must understand the limitations (e.g.,

financial) management face and prioritize.

Know how to pick your battles. Involve all

key players in the organization (managers,

workers, etc.). This facilitates creative

thinking and innovative solutions.

■ Management Support: The support of

management is crucial to affecting

change, since change usually has the

most impact when it comes from the top

down. One possible method of getting

management on board is to present the

risk(s) for the organization (i.e., One

person getting hurt will impact over 100

people.).

■ Redundancy: This is important when it

comes to not only practicing a plan but

also notifying employees about an emergency. McFarlane explained that the

nature of the emergency impacts both the

response and the means of notification.

Agencies must have multiple means of

relaying information to staff regarding an

“Agencies must ensure that a variety of notification systems are in place.

These should be well understood by all employees.”
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

47

The Buddy System and Cross-Training

In McFarlane’s opinion, plans should not be

based on the person being in their own office at

the time of an emergency. He believes that planning that is person or location dependent had

glaring weaknesses. Consequently, he sees the

buddy system as not exclusively effective, since it

is both person and location dependent. 

Blechman said the Access Board chose not to

use the buddy system, given staff travel and

training schedules and the agency size (less than

30 staff). Instead, staff who volunteered to work

with people with disabilities during an emergency situation were cross-trained.

If agencies choose to utilize the buddy system,

she recommended that “participation be voluntary, volunteers be cross-trained and have volunteers assemble at central location(s).” If the

buddy or the employee is unavailable, a backup

system should be utilized. She emphasized that

redundancy is key!

Additional Egress Issues

Many of the participants had additional questions and concerns related to egress. Specific

issues raised during the discussion related to

employees who may take longer to evacuate; use

of elevators; equipment selection; and education

and training.

One of the participants asked how to address

the issue of a person who believes he/she does

not need assistance, but is in fact impeding others during an evacuation. McFarlane said his

■ Computer Electronic Notification System

(CENS): These can be used in all situations. Make sure the software system

affords access to all. This will require it to

be compatible with screen readers and

speach recognition software. (Good system

for shelter-in-place).

■ Warden Phones: These are phones located at elevators that connect to a command

center. The command center informs persons with mobility impairments whether or

not it is safe to use elevators. A button

inside the elevators allows individuals to

contact the command center. One participant believed TTYs (teletypewriters)

should also be installed in elevators to

ensure similar access for deaf or hard of

hearing employees.

■ PA System

■ Wireless Communication Devices (e.g.,

pagers, PDAs, cell phones)

■ Short-Wave Radios: Floor Monitors and

drivers use these radios.

■ Emergency Hotline: People off-site are able

to call in and obtain more information

about the situation.

■ Web Site Information 

■ Buddy System: This system is person and

location dependent. McFarlane believes

that such systems generally only have drawbacks when used exclusively.

“In McFarlane’s opinion, plans should not be based on the person being

in their own office at the time of an emergency.”
48

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

agencies and federal contractors must understand

their responsibilities under the Rehabilitation Act

of 1973, as amended. She reiterated the importance of receiving support from upper management. Safety personnel should also be made

aware of those who need assistance. To this end,

she encouraged both agencies and individuals to

be proactive when addressing barriers both inside

and outside the building. For example, make

sure that security barricades are not blocking

accessible routes away from the building. Finally,

she encouraged agencies to continue working

together following the Seminar. Both she and

McFarlane said they would like to see the establishment of an interagency working group to

address the issue of emergency preparedness for

people with disabilities.

F. Regional and Field

Office Considerations

Regional and field offices face unique challenges when it comes to emergency preparedness planning. Federal agencies

and offices must consider the needs of employees with disabilities, personnel previously unidentified as having a disability, and the public. It is

response would depend on if the person were a

permanent or temporary employee. If it were a

permanent employee, he would likely discuss the

issue with the person one-on-one. If it were a

temporary individual, the decision would be up

to the hall monitor. A solution might be to suggest the individual use the elevator, if possible. 

A question was raised regarding the use of elevators during fires. Fire codes in some locations, such as New York, preclude the use of elevators during fire emergencies (in high rise buildings). The panelist suggested this could be overcome in situations where there are multiple

banks of elevators. An “enunciator panel”

allows on-site safety/security personnel (e.g., the

fire department) to determine the location of the

fire. If the elevator is on an independent power

source and not in the vicinity of the emergency,

people could possibly be directed to another part

of the building.

Participants suggested two other possible solutions: designating a particular stairwell for use

by people with disabilities or using evacuation

chairs. One of the presenters pointed out that

the first suggestion presents a problem, especially if the emergency (i.e., bomb, fire) is in that

area. It is important to prepare for use of all

stairwells in the building. Using an evacuation

chair may present some problems as well.

Blechman pointed out that an individual’s wheelchair might need to be left behind, making it difficult for the person to get around once outside.

In addition, there has been little research regarding the safety of various chairs. One solution at

some agencies has been to leave spare wheelchairs in the stairwells or lobbies.

Blechman contended agencies and safety personnel need to be educated as to what can and cannot be done regarding emergency preparedness

for employees with disabilities. She said federal

Elizabeth Davis, Director of NOD’s Emergency Preparedness

Initiative (EPI), and Alan Clive, FEMA Civil Rights Program

Manager, led a discussion on regional emergency preparedness.
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

49

Government personnel (e.g., Social

Security Administration (SSA) and U.S.

Citizenship and Immigration Services

(USCIS)). Such factors should be considered in evacuation planning.

■ Hazards: Clive encouraged participants to

be prepared for a variety of hazards,

including natural and man-made disasters,

chemical spills and power outages. He

cited such events as the September 11th

attacks and the 2003 power outage in the

Midwest that impacted much of the East

Coast. Such events galvanized many,

including the disability community, to consider needs they may have in an emergency. 

It was stressed that ultimately each office needs

to customize its plan, determining the most

effective practices given location, population,

financial constraints, and emergency preparedness needs.

Rethinking “Special Needs”

While accommodations can and should be

made for those with distinctive needs (e.g., elderly, people with disabilities, those with unique

medical needs), Elizabeth Davis, Director of

the National Organization on Disability’s

(NOD) Emergency Preparedness Initiative

(EPI), explained that there is no consensus on

the best strategy, technology, or tools to assist

people with disabilities in an emergency. There

are complaints that with the quick growth in the

market for emergency equipment for people

with disabilities, no standards exist to advise

purchasers on the effectiveness or safety of specific equipment. Until such standards exist, she

said, “Buyers beware.” 

vital that federal safety plans do not conflict with

other agencies and/or business tenants sharing

building locations. This session was to examine

the importance of involving all stakeholders in

planning and implementation as well as identifying and working with nontraditional planning

partners, such as local emergency professionals,

property management, and building safety directors. There were to be additional references to

planning methodology, situational differences

among agencies, and support materials.

Dr. Alan Clive, Civil Rights Program Manager

for the Federal Emergency Management Agency

(FEMA), began by explaining that agencies have

to contend with three main issues when developing emergency plans. 

■ Location/type of building: federal agencies throughout the country have unique

characteristics. Some are located in

Government-built and owned buildings.

Others are located in skyscrapers, where

the government leases several floors.

Some are sole occupants, while others

share space with other federal agencies or

private employees. Some occupy entire

campuses, while others may be isolated

industrial-style facilities, such as warehouses.

■ Population: Agencies must take into

account who is in the building. Some federal agencies (e.g., Federal Bureau of

Investigations (FBI) and FEMA) have very

few non-government personnel in the

building. Other offices, especially those

that provide services to the public, have a

constant flow of visitors and non-

“Davis urged agencies to plan for a gap in ability during an emergency,

not for disability.” 
50

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

She added that in the General Services

Administration’s (GSA) Occupant Emergency

Plan (OEP), which serves as a framework for

federal agencies, there are no special emergencysupport functions, because special needs fits

into each emergency support function. Every

Government agency that occupies federallyowned or leased space must have an OEP.

Certain aspects of a plan may need to be tailored to meet employees’ needs; however, Davis

and Clive contend that general emergency planning for people with disabilities should be an

integral part of the entire process—not a separate

practice or an afterthought. Davis urged agencies to plan for a gap in ability during an emergency, not for disability. 

Such an approach to planning would take into

account those who may suddenly need assistance evacuating a building in the event of an

emergency. For example, a pregnant woman

may have difficulty walking down the stairs. If

certain exits are blocked, a person who uses a

wheelchair or scooter may need assistance.

She cautioned participants not to assume what

employees can or cannot do in the event of an

emergency. Planning for those with distinctive

needs can have application for everyone.

Several participants reiterated this idea. 

Others had specific questions related to individuals who may take longer to evacuate the

buildings. The presenters and fellow participants recommended such alternatives as estab-

“It is helpful for agencies to develop a template and methodology around

planning, (regular) testing, and updating plans. This can be as simple

as a very general outline that can then be expanded upon by individual

regions and field offices.”

lishing “areas of refuge” or “areas of rescue

assistance,” re-evaluating policies related to

elevator use for evacuation, and widening stairwells in future constructions.

Planning Considerations

Even the most comprehensive plans will not be

perfect. Davis said agencies should do the bes

they can to establish predictable certainty. In the

event of legal challenges of discrimination in

planning, establishing intent or disparate impact

can be difficult. Remember that an emergency

crisis is an equal opportunity injury-causing

event. Finally, these suggestions were offered for

those in regional and field offices:

■ Become advocates with regard to emergency preparedness planning. Davis

encouraged managers and decision-makers

to include those who are not typically

involved in the internal agency planning

process (e.g., human resources personnel,

and first responders). Consider the community-based organizations that can provide assistance, and establish relationships

with these agencies. Be sure to utilize

resources in the building as well (i.e., a

medical clinic). However, do not plan for

people with disabilities, but plan with all

employees. By doing so, everyone has the

opportunity to offer creative solutions, identify issues, and be a part of the process.

■ Keep plans updated and involve employees

in the process. Davis said she believes

that most emergency plans are created in
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

51

of this session were to discuss factors and

strategies for customizing emergency preparedness for people with disabilities. The session

included strategies for ensuring that people

with disabilities are involved in emergency preparedness; planning, tips and tools for areas of

specific consideration; and suggestions on how

supervisors and employees with disabilities can

together develop individualized plans that

incorporate the overall agency emergency plans

and procedures.

Since September 11, 2001 the issue of emergency preparedness has come to the forefront.

Workplace safety is of special importance,

since it is where we, as a society, spend much

of our time. And, for people with disabilities

and activity limitations, barrier-free, as well as

barrier-ridden, environments can be difficult to

navigate in an emergency situation.

Nevertheless, a 2001 National Organization

on Disability (NOD) /Harris Poll concluded

that 50% of employees with disabilities say no

plans have been made to safely evacuate their

workplace, compared to 44% of people without

disabilities. Even more revealing is that 18%

of people with disabilities feel extremely or

very anxious about their safety in the event of

a crisis, compared to 8% of people without disabilities. 

Dr. Richard Horne, Supervisory Research

Analyst in the Office of Disability Employment

Policy (ODEP) at the Department of Labor

(DOL), presented on the topic of individualizing emergency plans for employees with disabilities. He addressed such topics as the

legal requirements of employers, determining

whether an individual will require assistance,

and developing an effective plan that can be

integrated into the larger office or agency plan.

a vacuum, then buried. Plans should be

reviewed, revised, and practiced on a regular basis. 

It is helpful for agencies to develop a template and methodology around planning,

(regular) testing, and updating plans.

This can be as simple as a very general

outline that can then be expanded upon

by individual regions and field offices.

Keep in mind that even within field

offices, plans may need to be further individualized to accommodate individuals or

situations.

■ Share information with other agencies

and employees. Determine effective practices, and examine the reasons why something did or did not work. Clive and

Davis explained that in such situations, it

is acceptable to take ideas from another

agency.

Davis said that emergency preparedness plans

need to become familiar to all personnel at a

site from the agency/division director to the

evening cleaning crew, since an emergency can

occur at any time. This ensures a cadre of

people in place who are aware; alert; and able

to take quick, appropriate action.

G. Individualizing

Emergency Plans

Using Kailes’ Emergency Evacuation

Preparedness: Taking Responsibility

for Your Safety: A Guide for People

with Disabilities and Other Activity Limitations

(2002, Center for Disability Issues and the

Health Professions, Western University of

Health Sciences, Pomona, CA), the objectives
U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

As such, Horne suggested employees consider

the following situations when determining

whether or not to request assistance:

■ Limitations that interfere with walking or

using stairs;

■ Reduced stamina, fatigue, or tire easily;

■ Emotional, cognitive, thinking, or learning

difficulties;

■ Vision or hearing loss;

■ Temporary limitations (surgery, accidents,

pregnancy); or

■ Use of technology or medications.

For those who had questions about employees

who may be reluctant to self-identify, Horne reiterated that the information is confidential. As

Kailes (2000, p. 6) explained in her handbook,

“There is a universal human tendency to avoid

thinking about possible emergencies. This

avoidance has greater consequences for people

with disabilities than for people without disabilities.” Horne stressed that if employees do not

plan, then what they need will not be in place

when necessary; do not assume anything.

People with disabilities must take responsibility

He began by explaining that federal agencies

and their contractors must comply with the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. The

1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

does not require private employers to develop

emergency preparedness plans for people with

disabilities. However, if an emergency preparedness plan is in place, it must include people with

disabilities. Even if

an employer chooses not to implement an emergency preparedness plan, they

may still be

required to address

the issue of developing and implementing an emergency preparedness plan (as a

“reasonable

accommodation”)

for a person with a

disability, under Title I of the ADA or other laws

and regulations.

For those employers who may be reluctant to

broach the topic of emergency preparedness with

their employees, Horne clarified that Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

guidance and federal disability laws do not prohibit an employer from gathering information for the

purposes of emergency preparedness planning.

He added that the best time to collect such information is after an offer has been extended or during an annual performance review. Not everyone

who may need assistance will self-identify or even

consider themselves as falling into this category. Participants discussed elements of emergency preparedness plans.

“People with disabilities must take responsibility for engaging in emergency preparedness and not get caught up in the avoidance tendency.”

Richard Horne, ODEP Supervisory

Research Analyst, responded to

Seminar participants’ questions in 

the Individualizing Emergency

Preparedness Plans breakout sessions.

52
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

53

option would be to have security do routine

checks.

Participants had questions regarding the

DOL’s emergency preparedness plan.

Horne explained that from the very onset,

the needs of the employees with disabilities

were considered. Following the events of

September 11, Secretary Chao established

a working group, of which ODEP was 

a part. 

■ Implementation: An important part of

this phase is committing the plan to writing. Include key personnel who will likely

be involved during an emergency in this

process. Be sure to conduct mock drills in

order to determine where improvements are

needed, and make necessary modifications. Make sure that all employees take

part in any training that occurs. While an

individual may not be able to perform certain tasks, it is important that he/she be

able to relay the information to another

individual in the event of emergency. Lastly,

be sure to distribute the plan in an accessible format, and integrate the concepts or

plans into the larger office or agency plan.

Oftentimes, emergency preparedness

accommodations made for employees with

disabilities can benefit all employees.

■ Maintenance: A plan—whether for an

individual, office, or agency—should be

updated regularly. It is beneficial to cultivate relationships with individuals and/or

agencies both internally and externally.

This can assist agencies in keeping abreast

for engaging in emergency preparedness and not

get caught up in the avoidance tendency. Some

suggestions for encouraging individuals to make

needs known include avoiding use of the term

disability and conducting practice drills.

Practice drills can be helpful in determining

whether or not assistance is needed during an

emergency. 

Determining who may require assistance during

an emergency is only part of process. Emergency

preparedness planning falls into three phases:

development, implementation, and maintenance.

At both the agency and the individual level, it is

important that individuals with disabilities be

involved in the entire process. Horne highlighted key tasks in each phase, as discussed below:

■ Development: This phase involves not

only identifying who needs assistance, but

also the possible hazards and accommodations. Aside from the obvious hazards, be

sure to check for such things as obstructed

exit routes, unclear signage, or inaudible

alarms. In deciding on specific accommodations, it is best to talk to the individual.

However, it may also be helpful to consult

other agencies (e.g., Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA)), community-based organizations (e.g., the Red

Cross, Centers for Independent Living

(CILs)) or local emergency personnel. 

Horne reminded participants to make sure

the plan addressed after-hours situations.

Attendees wondered how to ensure the

employee’s safety in such circumstances. It

was suggested that employees inform security when they are working late. Another

“Horne stressed that if employees do not plan, then what they need will not

be in place when necessary; do not assume anything.” 
The following additional resources were shared:

Job Accommodation Network:

www.janwvu.edu/media/emergency.html

DisabilityInfo:

www.disabilityinfo.gov

Center for Disability Issues and Health

Professionals:

www.cdihp.org■

54

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

of new technology or protocol. For individuals, building relationships with co-workers

increases the chances of finding/getting

assistance in the event of an emergency. 

There was additional discussion regarding

the pros and cons of the “buddy system.”

While the buddy system can be effective, it

is important to recognize that alternative

plans may be necessary if a co-worker is

not available. The idea of a personal support network, where several people may be

available to assist, is seen as a better

approach.

Implement procedures for reporting new

safety concerns or hazards, as well as identifying the needs of new employees. Check

with personal support networks quarterly

to make sure the individuals are still willing

and able to assist in an emergency; also, be

sure to notify them of changes in work

schedules. Finally, be sure that all the

equipment is in good working order. 

While employers undoubtedly bear some of the

responsibility for emergency preparedness planning, Horne said employees with disabilities

must also take the initiative to ensure their safety. It is important that employees with disabilities not assume plans have or will be put in

place for them. Furthermore, employees should

keep extra supplies, such as medication, at their

desks. They should also be able to clearly

explain their needs to another individual. This

will make it easier to get the appropriate assistance from emergency personnel and others in

the event of an emergency. If the individual has

difficulty communicating, it may be beneficial to

put instructions in writing.
CONCLUSION:

PREVAILING

THEMES
56

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

emergency preparedness plan that effectively

addresses the unique needs of employees with

disabilities. Communication, in this regard,

actually consists of three inextricably intertwined

elements: outreach to employees with disabilities; sharing disability information within the

confines of civil rights and privacy protections;

and using effective methods of communication. 

Developing, implementing and maintaining an

emergency plan that involves people with disabilities cannot succeed without input from those it

is designed to benefit. Throughout the Seminar

of Exchange, presenters stressed that there is no

greater authority on the emergency needs of an

individual with a disability than the person himself/herself. Therefore, the plan should reflect

the input of employees with disabilities. In

doing so, an agency guarantees that its plan is

as comprehensive as possible. Additionally,

communicating with employees with disabilities

will, in many instances, provide them with a

sense of confidence, having had an opportunity

to actually contribute to the process.

Obtaining necessary input from employees with

disabilities is a critical factor in developing an

emergency preparedness plan. However, managers may have legitimate concerns that gatherThe Seminar of Exchange regarding emergency preparedness for people with disabilities was well-received by both participants and presenters. In the evaluation surveys

received rating the Seminar purpose and the

information received, feedback indicated that

participants found the presenters very knowledgeable, the content strong, and the materials

practical and thought-provoking. Many respondents indicated they particularly liked finding out

what other agencies are doing and sharing ideas

and practices with others. 

Based upon the high registration rate and the

overwhelmingly positive feedback, this Seminar

filled a void for many in terms of developing,

implementing, and maintaining an agency emergency preparedness plan that includes people

with disabilities. The sponsoring agencies, coordinators, and presenters of this event hope that

the Seminar served as a catalyst to bring about

greater focus and action on this important issue

in the future.

A careful review of the presentations and subsequent discussion in the plenary and breakout

sessions revealed four prevailing themes related

to developing an emergency preparedness plan

that involves people with disabilities. They are

(1) communication with employees; (2) agency

budget and personnel commitment; (3) flexibility; and (4) practice. The following is a summary of the prevailing themes of the Seminar and

should not be viewed as an agency prescription

or policy recommendation.

Communication with Employees

Communicating with all employees is paramount

to developing, implementing, and maintaining an
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

57

direct communications from executive-level officials, such as the agency Secretary. Since the

protocols and forms of communications differ

from agency to agency, personnel tasked with

creating emergency preparedness plans need to

think creatively about obtaining and communicating the vital managerial buy-in.

Flexibility

Even the best laid plans for an emergency situation can fall prey to unforeseen circumstances.

In order to minimize the chaos and disorder

stemming from an emergency situation, an

agency emergency preparedness plan must be as

flexible as possible. Although an agency may

believe it has identified and accommodated all

employees with disabilities, there is a very real

possibility that not everyone who needs assistance in emergencies has self-identified. Indeed,

there also may be instances where an emergency

situation exacerbates existing impairments or

creates new impairments, affecting an individual’s ability to evacuate. Recognizing that situations like these can arise, effective planning practice includes building flexibility into an agency

emergency preparedness plan. 

For example, during the Seminar, there was significant discussion about the effectiveness of the

buddy system. As defined earlier, a traditional

“buddy system” entails assigning an able-bodied

person to a person with a disability for the purpose of assisting the employee with a disability

during an emergency. However, reliance on a

single buddy can put the employee at risk, in the

event the buddy is not present, able, or willing to

assist during an emergency. Therefore, “flexibility” in an emergency preparedness plan is vital.

ing information about specific individual needs

violates civil rights protections afforded by federal laws (e.g., Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as

amended). Thus, agency personnel should be

carefully instructed on the legal aspects of gathering such information (e.g., type of information

that can be gathered and the manner in which

this is accomplished). Federal laws do not prevent employers from obtaining and appropriately

using information necessary for a comprehensive

emergency evacuation plan. Similarly, with

respect to attitudes toward disability, it is essential an agency develop a culture where employees

feel comfortable sharing the necessary information with appropriate individuals.

Finally, establishing effective means to impart

emergency preparedness and response procedures is vital to the success of the agency plan.

Communication challenges among federal

employees with disabilities vary widely.

Therefore, varied, multiple, and redundant

means of emergency notification and communication are necessary.

Agency Budget and Personnel

Commitment 

An effective emergency preparedness plan

requires support and commitment from seniorlevel management within an agency. Seminar

presenters and participants alike commented

that an agency preparedness plan will only be as

good as the financial and personnel resources

supporting it. The methods of securing and

demonstrating managerial commitment to

including people with disabilities in emergency

planning vary from agency to agency. At some

agencies, this has been accomplished through
58

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

This may mean augmenting the traditional

buddy system with additional supports for the

employee; in other words having multiple individuals prepared to assist in an emergency. With

this approach, everyone, including the person

with a disability, would be trained in issues that

may arise during an emergency. 

Practice

During the Seminar, presenters and experienced

managers continually emphasized the importance of rigorously practicing the emergency plan

on a regular basis with all employees. Practicing

serves several purposes. First, it allows employees with and without disabilities to become

familiar with the agency plan. This includes

learning, knowing, and remembering where to

go, what to do, and who to contact in an emergency. Secondly, it provides agency emergency

preparedness planners with an opportunity to

survey and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the plan; therefore, providing a base plan

on which to improve or from which to replicate.

Finally, regularly-timed drills and/or practice sessions keep the issue of being prepared on the

minds of all involved, from the agency Secretary

to the agency custodial staff.■
RESOURCES
60

U.S. Department of Labor ■ Office of Disability Employment Policy

TTY: (202) 272-0082 

(800) 993-2822 

Fax: (202) 272-0081

E-mail: info@access-board.gov 

www.access-board.gov

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

(DHS)

Washington, DC 20528 

www.dhs.gov

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC)

1801 L Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20507

Voice: (202) 663-4900

TTY: (202) 663-4494

You can be automatically connected to your

nearest Field Office by calling: 

Voice: (800) 669-4000

TTY: (800) 669-6820

Federal Emergency Management Agency

(FEMA)

500 C Street, S.W.

Washington, DC 20472 

Phone:(202) 566-1600

www.fema.gov

U.S. Fire Administration (USFA)

16825 S. Seton Avenue

Emmitsburg, MD 21727

Voice: (301) 447-1000

Fax: (301) 447-1052

www.usfa.fema.gov

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20210

Voice: (866) 4-USA-DOL (4-872-365)

TTY: (877) 889-5627

www.dol.gov

Office of Disability Employment Policy

(ODEP)

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20210

Voice: (866) ODEP-DOL (633-7365)

TTY: (877) 889-5627 

www.dol.gov/odep

Job Accommodation Network (JAN)

P.O. Box 6080

Morgantown, WV 26506-6080 

Voice/TTY: (800) ADA-WORK 

((800) 232-9675) 

Fax: (304) 293-5407

E-mail: jan@jan.wvu.edu

www.jan.wvu.edu

Calls are answered from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.

Eastern Time Monday through Thursday and

on Fridays from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. Machines

answer after-hours calls. 

DisabilityInfo.gov

www.disabilityinfo.gov

U.S. Architectural and Transportation 

Compliance Board (Access Board)

1331 F Street, N.W.

Suite 1000

Washington, DC 20004-1111

Voice: (202) 272-0080 

(800) 872-2253 
Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

61

Arlington, VA 22201

Voice: (703) 525-3406 

TTY: (703) 525-4153

Fax: (703) 525-3409

Email: ncil@ncil.org

For a listing of Centers for Independent Living

(CILs) by state visit www.virtualcil.net/cils/

National Fire Protection Association

(NFPA)

1 Batterymarch Park

Quincy, MA 02169-7471

Phone:(617) 770-3000

Fax: (617) 770-0700

www.nfpa.org

Customer Sales/Member Services: 

Voice: (800) 344-3555

(617) 770-3000

Fax: (800) 593-6372

(508) 895-8301

National Organization on Disability

(NOD)

910 Sixteenth Street, N.W., 

Suite 600

Washington, DC 20006

Phone:(202) 293-5960

Fax: (202) 293-7999 

TTY: (202) 293-5968

Email: ability@nod.org 

www.nod.org

National Taskforce on Fire/Life Safety

for People with Disabilities

637 Riverside Drive

Luray, VA 22835-2910

Voice/Fax (by appointment): (540) 743-4601

E-mail: edwina@shentel.net

Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

1900 E Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20415-1000 

Voice: (202) 606-1800 

TTY: (202) 606-2532

www.opm.gov

American Red Cross National

Headquarters

2025 E Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20006

Phone:(202) 303-4498 

www.redcross.org

Center for Disability Issues and the

Health Professions

Western University of Health Sciences

309 E. Second Street

College Plaza

Pomona, CA 91766-1854

Phone:(909) 469-5380

E-mail: evac@westernu.edu

www.cdihp.org

Disability Preparedness Center 

(National Center on Emergency Planning for

People with Disabilities)

1010 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W.

Suite 340

Washington, DC 20007

Voice/TTY: (202) 546-4464

Fax: (202) 338-7216

E-mail: NCEPPD@inclusioninc.com 

www.disabilitypreparedness.com

National Council on Independent Living

(NCIL)

1916 Wilson Boulevard

Suite 209

APPENDICES
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FOR 

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

An Interagency Seminar of Exchange for Federal Managers

U.S. Department of Labor

December 2–3, 2003

Tuesday, December 2, 2003

7:45 a.m. — 8:30 a.m. REGISTRATION / CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Great Hall

8:30 a.m. — 8:40 a.m. WELCOME 

The Honorable W. Roy Grizzard, Jr., Ed.D.

Assistant Secretary

Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP)

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Great Hall 

(Open to Media)

8:40 a.m. — 9:00 a.m. SETTING THE STAGE: THE IMPORTANCE 

OF EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS IN A TIME 

OF UNCERTAINTY

Dan Sutherland, J.D.

Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Great Hall 

(Open to Media)

9:00 a.m. — 10:00 a.m. PLENARY SESSION I: LESSONS LEARNED: 

PERSPECTIVES FROM FEDERAL MANAGERS 

AND EMPLOYEES WITH DISABILITIES

Lawrence W. Roffee, Jr.

Executive Director

U.S. Architectural and Transportation

Barriers Compliance Board (U.S. Access Board)

64
Mary Ann Wilson

Director

U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development (HUD) in Richmond, VA

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Great Hall 

(Open to Media)

10:00 a.m. — 11:30 a.m. PLENARY SESSION II: FEDERAL AGENCY 

SHOWCASE: EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 

PLANS THAT INVOLVE PEOPLE WITH 

DISABILITIES

10:00 a.m. — 10:40 a.m. PART I

A. U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Plan 

Presentation

Al Stewart, M.A., J.D.

Director 

Business Operations Center

Office of Assistant Secretary for Administration 

and Management

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

B. U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Plan 

Presentation

John Benison

Disability Policy Advisor

Office of Civil Rights

U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)

10:40 a.m. — 10:50 a.m. BREAK

10:50 a.m. — 11:30 a.m. PART II

C. U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) / Defense 

Intelligence Agency (DIA) Plan Presentation

65
Pamela A. Butler

Deaf and Disabled Persons Employment Program 

Manager

Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity Office 

Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) 

U.S. Department of Defense (DOD)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Great Hall 

(Open to Media)

11:30 a.m. — 12:00 p.m. REMARKS FROM THE SECRETARY OF 

LABOR

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Great Hall 

(Open to Media)

12:00 p.m. — 1:00 p.m. LUNCH

1:00 p.m. — 2:30 p.m. BREAKOUT SESSIONS

Breakout Session Topic #1: Communicating 

with Employees

Dr. Carl T. Cameron

President

Disability Preparedness Center

Cheryl Heppner

Executive Director

Northern Virginia Resource Center for 

Deaf and Hard of Hearing Persons

Sharon Rennert, J.D.

Senior Attorney Advisor

ADA Division

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Conference 

Center, C-5515 (Closed to Media)

66
67

Breakout Session Topic #2: Equipment 

Decisions

Dr. Beth Loy

Human Factor Consultant

Job Accommodation Network (JAN)

Linda Batiste, M.S., J.D.

Human Factor Consultant

Job Accommodation Network (JAN)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Conference 

Center, C-5515 (Closed to Media)

Breakout Session Topic #3: On-Site (Virtual) 

Tour of Department of Labor’s Emergency 

Preparedness Effective Practices 

Zoë Fearon, M.A.

Program Specialist

Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration and Management

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Auditorium 

(Closed to Media)

Breakout Session Topic #4: Egress

Edwina Juillet

Co-Founder 

National Taskforce on Fire/Life Safety for People 

with Disabilities

June Isaacson Kailes

Associate Director

Center for Disability Issues and the Health Professions

Western University of Health Sciences

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Conference 

Center, C-5515 (Closed to Media)
68

Breakout Session Topic #5: Support 

Mechanisms in the Workplace

Peg Blechman, J.D.

Compliance Specialist

U.S. Architectural and Transportation 

Barriers Compliance Board (U.S. Access Board)

Bruce A. McFarlane, Sr.

Director

TARGET Center

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Conference 

Center, C-5515 (Closed to Media)

Breakout Session Topic #6: Regional and Field 

Office Considerations

Elizabeth Davis, Ed.M., J.D.

Director

Emergency Preparedness Initiative (EPI)

National Organization on Disability (NOD)

Dr. Alan Clive

Civil Rights Program Manager

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Conference 

Center, C-5515 (Closed to Media)

Breakout Session Topic #7: Individualizing 

Emergency Plans

Dr. Richard Horne

Supervisory Research Analyst

Office of Disability Employment Policy

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Conference 

Center, C-5515 (Closed to Media)
69

2:40 p.m. — 4:10 p.m. BREAKOUT SESSIONS REPEATED

(Closed to Media)

4:20 p.m. — 4:50 p.m. (OPTIONAL) ON-SITE (VIRTUAL) TOUR OF 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR’S EMERGENCY 

PREPAREDNESS EFFECTIVE PRACTICES

Zoë Fearon, M.A.

Program Specialist

Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Administration and Management

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Auditorium 

(Closed to Media)

Wednesday, December 3, 2003

8:30 a.m. — 10:00 a.m. BREAKOUT SESSIONS REPEATED 

(Closed to Media)

10:10 a.m. — 11:00 a.m. PLENARY SESSION III: SITUATIONS AND 

SOLUTIONS: EXCHANGING INNOVATIVE IDEAS

Dr. Beth Loy

Human Factor Consultant

Job Accommodation Network (JAN)

Linda Batiste J.D.

Human Factor Consultant

Job Accommodation Network (JAN)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Great Hall 

(Open to Media)

11:00 a.m. — 11:40 a.m. PLENARY SESSION IV: PUTTING IT ALL 

TOGETHER: STRENGTHENING YOUR 

AGENCY’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PLAN

Elizabeth Davis, Ed.M., J.D.

Director
70

Emergency Preparedness Initiative (EPI)

National Organization on Disability (NOD) 

Edwina Juillet

Co-Founder

National Taskforce on Fire/Life Safety for People 

with Disabilities

June Isaacson Kailes

Associate Director

Center for Disability Issues and the Health Professions

Western University of Health Sciences

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Great Hall 

(Open to Media)

11:40 a.m. — 11:55 a.m. CLOSING REMARKS

The Honorable W. Roy Grizzard, Jr., Ed.D.

Assistant Secretary

Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP)

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

Location: U.S. Department of Labor Great Hall 

(Open to Media)
Opening Remarks Prepared for Delivery for

Assistant Secretary for the Office of

Disability Employment Policy (ODEP)

W. Roy Grizzard, Jr., Ed.D.

Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

An Interagency Seminar of Exchange for Federal Managers

U.S. Department of Labor

Tuesday, December 2, 2003

Good morning. I am Roy Grizzard, Assistant Secretary for the Office of Disability

Employment Policy (ODEP), in the U.S. Department of Labor. It is my distinct pleasure to

welcome you all here today to the Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

Interagency Seminar of Exchange.

This is an important event for us for several reasons, but before I get into that, I would like

to share with you a little background about ODEP, its mission, and its activities.

ODEP BACKGROUND

■ ODEP is the only agency in the Federal Government led by an Assistant Secretary that

deals solely with disability employment policy.

■ ODEP recommends policy. 

■ ODEP does not regulate, investigate, or adjudicate.

ODEP Mission and Approach

■ ODEP’s mission is to provide leadership to increase employment opportunities for

youth and adults with disabilities.

■ ODEP’s approach is market-based: demand and supply

ODEP Goals and Activities

■ ODEP’s overarching goal is to eliminate employment barriers for people with disabilities.

71
■ To achieve its mission, ODEP funds a variety of initiatives, then measures and analyzes

the results to inform the policy development process & to share promising practices

with employers, providers, and others in the workforce development system.

■ Through its Employer Assistance Referral Network (EARN) and its Job

Accommodation Network (JAN) initiatives, ODEP provides technical assistance to private sector employers.

■ ODEP’s Workforce Recruitment Program (WRP) gives employers access to a pool of

talented college and university students with disabilities to fill summer or permanent

positions.

■ ODEP serves as a catalyst to bring together federal agencies that address issues and

policies that impact on the employment of people with disabilities. This seminar is an

example of what we do.

WHY AN EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS SEMINAR?

ODEP’s goals rest on several core fundamentals. Key among these is that increased employment opportunities for people with disabilities can be best achieved through a balanced distribution of elements: 

■ access to appropriate education and training, 

■ affordable and decent housing, 

■ reliable transportation, 

■ personal and professional supports, and

■ physical safety.

Imagine if you will a balanced scale, with the elements I just mentioned distributed equally

on both sides of the scale. To remove even one of the elements will throw the balance off

completely, resulting in missed employment opportunities. 

This seminar is important because it addresses the element of physical safety for people with

disabilities while they are at work. A 2001 Harris Poll, commissioned by the National

Organization on Disability (NOD) showed that among people with disabilities who are

employed full- or part-time, 50% say no plans have been made to safely evacuate their workplace! With a statistic like this, is it any wonder that people with disabilities are more anxious about their personal safety post September 11th than the general population, as the survey also indicated?

72
Did you know that workers with disabilities make up 7.0% or 123,000 of the 1.8 million

employees in the federal workforce? Whether these figures strike you as larger or smaller

than you may have expected, the point is that the Federal Government’s diverse workforce

includes people with disabilities. As such, it is imperative that emergency preparedness

processes and strategies address the unique needs of employees with disabilities.

You are here today because your agency or organization recognizes that emergency preparedness for employees and customers with disabilities is important. Throughout this day and

into tomorrow, you will hear from some of the premier experts on issues ranging from egress

to individualized emergency preparedness plans. While you are hear learn all that you can.

Ask questions. Challenge the responses. Share your agency’s experiences. 

There is no “one-size-fits-all” when it comes to emergency preparedness. I am telling you

now; you will hear that phrase repeatedly while you are with us. However, by sharing what

we know with each other and asking the critical questions, we will be able to create thorough and comprehensive emergency preparedness plans that provide for an appropriate

course of action for all employees in an emergency situation.

On behalf of my colleagues at ODEP and the Department of Labor, I wish you all a successful and engaging Seminar.■

73
Keynote Remarks Prepared for Delivery for

U.S. Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao

Emergency Preparedness for People with Disabilities

An Interagency Seminar of Exchange for Federal Managers

U.S. Department of Labor

Tuesday, December 2, 2003

Thank you, Roy [Roy Grizzard].

I would like to recognize the staff of the Office of Disability Employment Policy for planning

this intensive two-day seminar. And I would like to thank Assistant Secretary John Henshaw

and Assistant Secretary Pat Pizzella for their support of this important event.

I would also like to welcome the more than 20 presenters who have agreed to share their

expertise on a number of key preparedness issues—especially Dan Sutherland, from the

Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Civil Rights, who took time from his busy

schedule to be this morning’s keynote speaker.

I would also like to recognize the participation of the National Organization on Disability

and its Director, Elizabeth Davis—thank you for your leadership in this critical area.

Today is truly an important milestone for federal emergency planners. We have 225 representatives from more than 90 federal offices and agencies with us today. This is the first

time ever that senior personnel from emergency preparedness, security, office safety and disability programs have gathered together to address emergency preparedness for federal

employees with disabilities.

At the Labor Department, we are working hard to bring people with disabilities into the federal workplace. As President George W. Bush said, when he announced his New Freedom

Initiatives for people with disabilities, “We must speed the day when the last barrier has been

removed to full and independent lives for every American with or without disabilities.”

To meet this challenge, the Department is involved in a number of key initiatives for people

with disabilities. We’re developing new training initiatives, offering creative placement services and adapting new technologies. We are encouraging flextime and easing transportation

74
challenges. Equally important, we’re making the federal workplace a model workplace by

ensuring a safe and secure environment for employees with disabilities.

We are committed to taking the steps necessary to ensure that all federal employees with disabilities are protected during an emergency.

The events of September 11th set up a new challenge in the workplace for people with disabilities—the ability to quickly evacuate employees with disabilities during terrorist threats,

attacks and other disasters.

At the Department, we have always taken the safety requirements of our over 1,000 employees with disabilities very seriously. We are constantly revising and fine tuning our emergency

preparedness plans. Even prior to September 11th, the Labor Department had plans in place

for the speedy and effective emergency evacuation of employees with disabilities. Since then,

we have strengthened these plans. I convened a Secretarial-level Task Force to improve the

workplace safety of all Department of Labor employees, and people with disabilities were a

key focus of our action plan.

Let me illustrate the importance of planning for these emergencies with a story involving

some of our OSHA colleagues in New York.

In August 2001, OSHA staff at the Manhattan Area Office completed an uneventful evacuation drill from their offices on the top floor of Building 6 of the World Trade Center complex. Managers felt confident that everyone could escape the building safely in an emergency—including an employee who had recently returned to work in a wheelchair. The evacuation plan had specifically been revised to accommodate his needs.

Within weeks, the practice proved more valuable than anyone could have imagined.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, OSHA employees had begun a routine day when

an explosion shook the building. The Assistant Area Director immediately issued the order

to evacuate. As the first plane hit the North Tower of the WTC, debris began falling on

Building 6. OSHA staff rushed into the hallway. Three employees helped their co-worker

in the wheelchair down the corridor and into a freight elevator they had used during the practice drill. They descended to the basement, into a garage, down some steps, and into another garage, where they escaped from the building.

75
The group moved outside just as the second plane hit the South Tower. As the group moved

away from the site, the North Tower collapsed, destroying OSHA’s Manhattan Area Office

as it fell. We are so thankful that no Department of Labor employee was lost during that

tragic day. Thanks, in no small part to OSHA’s careful emergency planning, everyone knew

what to do—even in this unprecedented circumstance.

This is a perfect example of why we must have emergency preparedness plans in place for

people with disabilities and why we must perfect these plans with constant practice. Practice

save lives, prevents injuries and helps create the conditions for a calm and professional evacuation should it ever be needed.

Every single day, more than 120,000 employees with disabilities go to work in the national

headquarters buildings, regional offices or field locations that are owned by or leased by the

Federal Government. Their safety—and the safety of all federal workers—is our number one

priority.

That’s why we’re having this conference, to guarantee that no federal worker is left behind

in an emergency. We must ensure that everyone has a safe and secure workplace environment. As leaders in your field, we’ll be looking to you to come up with creative solutions

to the challenges ahead.

During the next two days you will hear from a number of speakers on a wide variety of subjects—from developing communication plans to applying technologies to help in evacuations.

It is critical that you attend these breakout sessions and general panel discussions. We need

everyone’s participation if we are to create federal emergency preparedness plans that save

lives.

So please take advantage of this wonderful opportunity to learn from your colleagues and

expert consultants.

We hope you will return to your agencies with new insights and practical tools to help create an ever better emergency management plan for your agency.

Working together, we can create a safe and secure workplace—ready for any emergency.

Thank you for joining us, and have a great seminar! ■

76
1 The EEOC has identified nine categories of severe disabilities as targeted disabilities for tracking purposes in an agency’s federal affirmative employment program for individuals with disabilities. These disabilities include: deafness, blindness, missing limbs, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, convulsive disorders,

mental illness, mental retardation, and distortion of limbs or spine.

2 A berm is an architectural security design meant to serve as a barrier or to provide insulation; similar to

a moat.

3 Every federal agency has an Employee Assistance Program (EAP), which has a goal to restore employees to full productivity. More specifically, the EAP provides free, confidential short-term counseling to identify the employee’s problem and, when appropriate, make a referral to an outside organization, facility, or

program that can assist the employee in resolving his or her problem. It is the employee’s responsibility to

follow through with this referral, and it is also the employee’s responsibility to make the necessary financial

arrangements for this treatment, as with any other medical condition.

4 Brick, K.N., & Heppner, C.A. (2003). Excerpts from Personal Experiences of Deaf and Hard of Hearing

Persons: September 11, 2001 and Its Aftermath. Deaf and Hard of Hearing Consumer Advocacy

Network & Northern Virginia Resource for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Persons.

77


Office of Disability Employment Policy

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

200 Constitution Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20210

Voice: (866) ODEP-DOL (633-7365)

TTY: (877) 889-5627