this is from the publication govtech.net.   There is great policy info in
this article.  It seems that lawsuits on technology access spur
development of policy to prevent future disasters.  It also describes an
innovative approach where consultants must undergo training on technology
access before they can receive a contract frm the state.

Kelly


Connecticut to Enforce Accessibility Guidelines

Darby Patterson - May 31, 2002 -- HARTFORD, Conn. -- As accessibility in
Web-site design becomes increasingly important to state and local
governments, Connecticut is ensuring its Web-site designers are trained
and qualified in creating an accessible site.

In a recent notice to consultants, the state's Department of Information
Technology announced that all consultants will be required to take
Web-site accessibility training "in accordance with the state guidelines
for achieving universal accessibility." The guidelines will be used in
the creation of any state Web site. The state's IT department has the
guidelines posted online.

The directive includes all consultants currently under contract with the
state who work in a number of areas, including Internet management and
development; design; application server administration; Internet
graphics; and as webmasters.

Contractors and IT consultants frequently present themselves as qualified
to build sites that are accessible to persons with disabilities, said
Cynthia Waddell, a consultant of CIBER's Accessibility Center of
Excellence. However, the results have often not measured up to standards
such as the W3C guidelines or Section 508 regulations.

"There is a lack of information and education about what accessibility
is," Waddell said. "The fact that Connecticut had to make it a
requirement speaks volumes. People want to do it but they haven't had the
tools and education."

Currently, all federal purchases of electronic equipment must be
accessible to adaptive technologies, such as screen readers for the blind
or alternatives to using a mouse to navigate, according to Section 508 of
the Rehabilitation Act.

Shortly after the regulations took effect last June, states began looking
more seriously at access issues. California, New York and Texas have
implemented strict standards in providing for accessibility, not only in
Web design, but also in the procurement of other equipment, such as
facsimile and copy machines.

As some jurisdictions move voluntarily to meet standards, others are
waiting to see if Section 508 will eventually filter down to the state
and local levels. One way this may happen is through litigation. In
Arkansas, the Federation of the Blind filed a lawsuit claiming a $19
million computer system purchased by the state is inaccessible and
alleging that the state is in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

The application at the center of the suit is the Arkansas Administrative
Information System, which employees can use to examine their payroll
information. Two blind employees who each worked for the state for 20
years found they were no longer able to access this confidential
information when the new system was installed in 2001.

How Section 508 may, or may not, play into this litigation is still
unclear. However, access experts are carefully watching the progression
of the case.

Some states, such as Connecticut, have taken a proactive approach,
according to Kathleen Anderson, purchasing service officer, Department of
Information Technology.

"Any consultant that is doing Internet or Web work for the state must
have the accessibility training," she said. "We are giving them until
July 1. Anyone on contract and not trained can no longer work."

Anderson said the training is free and will assist vendors.

"We want to make sure that they pay attention to our guidelines . it
should benefit the whole firm," she said.

Daniel Goldstein, an attorney with the firm that is representing the
Federation of the Blind in the Arkansas case, said the state had also
been diligent in setting standards, calling the Arkansas guidelines a
"mini Section 508."

According to the statute, all software contracts must contain
accessibility features. Goldstein said the human resources solution in
Arkansas did not meet the criteria in the original RFP. However, the
vendor was working with some legacy issues.

"Here is the problem: It is a lot more difficult to put an elevator in a
building that's already built," he said. "The same is true of software.
It's not that hard in the initial design."

Goldstein, whose firm litigated one of the nation's first accessibility
lawsuits (Connecticut vs. AOL, which was settled out of court) said a
government's or company's culture often dictates how this issue is
handled.

"The companies that don't run into trouble are the ones who have someone
fairly high up in the management structure that cares about accessibility
issues," he said. "If there is no champion, no one is getting the
monetary reward for making the application accessible."

In addition, Goldstein said, good Web design depends upon the specific
needs of the user group.

"An advisory committee of people with disabilities can tell you what
works and what doesn't," he said. "One point that gets missed is this
step will save you from doing something expensive . 'cause you thought
the disability group wanted it, but they didn't."

Many software companies are afraid to contact disability groups to ask
for help, fearing a call might trigger a lawsuit, he said.

"Companies that want to fix the problem will get a warm reception," he
suggested. "They are not painting a target on themselves."

Waddell said states need to overcome the barriers to creating accessible
Web sites, barriers that, at times, are built from false information.

"There are a lot of myths out there about how complicated this is,
terrible misinformation and overkill," Waddell said. "I don't think
people need to be afraid creating true accessibility."

Darby Patterson, Editor in Chief