>Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 11:32:40 -0500
>From: Kelly Pierce <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Section 508: One year Later
>Sender: [log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Reply-to: Kelly Pierce <[log in to unmask]>
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
>Original-recipient: rfc822;[log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
>government Executive Magazine
>June 1, 2002
>
>Access Granted
>
>By Brian Friel
>[log in to unmask]
>
>Thanks to a 1-year-old rule, the technologies that power agency
>operations have become more accessible to people with disabilities.
>
>l ast year, officials at the Social Security Administration needed to buy
>100 high-speed copiers. They narrowed their choices to two types of
>machines. One was low enough to be operated by someone sitting in a
>wheelchair. It also had Braille labels on its buttons. The other machine
>had neither feature.
>
>The officials chose the wheelchair- and blind-accessible type, even
>though it cost $695 more per copier.
>
>Under a rule that is 1 year old this month, federal agencies purchasing
>technology products must pick the ones that are the most accessible to
>people with disabilities. Exceptions to the rule-known as Section 508,
>for the part of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act in which it appears-are few.
>The regulation forces federal technology buyers to think about people who
>are blind, deaf, paralyzed or have other disabilities before they buy
>software, computers, printers, copiers, fax machines, kiosks,
>telecommunications devices, or video and multimedia products. Federal Web
>site designers also have to make their sites accessible to disabled
>users, and anyone in government who develops or maintains technology
>products has to make sure those technologies are accessible.
>
>Section 508 was added to the Rehabilitation Act in 1986, but lacked teeth
>until Congress pushed in 1998 for the executive branch to develop
>accessibility standards. Those standards were completed in December 2000,
>seven months before the purchasing rule took effect. The changes gave the
>law the same kind of impact as the 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act.
>Just as the ADA pushed construction firms to build ramps so that people
>in wheelchairs could get into buildings, the Section 508 rule pushes
>technology companies to build techno-ramps into their products so that
>people with disabilities can use them.
>
>One year into its existence, the Section 508 rule is starting to have the
>effect that its authors intended: The technology industry is beginning to
>make more and more of its products accessible to people with
>disabilities, and federal Web sites are more accessible than they were 12
>months ago. Since companies typically don't make separate versions of
>their products for government and everyone else, technology products are
>becoming more accessible to all Americans, not just government employees.
>
>But the rule is reaching a pivotal turning point. As technology companies
>begin to roll out more accessible products this year, all eyes in the
>industry will be watching to see the full effect of the new standards on
>the federal market. The Social Security example aside, it's not clear yet
>whether federal buyers actually will make accessibility a deciding factor
>as they plunk down $45 billion each year for technology products and
>services.
>
>MARKET PSYCHOLOGY The Section 508 rule takes a crafty approach to its
>goal of making technology accessible to everyone. Rather than mandate
>standards for technology the way the Americans With Disabilities Act
>mandated standards for construction, Section 508 makes accessibility a
>competitive advantage. If you want agencies to buy your products, Uncle
>Sam is telling technology firms, you will have to make them more
>accessible than your competitors' goods.
>
>For example, the following four standards now apply to desktop and laptop
>computers: People with poor dexterity should be able to use mechanical
>controls and keys. People who can't use touch screens or touch-activated
>controls (such as blind people) should have other options. Computers
>should have slots so people with disabilities can plug in assistive
>devices. Biometric user identification tools shouldn't prevent people
>from logging on (someone who is mute can't use voice recognition, for
>example). If all four standards apply to a purchase, then the government
>buyer is supposed to pick the one that complies with the most standards.
>The standards were written by the Access Board, the same federal agency
>that wrote the standards for the ADA.
>
>"Section 508 provides a marketplace incentive for competition based on
>accessibility," says Cynthia Waddell, a Silicon Valley-based
>accessibility expert with Ciber Inc. "We never had that before. Everyone
>who wants to participate in the federal market has to have a systemic
>approach to addressing 508, otherwise they will have gaps in their
>products and services that will make them vulnerable to bid protest or
>even failure to win a bid."
>
>But for Section 508 to work, federal buyers must use accessibility as a
>deciding factor in technology purchases. To make that happen, officials
>at the General Services Administration have taken the lead in spreading
>the word across government about the rule's requirements. The agency set
>up a Web site, www.section508.gov, with a list of accessibility standards
>and a database in which technology companies can provide information
>about their products. GSA also oversees a network of Section 508
>advocates from each major agency and coordinates meetings among
>government officials, industry representatives and advocates for people
>with disabilities.
>
>"The government is a huge animal," says Terry Weaver, director of GSA's
>Center for IT Accommodation."Section 508 puts a requirement on more than
>just the people who do procurements. It puts a requirement on anyone who
>develops or maintains information technology. One of the challenges is
>that program people do their jobs in very program-specific ways. They
>don't consider themselves IT people. We're always looking for ways to get
>the message out to them."
>
>GSA has sponsored accessibility seminars across the country, but much of
>the education effort falls to the Section 508 coordinator in each agency,
>most of whom work for their agencies' chief information officers. The
>coordinators have helped set up workshops, procurement guides and
>accessibility policies for their agencies. At the Social Security
>Administration, Section 508 coordinator Clare Bellus helped create
>accessibility checklists that technology buyers must fill out before they
>make purchases. Under Section 508, buyers can claim that buying the most
>accessible product would create an undue burden on the agency, which
>would usually mean that the most accessible products are too expensive.
>Buyers can also claim that certain accessibility features are not
>available in the marketplace. To date, no SSA buyers have tried to use
>the undue burden exemption, but some have said that features aren't
>available, Bellus says. "As the market changes, we'll see fewer of the
>noncommercial availability forms," she says.
>
>Markets, of course, are driven by supply and demand. If buyers demand
>accessibility, makers will supply it. Observers say that some
>agencies-Social Security, Education, Treasury, the Environmental
>Protection Agency and even Defense-are establishing procedures that will
>accelerate the demand for accessibility. But technology salespeople are
>also running into federal buyers who either have never heard of Section
>508 or simply choose not to ask suppliers about accessibility. The
>effects of supply and demand are largely psychological. If a firm thinks
>that many customers want a feature, or that a few important customers
>want it, or that the firm's competitors will gain an edge by offering it,
>and that in the end it will lose business if it does nothing, then the
>firm will install the feature in its products. If a feature won't affect
>the bottom line, then a firm will be less likely to offer it. Some
>vendors still haven't seen any advantage to accessibility and haven't
>even checked how their products stack up against the Section 508
>standards.
>
>SUPPLY-SIDE ACCESSIBILITY But many companies are taking Section 508
>seriously, creating a supply of accessible products before the demand
>fully blooms. Major companies, such as Hewlett Packard, have set up
>special offices to review all of their products against the standards and
>encourage designers to install new accessibility features in the next
>generation of products. Companies with long-standing accessibility
>programs, such as Panasonic, Microsoft and Compaq, are using the Section
>508 standards as new guidelines for software designers. Software
>designers might not have thought about color blindness, for example, when
>using only color to differentiate between options.
>
>Adobe, a San Jose, Calif., software firm, revamped its Acrobat document
>design program with a feature that helps people design pages so that a
>blind person's screen-reading software can read them. Xerox adjusted its
>DocuShare document management software so that screen readers would work
>better with it. Compaq and Microsoft have teamed up with other technology
>companies to make sure accessibility improvements in software are
>compatible with changes in hardware.
>
>"Section 508 brings a whole new round of energy to the product groups
>about accessible design, because they realize part of the reason for
>making things accessible now has to do with competition," says Laura
>Ruby, Microsoft's regulatory and industry affairs program manager.
>Microsoft has had an accessibility program for 12 years. "Having to do
>the paperwork and fill out [checklists] have helped some of our product
>groups realize where they have gaps."
>
>Doug Wakefield, an accessibility specialist with the Access Board, has
>traveled to numerous technology firms, including IBM, Xerox, Sun
>Microsystems, Apple and Novell, to meet with designers about how to make
>their products more accessible. Industry officials regularly meet with
>Section 508 representatives in Washington to discuss concerns with how
>the rule is playing out.
>
>Many vendors have even taken on the role of educators. Xerox executives
>led a Section 508 seminar at the Ronald Reagan building in Washington
>last summer, during which federal buyers grilled the company more about
>the meaning of certain Section 508 provisions than about the
>accessibility of its copiers. Xerox officials found themselves correcting
>myths about the rule, such as the then-prevalent notion that federal
>agencies could not buy products if they didn't meet all of the Section
>508 standards.
>
>Industry observers see the coming year as a bellwether for accessibility
>in technology. Because design cycles for technology products often fall
>in the range of 18 to 24 months, many of the accessibility features that
>companies have incorporated into their products will appear on the market
>between now and next summer.
>
>SECTION 508 CHALLENGES If federal purchasers don't buy the most
>accessible products, Section 508 has some teeth that can bite them.
>First, companies that get passed over for contracts even though their
>products are more accessible can file bid protests with the General
>Accounting Office. Second, disabled federal workers and citizens can file
>complaints with agencies or sue for corrective action if technology is
>unusable. So far, neither method has been used to force agencies to buy
>accessible products.
>
>Government, industry and representatives of people with disabilities say
>the three sides have collaborated well so far on making the rule work.
>"People have put in a lot of effort to make it as smooth a transition as
>possible," says Olga Grkavac, executive vice president of the Information
>Technology Association of America. In fact, "508 has been like a
>lovefest," adds David Capozzi, director of technical and information
>services at the Access Board.
>
>But several challenges may strain the good vibes that have accompanied
>Section 508 so far. One is concern among vendors that federal buyers are
>passing the buck on to them for a government mandate. Not only must
>companies spend money upgrading their products, but some agencies also
>require them to fill out lengthy checklists and verification forms.
>Companies are also worried that agencies will require third-party
>validation of Section 508 compliance without paying for it or start
>forcing companies to sign statements that would shift the blame for
>inaccessibility from the government to contractors. "Such requirements
>are not only contrary to federal policy relative to accessible
>technology, but also a misinterpretation of Section 508 itself," wrote
>Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., in a Feb. 20 letter to GSA Administrator Stephen
>Perry. "Alone and in combination, they serve to discourage vendors from
>developing accessible products and competing for federal business."
>
>Another concern is ignorance about Section 508 in the federal workforce
>and among technology companies. Even many people who know about Section
>508's basic rules don't understand all of its intricacies, such as how a
>claim for undue burden works or how some of the exceptions to the rule
>apply. That lack of knowledge will become more of a problem in January
>2003, when an exception for small purchases expires.
>
>Starting in January, all purchases, even those worth less than $2,500,
>will have to comply with Section 508. That means the 400,000 federal
>employees who carry government purchase cards will need to know and
>follow the accessibility rules. Federal buyers already have numerous
>other rules and regulations to keep in mind when they make purchases. The
>addition of the 508 rules-and their potential costs-may annoy some
>buyers. Most companies say they are designing accessibility features into
>their products at no charge to customers, but some of the features must
>be purchased as add-ons, such as the Braille labels and lower displays on
>the copiers that Social Security bought.
>
>Section 508 advocates say the benefits of making technology accessible to
>anyone, anytime, anywhere make the added burden of the new requirements
>worthwhile.
>
>At numerous sites in Washington-such as the Center for IT Accommodation
>at GSA, or the Computer/Electronics accommodations program at the
>Pentagon (where President Bush appeared last summer to endorse Section
>508)-federal buyers can check out the latest in accessible technology.
>They can hear blind people speeding through documents using screen
>readers or Braille display keyboard attachments, see how teletypewriter,
>or TTY, devices help deaf people use phones, and touch special keyboards
>and screens that make work easier for people with physical disabilities.
>
>Federal buyers might also find that they enjoy having some of the
>accessible features themselves. Jennifer Sheehy, a senior policy adviser
>for the Presidential Task Force on the Employment of People With
>Disabilities, says she types 150 words per minute by speaking into her
>voice recognition software. Before a spinal injury prevented her from
>typing with her hands, Sheehy clocked in at just 28 words per minute. A
>screen magnifier, usually used by people with very poor vision, came in
>handy for a colleague of GSA Section 508 Specialist Helen Chamberlain,
>who had left his glasses at home one day. "People realize this stuff
>really works," Chamberlain says. Craig Luigart, CIO at the Education
>Department, points out that more and more Americans will have functional
>limitations as they get older, with one in three people facing at least
>one limitation by the time they reach 55 to 64 years of age. The
>accessible technologies that today's able-bodied federal workers buy may
>be the same ones they use in the future.
>
>"If you break your arm tomorrow, you may want to be able to get into
>Microsoft Office and do some voice input into a Word document, rather
>than inputting text with one hand," Microsoft's Ruby says.
>
>ACCESS TO THE WEB f ederal webmasters have been busily redesigning the
>government's Web sites over the past year, checking their Web pages
>against 16 accessibility standards the Access Board developed under
>Section 508.
>
>Blind users are the primary concern for webmasters. Sites need special
>coding so that screen readers-software that reads the words on a screen
>to blind people-can follow the text and the links on a site.
>
>Federal webmasters "are definitely paying attention" to blind users'
>needs, says Janina Sajka, director of technical research and development
>for the American Foundation for the Blind. "There is a noticeable and
>substantial difference today as compared to last summer."
>
>Sajka says Firstgov.gov, the central portal for federal information on
>the Web, had been hard to use because its links were not clearly labeled.
>Her screen reader would simply say, "Link. Link. Link. Link. Link," as it
>read the page, leaving Sajka wondering where a link would take her. "Is
>that the women's room or the men's room?" Sajka jokes. Now when she
>speeds through the front page of Firstgov.gov, with the voice of the
>screen reader zipping through the text on the page at a rate only
>understandable to the trained ear, she knows where the links lead. "I
>know what's here," she says. She gives a quick appraisal of other federal
>sites: "Justice is nice. Commerce is not bad," Sajka says. "The White
>House does a nice job, but Capitol Hill is a mixed bag. Some of the sites
>are very uninformative."
>
>Sajka and other Web watchers say blind users still run into frequent
>obstacles on federal sites, such as documents in Portable Document
>Format-a printer-ready format that agencies commonly use-that are not set
>up properly for screen readers. When they run into roadblocks, blind
>users can send complaints to webmasters asking for help. Webmasters often
>find other ways to get people key documents when their Web versions are
>inaccessible, though the goal of Section 508 is to make special treatment
>unnecessary.
>
>In fact, Sajka notes that the Web-when properly formatted-can be a great
>enabler for the blind. Paper documents are inaccessible, forcing blind
>people to get sighted helpers to read to them. The Web, on the other
>hand, allows blind people to obtain information on their own. "If you
>have an e-option, no one has to know you are blind," Sajka says.


                 Norman Coombs, Ph.D.
CEO, EASI (Equal Access to Software and Information)
http://www.rit.edu/~easi
Professor Emeritus, Rochester Institute of Technology
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
         Cell (949) 922-5992
http://www.rit.edu/~nrcgsh
22196 Caminito Tasquillo
Laguna Hills CA 92653