State of Connecticut Web Site Accessibility Committee

1. State of ConnecticutWeb Site Accessibility Committee Our Approach to Making Online Government Accessible Technology Accessibility Conference - SCSU October 12, 2007 Kathleen Anderson

2. History of the State of Connecticut’s Web Site Accessibility Policy • Version 3.1 – December 1996 • http://www.access.state.ct.us/policies/accesspolicy31.html • Version 4.0 – July 2000 • http://www.access.state.ct.us/policies/accesspolicy40.html • Version 5 (proposed) – 2005 • http://www.access.state.ct.us/wg/proposal.asp • Version 6 (in progress) – 2007 • Section 508 http://www.section508.gov/

3. Version 3.1 • Written in August 1996 • Adopted in December 1996 • Based on the TRACE Center Unified Web Site Accessibility Guidelines • No training given to state webmasters • Not rigorously enforced • No compliance date set

4. Version 4.0 • Committee formed in October, 1999 • All Committee members are volunteers • Policy written by Committee members in the Spring of 2000 • Adopted on July 26, 2000 • Incorporates the W3C WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines – Priority 1 Checkpoints • Encourages the use of valid HTML • Requires a valid DOCTYPE declaration • Target date for compliance was January 2002

5. Version 5 (Proposed) • Working Group formed in December, 2004 • Proposal developed in 2005 • Incorporates: • All WCAG Priority 1 Guidelines • Some Priority 2 and Priority 3 Guidelines • Section 508 Standards that are not WCAG P1 • One Guideline from WCAG 2.0 (Draft)

6. “Why not Section 508?” “Why not wait for WCAG 2.0?” • State Policy Version 3.1 – December 1996 • http://www.access.state.ct.us/policies/accesspolicy31.html • Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 – May 1999 • http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/ • State Policy Version 4.0 – July 2000 • http://www.access.state.ct.us/policies/accesspolicy40.html • Section 508 Rules – February 2001 • http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Content&ID=12#Web • Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 – June 2005 (Working Draft) • http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/ • State Policy Version 5 (Draft) – 2005 • http://www.access.state.ct.us/wg/proposal.asp • Refresh of Section 508 Standards • http://www.access-board.gov/news/508update.htm • State Policy Version 6 (in progress) – 2007 • Section 508 http://www.section508.gov/

7. Version 4.0 Implementation • Communications • Web Site: http://www.access.state.ct.us/ • Listserv: CT-Access http://www.access.state.ct.us/listserv/subscribeform.htm • Monthly face-to-face meetings open to all state webmasters

8. Version 4.0 Training • Training provided to state webmasters • External – New Horizons – Fall, 2000 – Funded by the Department of Information Technology (DOIT) • Internal – All day “Refresher course” taught by Committee members – Fall, 2001 • Resources, Tools and Tutorials available on web site

9. Version 4.0 Testing • Testing Center set up • All hardware and software donated by state agencies • Test Center Hardware: • PC running Windows 98 • Power Mac G4

10. Version 4.0 Testing (Continued) • Test Center Software • Browsers/Emulators • Internet Explorer • Netscape(s) • Opera • Lynx • WebTV Viewer • Bobby Worldwide • JAWS (PC), OutSpoken (Mac)

11. Compliance • Tutorials written by Committee members • Six Steps to Accessibility Certification • How to run Bobby against large web sites • How to install the Lynx browser • How to code a default DOCTYPE in FrontPage • How to create Accessible PowerPoint presentations • How to create Accessible PDF documents

12. How to obtain Compliance Certification • Agency webmaster writes to the Committee Chair requesting a site review • Chair posts the request to the listserv • A committee member volunteers to do the review • The process is then taken off-list • All communication is private, between the reviewer and the reviewee

13. Compliance Negotiation • Occasionally, the Chair is called in during the process as an arbitrator, by either the reviewer or the reviewee: • Some webmasters use the compliance certification request as a way of finding out what’s wrong with their site, instead of doing a preliminary assessment themselves • Differences of opinion – “spirit of the law” • Most reviews have a successful outcome

14. Compliance Certification • Site is certified to be compliant with the policy • Webmasters place a compliance statement and a link to the policy on their site • Webmaster and their agency head are presented with certificates at quarterly statewide webmaster meetings • A list of all compliant (and non-compliant) web sites is available on our web site for all to see

15. The Pros and Cons of Policy vs. Law • Funding • Buy-in • Training • Compliance

16. Funding • No funding for a Policy • All goods and services are donated • Hardware • Software • Time • Like Blanche DuBois, we depend on the kindness of strangers

17. Buy-in • A Law leaves no doubt whether or not to comply • A Law normally has funding attached • Provides an avenue and redress for complaints

18. Training • Training needs to be funded • Training needs to be mandatory • Training needs to be offered on an on-going basis • New hires • New technologies • New consultants

19. Compliance • A Law mandates compliance • A Policy mandates compliance; however, • Scope is unclear • different branches of government • Internet vs. Intranet vs. Extranet • Physical location of server (state server or vendor server) • Not a priority for agencies in an era of budget cuts • No penalty for non-compliance

20. External Issues • Vendors • Training • Software

21. Vendors • Difficult to find qualified consultants already on state contract • Proposals submitted by vendors were unrealistic in terms of: • Hours • Scope of work • Dollar amount of the proposal • Raised the questions: • Did the vendors really know what they were being asked to do? • Did they think we didn’t know what we were asking for?

22. Vendor Training • Problem solved in Connecticut by requiring vendors to be trained in how to make Accessible web sites • Training was provided by the State at no cost to vendors • Test center made available for use by vendors • Committee web site and listserv available as resources for follow-up

23. Vendor Training Issues • Billable hours • Vendors thought the State should pay for the time the consultant was in class • We said: “We don’t pay for your database training, accessibility training isn’t any different – it’s a skill set required to qualify for a state contract” • Attitude • Some consultants walked into class with a “low enthusiasm level” • 99% walked out “getting it” and thanking us for the learning opportunity

24. Keys to Training Successes • Webmasters must experience the barriers in a hands-on environment • Take them out of their comfort zone (out of their office, away from their PC) • Take away the mouse • Turn off the speakers • Turn off images • Training can be effective in either a classroom environment or online

25. How did we do? • Summer 2002 • 81 consultants representing 35 companies were trained in less than 3 months • 2004 - 2005 • Vendors are asking for training for new hires so they can remain qualified • They are given a choice of Acceptable courses to choose from

26. Web Site Accessibility - Acceptable Training Programs • HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/ • Introduction to Designing Accessible Websites • Key-Logic: http://www.key-logic.com/ • Universal Web Site Accessibility Training

27. Web Site Accessibility - Acceptable Training Programs • New Horizons Computer Learning Center: http://www.newhorizons.com/content/index.aspx • State of Connecticut – Web Site Accessibility Training • Email: kathleen.anderson@po.state.ct.us • Phone: (860) 622-2159

28. Software • “It is just as important that all people be able to author content as it is for all people to have access to it.” • W3C Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 - http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/ • Questions to ask • Does the web page authoring tool create accessible web pages? • Is the web page authoring tool itself accessible to people with disabilities?

29. How to choose an Accessible Authoring Tool • Conformance Reviews done by the WAI Authoring Tools Working Group: http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2002/tools • Section 508 Buy Accessible: http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Content&ID=2

30. What factors contributed most to our success? • Committee participation is voluntary • Policy development • Writing tutorials • Web site reviews • Support from DOIT: • Agreement to adopt a statewide IT policy • Funding for state webmaster training • Mandating vendor training

31. And, strange as it sounds … • Change in the way state agencies communicate (email, web, listservs, etc.) • Information available faster and accessible to more people • Discussions held (and decisions made) online instead of waiting for a meeting • Greatly reduces bureaucracy – and things get done!

32. For more information • Visit our web site: http://www.access.state.ct.us/ • Subscribe to the CT-Access listserv: http://www.access.state.ct.us/listserv/subscribeform.htm • Come to a meeting: http://www.access.state.ct.us/meetings/2005meetings.html • Send me an email: kathleen.anderson@po.state.ct.us • Call me: (860) 622-2159