I. Executive Summary and Recommendations

Over 20 years ago, Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which was signed into law on July 26, 1990.  42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213.  The ADA made it a violation of federal law to discriminate against a person with a disability in private sector and state and local government employment, in the provision of state and local government services, and in the provision of goods and services by places of public accommodation.  The ADA is a mandate for equality for persons with disabilities, many of whom throughout our country’s history have been constrained by societal, cultural, and structural barriers that limited opportunities for them to achieve their potential, live independently, obtain gainful employment, and participate meaningfully in our shared American life.  The ADA’s implementation has rendered much of our society more open and inclusive; considerations of accessibility feature more prominently today than in the past in the implementation of state and local government programs, as well as the provision of private sector services and facilities.  These changes have empowered people with disabilities to participate in American society to an extent never before possible.

In the federal sector, government agencies have long been subject to the accessible design requirements of the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4151-4156, and the employment nondiscrimination requirements of Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 791.  In 1978, Congress amended Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) to extend the disability nondiscrimination obligations imposed on recipients of federal financial assistance to the programs and activities of federal agencies.  29 U.S.C. § 794.  And, in 1998, Congress amended Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 508) to require federal agencies to ensure that the electronic and information technology (EIT) they procure, develop, maintain, and use is accessible to people with disabilities.  29 U.S.C. § 794d.  Section 508 is designed to fulfill the promise inherent in information technology to enhance the lives of persons with and without disabilities. 

In April 2000 the Department of Justice issued its first report pursuant to Section 508, which described the state of accessibility of the federal government’s EIT for people with disabilities.  The 2000 report included detailed findings of fact based on the results of a 1999 self-evaluation by federal agencies.  The report also included recommendations, for example, to increase coordination among federal agencies, including establishing an interagency technical assistance support center, to form intra-agency voluntary advisory committees comprised of persons with disabilities to assist in the identification and resolution of accessibility issues, to develop agency-wide guidelines for web-page development, and to develop systemic procedures to ensure procurement of accessible EIT products.

On the tenth anniversary of the ADA, on July 26, 2000, then President Clinton called upon the heads of the executive departments and agencies to renew their commitment to ensuring that federal programs were free of disability-based discrimination, including all programs offered on government Internet and Intranet sites, and he encouraged coordination among government agencies to ensure the success of their efforts to make EIT accessible to persons with disabilities pursuant to Section 508.  The memorandum emphasized that an “important goal of the [Rehabilitation] Act for the Federal Government is to set an example for the rest of the country by . . . providing exemplary service to its customers with disabilities.”  President‘s Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on Renewing the Commitment to Ensure that Federal Programs are Free from Disability-Based Discrimination, 36 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1688 (July 31, 2000).

EIT Accessibility Standards implementing Section 508 were published by the U.S. Architectural and Transportation Compliance Board (Access Board) in late 2000 and the Federal Acquisition Regulation was amended to incorporate the Access Board’s Section 508 Standards in 2001.  Section 508 became enforceable in June 2001.

In recognition of the important role that technology can play in advancing opportunities for workplace and community participation by persons with disabilities, then President Bush on February 1, 2001, embarked on a number of efforts designed to promote the development of assistive and universally designed technologies for individuals with disabilities.  For example, under the Assistive Technology Act, matching grants to States were awarded to help people with disabilities purchase assistive technology.  A new website, www.DisabilityInfo.gov (now www.Disability.gov), was launched by the government to provide information in an accessible format to persons with disabilities concerning programs and activities of interest across the government.  And, to facilitate a common understanding among federal agencies of Section 508 requirements, an interagency Section 508 Steering Committee and Coordinators’ Working Group were formed to work closely with federal agencies responsible for Section 508 and coordinate technical guidance and training.

In 2001 and 2004 the Department of Justice surveyed federal agencies regarding the status of their efforts to comply with Section 508.  In mid-2004, the Department published on its website at www.usdoj.gov/crt/508/report2/index.php a report based on the results of the 2001 Survey [1].  The report included findings and offered recommendations regarding web accessibility, the processing of Section 508 administrative complaints, agency policies and practices concerning telecommunications devices and information transaction machines, and it offered some guidance on the interplay of Sections 501 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act on the federal government’s obligations under Section 508.

On President Obama’s second day in office, on January 21, 2009, he issued a call for openness and transparency in the manner in which the federal government interacts with citizens and provides information about government programs and activities.  President’s Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Agencies on Transparency and Open Government, 74 Fed. Reg. 4685 (January 26, 2009).  More recently, on May 23, 2012, the President issued a directive entitled “Building a 21st Century Digital Government,” which launched a comprehensive Digital Government Strategy aimed at delivering better digital services to the American people.  President’s Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on Building a 21st Century Digital Government, 77 Fed. Reg. 106 (June 1, 2012).  These mandates can only be fully realized, however, when persons with disabilities have comparable access to government information and data.  Federal agencies operate today in a more dynamic information environment than ever before and vigilance is required to make sure that the requirements of Section 508 continue to guide the procurement, development, maintenance, and use of EIT in all of its various forms.  With recent advancements in technology, opportunities for communicating with the public have grown exponentially to include not only the Internet as traditionally used to provide information, but also new Internet-based social networking communities where people can respond to information provided to them, such as Facebook, Twitter, MySpace and YouTube.  These expansions in technology hold the promise of increased participation for all, but present challenges for the full inclusion of persons with disabilities.

President Obama is committed to removing those barriers that remain in our society and that exclude people with disabilities, depriving them of true equality of opportunity and independence. In seeking to do more for Americans with disabilities, he is motivated by the principles of improving health care, increasing employment opportunities, expanding educational opportunities, protecting civil rights, promoting community living, supporting accessible technology, and supporting international disability rights.  Compliance with Section 508 can facilitate achievement of the President’s objectives by removing many of the barriers to EIT that impede persons with disabilities’ access.  For example, accessible EIT can open up to persons with disabilities information about government assistance for education and training programs, housing, and other government services and benefits, much of which is available on agency websites or is communicated to the public using agency telecommunication services, agency information kiosks, and transaction machines.  Accessible EIT can also facilitate achievement of the federal government’s goal of increased federal hiring, promotion, retention, and success of people with disabilities, as illustrated by Executive Order Number 13548, Increasing Federal Employment of Individuals with Disabilities, 75 Fed. Reg. 45,039 (July 26, 2010).  Executive Order 13548 calls for the heads of executive agencies to take steps to increase the employment of persons with disabilities.  The executive order emphasized that agencies should implement strategies for hiring and retaining workers with disabilities, including by “increasing access to appropriate accessible technologies, and ensuring the accessibility of physical and virtual workspaces.”

This report examines the state of federal agencies’ compliance with Section 508 during fiscal year 2010 (FY2010).  The survey was administered to federal agencies in early 2011.  It is hoped that the report’s findings can serve as a benchmark against which progress towards an even more open, transparent, and inclusive EIT environment within federal agencies can be assessed in the future.

A. Background

1. Information Technology

Changes in technology continue at an extremely rapid pace, increasing the amount of EIT available to the American people, both with and without disabilities.  Today, meaningful participation in American society requires access to a full range of EIT, including computers, office equipment, cellular telephones, software, and the Internet.  Technological devices are increasingly portable, connected, and multifunctional, allowing a person to make a phone call, type a document, search the Internet, and send and receive e-mail from virtually anywhere in the country.  The technological convergence of various modes of communication and information is continually evolving, changing the way the American people learn, work, consume goods and services, and communicate with each other.

People with disabilities have been among the greatest beneficiaries of the technological advancement of EIT.  However, people with disabilities also are at significant risk of being excluded if the technological innovations are designed without considering accessibility.  Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act ensures that federal agencies address these needs when they develop, procure, maintain, or use EIT. [2]

2. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, as amended by the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, requires federal agencies to ensure that EIT is accessible to people with disabilities, unless certain exceptions apply.  Specifically, Section 508 requires federal agencies to ensure that EIT they develop, procure, maintain, or use allows employees with disabilities and members of the public seeking information or services to have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to that available to employees and members of the public without disabilities.

To implement Section 508, the Access Board published final EIT Accessibility Standards on December 21, 2000, 36 C.F.R. pt. 1194.  On April 25, 2001, the General Services Administration, the Department of Defense, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration published a final rule to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to incorporate the Access Board’s EIT Accessibility Standards.  66 Fed. Reg. 20894 et seq. (April 25, 2001).  Section 508 became enforceable and the FAR amendments went into effect in late June 2001.

Because of the rapid changes in technology, in 2006, the Access Board began the process to update the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards by establishing an advisory committee.  The advisory committee was composed of representatives from industry, disability groups, standard setting bodies in the United States and abroad, and government agencies.  On April 3, 2008, the advisory committee presented its report and recommendations to the Access Board, and on March 22, 2010, the Access Board issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) to update and revise the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards.  In response to comments, the Access Board made significant changes to the 2010 ANPRM and issued a second ANPRM on December 8, 2011.  The comment period for the second ANPRM ended on March 7, 2012.  The Access Board anticipates publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking in early 2013.

B. Department of Justice’s Survey

Section 508 requires the Attorney General to submit to the President and Congress reports containing information on and recommendations regarding the state of federal department and agency compliance with Section 508, including actions regarding individual complaints.  29 U.S.C. § 794d(d)(2).  Section 508 requires federal agencies to cooperate with and to provide information to the Attorney General necessary to assist with the reports.  29 U.S.C. § 794d(e). 

Pursuant to this directive, in 2010-2011, the Department of Justice created survey instruments and solicited answers from federal agencies regarding their implementation of Section 508 in FY 2010.[3] The survey questions were based on prior survey efforts and finalized after consultation with participants from various federal agencies, including the Access Board, General Services Administration, Social Security Administration, and the Department of Homeland Security.  The Department also consulted with many participants from federal government organizations including the Section 508 Coordinators, Federal Web Managers Council, and the Federal Chief Information Officers Council.

The survey requested data in four important areas:  general processes for implementing Section 508, procurement, administrative complaints and civil actions, and website compliance.  In order to obtain the most comprehensive and reliable data possible, the survey asked the federal agencies to identify components within each agency that were responsible for each category of duties referenced in each section of the survey.  These agency components completed the survey and submitted the survey responses to their parent agency.  The parent agency collected and provided the combined survey responses from all of their components to the Department.  For purposes of the report, the survey responses were grouped according to their agency size category using the following breakdown:

• Very Small        100 or fewer employees
• Small                101 to 1,000 employees
• Mid-Size            1,001 to 10,000 employees
• Large                10,001 to 25,000 employees
• Very Large        25,001 or more employees

A total of 89 federal agencies, including Cabinet level agencies, independent agencies, and boards, commissions, and committees, participated in the Department of Justice's survey [4]. Twenty-six were very small agencies, 26 were small agencies, 18 were mid-size agencies, 6 were large agencies, and 13 were very large agencies. The 89 federal agencies identified a total of 318 components that provided the responses to the survey. This report provides the Department's findings and recommendations. The report also provides the data reported by the federal agency components and includes an analysis by agency size category.

C. Department of Justice’s Report and Recommendations

Almost 15 years ago, Congress amended Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act to require federal agencies to ensure that the EIT they procure, develop, maintain, and use is accessible to people with disabilities.  Some agencies have achieved substantial success in implementing and complying with Section 508.  However, many agencies continue to face significant challenges in adopting appropriate policies and procedures, establishing a Section 508 office or program, providing training, coordinating efforts, and establishing accountability.

1. General Processes for Section 508 Implementation

The first section of the Department’s survey focused on general processes for implementing Section 508 within the agencies and their components.  Specifically, this section sought information regarding policies, processes, and procedures that agencies used to ensure their components comply with the requirements of Section 508.  In addition, agencies were asked questions regarding their budgets for information technology (IT), development of software and web applications, and training.  Also, agencies were asked several questions regarding Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 504).

Agencies reported mixed levels of success.  Slightly more than fifty percent of agency components had established a general policy to implement and comply with Section 508.  However, only about forty percent of agency components that developed software had included a process to ensure the accessibility of software, and only about thirty percent of agency components that developed videos or multimedia productions had included a process to ensure the accessibility of training or informational videos or multimedia productions.  Additionally, nearly seventy percent of agency components had appointed a Section 508 coordinator, but only thirty-five percent of agency components had established a Section 508 office or program.  Among the agency components that had established a Section 508 office or program, they assigned on average 2.5 full time equivalents (FTEs) and allocated a median budget of $35,000 to their Section 508 office or program.[5]

Agency components experienced difficulty in providing Section 508 training to their personnel - only forty percent of agency components provided Section 508 training, and these agency components provided only a small number of hours of training to their agency acquisition workforce (less than one hour) or EIT developers (a little more than one hour).  Agency components also experienced difficulty establishing a mechanism to ensure EIT used in a program or activity receiving federal financial assistance is accessible to persons with disabilities .

The Department recommends the following:

• Establish Section 508 Policies and Procedures.  Agencies that have not already done so should establish policies and procedures to ensure that their development, procurement, maintenance, and use of EIT (web, software, office equipment, and other EIT) are accessible.  The policies and procedures should identify the person in charge and define roles and responsibilities, especially for the agency’s personnel involved in the procurement process and web and software developers.  The policies and procedures should include a process to regularly report on the status of Section 508 compliance and implementation to agency’s leadership.  The policies and procedures should also include the technical requirements of Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards, including the accessibility requirements for all live or recorded training and multimedia production (e.g., closed captioning, open captioning, and audio description). 

• Appoint Coordinators and Establish Section 508 Offices or Programs.  Agencies that have not already done so should appoint a Section 508 coordinator and establish a Section 508 office or program.  The Section 508 coordinator and the Section 508 office or program should reside in the office that plans and oversees the implementation of the agency’s information technology (e.g., Office of the Chief Information Officer or Chief Technology Officer).  The Section 508 coordinator should have the authority to implement the agency’s Section 508 policy.  The coordinator should also have the authority to facilitate and develop partnerships with agency components that are responsible for information technology, procurement, and enforcement of equal employment opportunity (EEO) or civil rights laws.  The agency’s Section 508 office or program should support Section 508 compliance within the agency’s information technology governance activities to ensure that decisions regarding technology include the needs of employees and members of the public with disabilities.  Additionally, the agency’s Section 508 office or program should provide support to agency personnel who are responsible for ensuring the accessibility of EIT that is developed, procured, maintained, or used.  The Section 508 office or program should also provide support for accessibility testing and remediation of EIT.

• Provide More Training to Agency Personnel.  Agencies should provide and/or facilitate the provision of more training to Section 508 coordinators, agency personnel involved in the procurement process, software developers, website developers, and video and multimedia developers.  Agencies should also provide training to equal employment opportunity, human resources, civil rights, and Section 508 offices and personnel.  To provide more effective training, agencies should utilize the Section 508 expertise of the Access Board and the General Services Administration, which have statutory authority for providing technical assistance under Section 508.  Agencies also should encourage the sharing of interagency training opportunities and take advantage of the existing Section 508 training opportunities, including the Section 508 Coordinators’ Conference and the Interagency Disability Educational Awareness Showcase.
• Ensure Accessibility of EIT Used in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance.  Section 504 prohibits recipients from discriminating against persons with disabilities in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Under this statute, recipients have an obligation to ensure that persons with disabilities are not excluded from, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance, including instances when the program or activity is offered through the use of EIT (e.g., through websites). Agencies should inform recipients that they are required to ensure the accessibility of their websites and other EITs and that they may meet this statutory obligation by using the standards described under the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards.[6]

2. Procurement

The second section of the survey focused on procurement practices and procedures within the federal agencies.  Specifically, this section analyzed contract requirements, market research, documentation of decisions, exceptions and commercial non-availability, and pre or post award protests.

A majority of the agency components currently incorporate accessibility provisions into their EIT procurements.  However, less than fifty percent of agency components incorporated specific applicable Section 508 Accessibility Standards as requirements in each procurement solicitations.  A majority of the agency components only provided standardized compliance language or clauses in their solicitations.  Additionally, instead of relying on actual product testing to validate Section 508 compliance, agency components most often relied on reviewing the materials submitted by the contractor or vender to evaluate whether the deliverables met the Section 508 requirements.  Some agency components conducted no evaluation at all.

The Department recommends the following:

• Develop Procurement Policies for Section 508 Compliance.  As mentioned previously, slightly more than fifty percent of agency components had established a general policy to implement and comply with Section 508.  Agencies that have not already done so should review all of their procurement practices and policies, formal and informal, and develop systematic ways to ensure that they are procuring EIT that meets the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards.

• Use Specific Language of the Section 508 Requirements in All Solicitations.  Rather than rely on general Section 508 standardized language, whenever possible, agencies should incorporate specific applicable Section 508 requirements that are appropriate for the procurement of the EIT product.

• Perform Actual Product Testing.  Instead of solely relying on reviewing the materials submitted by the contractor or vendor, agencies should evaluate Section 508 compliance by conducting actual product testing throughout the acquisition process, particularly for products that will be heavily used by agency employees or members of the public.  When product testing reveals noncompliance, an effective plan should be developed to correct or remediate the problem in a timely manner.

• Establish Procedures to Document Section 508 Procurement Decisions.  Only about forty percent of agency components had established a formal policy to document any Section 508 exceptions claimed on procurements of EIT.  Agencies that have not already done so should establish formalized systems to document their Section 508 procurement decisions (e.g. , non-availability determination, undue burden exceptions, National Security exceptions).

3. Administrative Complaints and Civil Actions

The third section of the survey examined policies and procedures for handling Section 508 complaints and requested statistics on the number of complaints and judicial actions involving the federal agencies.  Agency components reported 140 administrative complaints and seven civil actions since June 21, 2001, the effective date of the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards.  However, most of the administrative complaints and civil actions were filed against componets in very large agencies.  Also, only slightly more than thirty percent of agency components had already established set of policies and procedures specifically to process Section 508 complaints.  Fifty-seven percent of the agency components were either using existing Section 504 complaint processes or some other process.

The Department recommends the following:

• Establish Procedures Specifically to Process Section 508 Complaints.  Rather than rely solely on the Section 504 complaint process, agencies should consider augmenting the Section 504 complaint process, where appropriate, so as to include specific policies and procedures targeted to the processing of Section 508 complaints. [7]  The complaint policies and procedures should also include a method for tracking the complaints and ensure a timely response and resolution.

• Incorporate Alternative Dispute Resolution Into Section 508 Complaint Process.  Almost seventy percent of agency components reported providing Section 508 complainants a choice of using an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) option to attempt resolution of their complaints.  Those agencies that have not done so should consider offering to Section 508 complainants a carefully designed ADR option within the context of the agencies’ Section 508 administrative complaint resolution process.

• Disseminate Widely Information About the Section 508 Complaint Process.  Agencies should widely distribute information about their Section 508 administrative complaint process.  For example, agencies should publish the complaint process on the agencies’ Internet and Intranet websites, as well as publish information prominently in equal employment opportunity handbooks and other appropriate publications.

4. Website Compliance

The fourth section of the Department’s survey inquired about general policies and practices for developing accessible web pages within the federal agencies.  Agencies also were asked to evaluate the accessibility of their external Internet home pages, internal Intranet home pages, web-based forms, and web-based applications.  Seventy percent of agency components reported having accessibility policies in place for website development and that their web pages, web-based forms, and web-based applications were generally accessible.  Also, nearly fifty-eight percent of agency components reported performing routine automated and/or manual evaluation and remediation on their websites.  Specifically, twenty-eight percent of agency components performed both automated and manual evaluation, while twenty-four percent of agency components performed only manual evaluation, and six percent of agency components performed only automated evaluation.  Agency components reported some difficulty, however, with providing captioning and audio description for multimedia content and providing keyboard accessibility.

The Department recommends the following:

• Establish Web Accessibility Policies and Procedures.  Agencies that have not already done so should establish web accessibility policies and procedures to ensure that web developers follow the requirements of the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards so as to ensure that their web pages (both public and private) are accessible to people with disabilities.

• Ensure that Web Accessibility Policies and Procedures Include Special Topics.  Agencies should ensure that their web accessibility policies and procedures include guidance to ensure that frequently used elements on their websites are accessible.  Guidance should include, among other things, Adobe Acrobat files (.pdfs), video and audio multimedia content (closed captioning, open captioning, and audio description), JavaScript or other scripting languages, word processing files, data tables, skip navigation links, and online electronic forms.

• Test Accessibility of Agency Web Pages.  Agencies should include in their web accessibility policies and procedures a process to routinely and consistently test their web pages for accessibility.  The most effective way to determine whether a web page is accessible to people with disabilities is to use both automated and manual testing.  Manual testing should be based on a consistent test process and should rely primarily on code inspection to ensure that the web page is consistent with the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards.  Also, agencies can improve accessibility and usabilty of a web page by including people with disabilities in the testing process using screen readers and other assistive technologies prior to posting.  Agencies should establish policies and procedures that require both methods of testing web pages.
• Publish Web Accessibility Statements.  Agencies should develop and publish web accessibility statements on their websites to provide transparency and information regarding the website’s accessibility.  The web accessibility statements should address the agency’s web accessibility policy, availability of accessible features, and testing and remediation process.

• Publish E-Mail Addresses.  Agencies should designate and advertise e-mail addresses on their websites to allow persons with disabilities to inform the agencies of accessibility problems encountered on their websites.  Agencies can also use e-mail addresses to accept requests from persons with disabilities for information and documentation in alternate formats.

5. Inter - and Intra-Agency Coordination

One significant challenge posed by Section 508 is the need for coordination between those with technological expertise and those with knowledge of disability access issues.  Agencies should improve inter- and intra-agency coordination and collaboration among information technology personnel, procurement officials, EEO or civil rights professionals, end users with disabilities, and the private sector.

In 2010, the U.S. Chief Information Officers Council (CIOC) formed an Accessibility Committee to serve as an interagency forum to improve the federal government’s implementation of Section 508.  Working in conjunction with the U.S. Access Board, the Department of Justice, and the General Services Administration, the Accessibility Committee hopes to provide a forum for federal agencies, disability advocacy groups, industry, and academic stakeholders to enable and support the federal government’s implementation of Section 508.  The Accessibility Committee has begun to develop and share best practices that address, among other things, Section 508 governance, procurement, testing, and training.

The formation of the CIOC Accessibility Committee is a positive step forward in promoting increased inter-agency coordination and awareness.  At the same time, agencies will need to improve intra-agency coordination and collaboration among agency components that are responsible for information technology, procurement, and enforcement of EEO or civil rights laws.  The participation of the agency’s EEO or civil rights office is especially important.  For most agencies, Section 508 implementation has been the province of components that are responsible for the agency’s information technology or procurement.  Today, some agencies view Section 508 as a set of technical requirements that they must comply with when developing, procuring, maintaining and using EIT.  Section 508 is a federal civil rights law but agencies’ EEO or civil rights offices have been mostly absent from the implementation process.

The Department recommends the following to increase coordination and cooperation:

• Revive the Interagency Disability Coordinating Council.  The Department should revive the Interagency Disability Coordinating Council (IDCC), as set forth in 29 U.S.C. §794c, with the Attorney General as Chair, consistent with Executive Order 12250, 29 U.S.C. §2000d-1.

• Issue Section 508 Model Complaint Resolution Policies and Procedures.  The Department, in consultation with the IDCC after it is reconvened, should review agencies’ complaint resolution policies and procedures for Section 508 and recommend improvements and best practices.

• Issue Guidance Clarifying the Relationship Among Sections 501, 504, and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act.  The IDCC should issue guidance clarifying the relationship among Sections 501, 504, and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act.

II. General Processes for Section 508 Implementation

This section of the survey focused on general processes for implementing Section 508 within the agencies and their components.  Specifically, this section sought information regarding policies, processes, and procedures that agencies used to ensure compliance with the full requirements of Section 508, including EIT that is procured, developed, maintained or used by federal agencies.  In addition, agencies were asked questions regarding their budget or spending on information technology (IT), development of software and web applications, and training.  Also, agencies were asked several questions regarding Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 504).

The general processes section focused on ten specific areas:

• Section 508 Policy
• Section 508 Office or Program
• Spending on IT and Section 508
• Software and Other EIT
• Section 508 Technical Requirements
• Section 508 Functional Performance Requirements
• Section 508 Information and Documentation Requirements
• Section 508 Training
• Section 508 Challenges
• Other Rehabilitation Act Issues

The following provides a brief summary of findings for each of the ten subsections of Section II – General Processes for Section 508 Implementation.

• Section 508 Policy.  Slightly more than fifty percent of agency components established a formal, written policy to implement and comply with Section 508.  The head of an agency or the agency’s office of the chief information officer established the majority of the agency components’ Section 508 policies.  Most Section 508 policies identified the office or person responsible, and defined some roles and responsibilities for Section 508 coordinators, requiring officials, contracting officers, application developers, and web content managers and authors.

• Section 508 Office or Program.  Nearly seventy percent of agency components appointed a Section 508 coordinator.  Also, nearly thirty-five percent of agency components established a Section 508 office or program.  On average, agency components assigned 2.5 full time equivalents (FTEs) and allocated a budget of $413,497 to their Section 508 office or program. [8]  However, it is important to note that the average budget for larger agency components was significantly higher than the average budget for smaller agency components, which has an effect of skewing the figure.  Across all agency size categories, the median budget was $35,000 for their Section 508 office or program.  In addition, the most common service provided by agency components that had established a Section 508 office or program was to evaluate the accessibility of websites, and the least common service provided was to evaluate the accessibility of hardware.

• Spending on IT and Section 508.  Agency components reported an average IT budget of $390,024,414.  However, it is important to note that the average IT budget for larger agency components is significantly higher than the average IT budget for smaller agency components, which has the effect of skewing the figure.  Also, nearly seventy percent of agency components reported allocating or using resources to implement and comply with Section 508.  However, eighty-five percent of agency components did not track their spending to implement and comply with Section 508.  Those agency components that tracked their spending, reported an average budget or spending of $5,785,963 to implement and comply with Section 508. [9]  However, again, it is important to note that the average budget for larger agency components was significantly higher than the average budget for smaller agency components, which has the effect of skewing the figure.  Across all agency size categories, the median spending was $140,000 to implement and comply with Section 508.  The most common service provided by agency components, regardless of whether they had established a Section 508 office or program, was to evaluate the accessibility of websites, and the least common service provided was to evaluate the accessibility of hardware.

• Software and Other EIT.  Seventy-five percent of agency components reported developing software or web applications. About forty percent of these agency components reported establishing a policy to ensure the accessibility of software, including testing developed software for Section 508 compliance.  Nearly seventy-one percent of agency components reported developing training or informational videos or multimedia productions. About thirty percent of these agency components reported establishing a policy to ensure the accessibility of videos or multimedia productions, including testing developed videos or multimedia production for Section 508 compliance.

• Section 508 Technical Requirements.  The percentage of agency components or parts of their components establishing policies to comply with each of the six subparts of the technical requirements of the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards varied from forty-three percent for self-contained, closed products to sixty percent for websites.

• Section 508 Functional Performance Requirements.  Nearly fifty percent of agency components or parts of their components established formal, written policies to comply with the functional performance requirements in Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards.  Thirty-three percent of agency components reported not establishing a policy and had no plans to establish a policy to comply with the functional performance requirements.

• Section 508 Information and Documentation Requirements.  Website, E-mail, and large print were the most common alternate formats used by agency components to provide individuals with disabilities access to information and documentation for EIT products.  Braille was the least common alternate formats used by agency components.  Similarly, website, E-mail, TTY, and sign language were the most common alternate methods used by agency components.  Mobile texting was the least common alternate method used by agency components.

• Section 508 Training.  Nearly sixty percent of agency components reported not providing Section 508 training to their employees.  Slightly more than forty percent of agency components reported providing Section 508 training.  Agency components reported providing the most average hours of training to Section 508 coordinators (a little more than four hours) and the fewest average hours of training to IT help desk staff (less than one hour).  Very small agency components reported the highest number of average hours of Section 508 training for many of the available types of employees.  A majority of agency components that offered training reported online training as the most common method for providing Section 508 training.  By contrast, mid-size agency components reported classroom instruction and conferences as their most common method for providing Section 508 training.

• Section 508 Challenges.  Many agency components reported lack of resources, lack of general awareness, and lack of training as the three most common challenges in implementing and complying with Section 508.  By contrast, lack of management support was the least common challenge.  Interestingly, fifteen percent of agency components could not identify any challenges in implementing and complying with Section 508.

• Other Rehabilitation Act Issues.  Nearly forty percent of agency components that provided federal financial assistance reported not having any knowledge whether recipients of federal financial assistance were required to ensure accessibility of websites and other EITs.  Another twenty-four percent of agency components did not require recipients to ensure accessibility of websites and other EITs.  Thirty-five percent of agency components or parts of their components reported requiring recipients of federal financial assistance to ensure accessibility of websites and other EITs.  Among these agency components, a majority reported establishing an EIT accessibility policy or parts of their components establishing an EIT accessibility policy for recipients of federal financial assistance.

A. Section 508 Policy

Agencies and their components were asked questions relating to their policies and procedures to implement Section 508.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section. 

The following provides a summary description of the agency components’ responses:

• Slightly more than fifty percent of agency components reported they established a formal, written policy to implement and comply with Section 508.

• The majority of the Section 508 policies were established by the head of the agency or the agency’s office of the chief information officer.

• Most agency components reported that their Section 508 policy identified the office or person responsible for implementing and complying with Section 508.

• A majority of the agency components reported that their Section 508 policy defined some roles and responsibilities for Section 508 coordinators, requiring officials, contracting officers, application developers, and web content managers and authors.

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Section 508 Policy by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Section 508 Policy by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Section 508 Policy – Office or Person in Charge by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

Section 508 Policy on Roles and Responsibilities by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

B. Section 508 Office or Program

Agencies and their components were asked questions relating to their Section 508 office or program.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 81 agency components did not complete this section because they have not established a Section 508 office or program.

The following provides a summary description of the agency components’ responses:

• Nearly seventy percent of agency components had appointed a Section 508 coordinator.

• Nearly thirty-five percent of agency components had established a Section 508 office or program. Another twenty-five percent of components did not establish an office or program, but utilized their parent agency’s Section 508 office or program.

• Agency components that established a Section 508 office or program reported assigning 2.5 average number of FTEs and allocated an average budget of $413,497 for their Section 508 office or program. [10]  However, it is important to note that the average budget for larger agency components was significantly higher than the average budget for smaller agency components, which has the effect of skewing the figure.  Across all agency size categories, the median budget was $35,000 for their Section 508 office or program.

• Agency components reported that the most common service provided by their Section 508 office or program was to evaluate the accessibility of websites.  By contrast, the least common service provided by agency components’ Section 508 office or program was to evaluate the accessibility of hardware.

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Section 508 Coordinator by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Section 508 Office or Program by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Section 508 Office or Program FTEs by Number of FTEs Among Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Section 508 Office or Program Budget by Average Number of Dollars Among Differently-Sized Agencies

Overall, the most common services provided by an agency component’s Section 508 office or program were to evaluate website accessibility (74.5%), provide training (69.1%), and assist acquisition officials prepare Section 508 language in EIT contracts (65.5%).  By contrast, the least common service provided by an agency component was to evaluate hardware accessibility (40.0%).  Interestingly, a higher percentage of large (73.3%) and small (83.3%) agency components assisted developers to design software that complies with Section 508 than very large, mid-size, or very small agency components.  Also, a higher percentage of small (83.3%) and very small (70.0%) agency components created or repaired electronic documents to comply with Section 508 than very large, large, or mid-size agency components.

The agency components reported the following:

Section 508 Services Provided by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

C. Spending on IT and Section 508

Agencies and their components were asked questions relating to their investments in IT and Section 508.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 35 agency components did not complete this section because the information was classified.

The following is a summary of agency components’ responses:

• Agency components reported an average IT budget or spending of $390,024,414.  However, it is important to note that the average IT budget for larger agency components is significantly higher than the average IT budget for smaller agency components, which has the effect of skewing the figure.  The amount of the IT budget or spending was generally relative to the agency size categories:  the larger the agency, the larger the IT budget or spending.  There was one exception to this trend, mid-size agencies reported an average IT budget or spending of $129,835,018, which was more than double the average IT budget or spending of large agencies.

• Nearly seventy percent of agency components reported allocating or using resources to implement and comply with Section 508.

• Eighty-five percent of agency components reported not tracking their spending to implement and comply with Section 508.  About fifteen percent of agency components reported tracking their spending.

• Agency components that tracked their spending reported an average budget or spending of $5,785,963 to implement and comply with Section 508. [13]  However, it is important to note that the average budget for larger agency components was significantly higher than the average budget for smaller agency components, which has the effect of skewing the figure.  Across all agency size categories, the median budget or spending was $140,000 to implement and comply with Section 508.

• Agency components, regardless of whether they established a Section 508 office or program, reported that the most common service provided was to evaluate websites for Section 508 compliance.  By contrast, the least common service provided was to evaluate hardware.

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

IT Budget or Spending by Average Number of Dollars Among Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Section 508 Spending Tracking System by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Section 508 Spending by Average Number of Dollars Among Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

Section 508 Spending by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Section 508 Spending by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

Across all agency size categories, the most common services provided by agency components were to evaluate websites (81.3%), create or repair electronic documents (70.3%), assist developers to design software (66.1%), evaluate software (64.6%), and assist acquisition officials prepare Section 508 language in EIT contracts (64.6%).  By contrast, the least common service provided by an agency component was to evaluate hardware (40.6%).  Interestingly, a higher percentage of mid-size agency components provided more of the following services than agency components in all other size categories:  assist acquisition officials prepare EIT contracts, assist developers design accessible software, remediate electronic documents, and evaluate websites.

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Section 508 Services Provided by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

D. Software and Other EIT

Agencies and their components were asked questions relating to their development of software and web applications.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 79 agency components did not complete this section because they did not develop software or web applications.

The following provides a brief summary of the agency components’ responses:

• Seventy-five percent of agency components reported developing software or web applications either in-house or by contractors.  But only about forty percent of these agency components reported establishing a policy to ensure the accessibility of software, including testing developed software for Section 508 compliance.

• Nearly seventy-one percent of agency components reported developing training or informational videos or multimedia productions either in-house or by contractors.  But only about thirty percent of these agency components reported establishing a policy to ensure the accessibility of videos or multimedia productions, including testing developed videos or multimedia production for Section 508 compliance.

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Software or Application Development by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Software or Application Development Policy by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

Software or Application Testing Policy by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Video or Multimedia Production by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Video or Multimedia Production Policy by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Video or Multimedia Production Testing Policy by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

E. Section 508 Technical Requirements

The Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards contain technical requirements for six specific technology areas:  software applications and operating systems, web-based information or applications, telecommunication products, video and multimedia products, self contained, closed products (e.g. , information kiosks, calculators, and fax machines), and desktop and portable computers.  In this section, agencies and their components were asked questions relating to their policies and procedures to comply with the technical requirements of the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.

The following provides a summary description of the agency components’ responses:

• Software.  Nearly fifty-four percent of agency components reported establishing a policy or parts of their components establishing a policy to comply with the technical requirements for software.  Twenty-four percent of agency components reported not establishing a policy and had no plans to establish a policy to comply with the technical requirements for software.

• Websites.  Nearly sixty percent of agency components reported establishing a policy or parts of their components establishing a policy to comply with the technical requirements for websites.  Twenty-three percent of agency components reported not establishing a policy and had no plans to establish a policy to comply with the technical requirements for websites.

• Telecommunication Products.  Forty-eight percent of agency components reported establishing a policy or parts of their components establishing a policy to comply with the technical requirements for telecommunication products.  Nearly twenty-four percent of agency components reported not establishing a policy and had no plans to establish a policy to comply with the technical requirements for telecommunication products.

• Video and Multimedia Products.  Nearly forty-six percent of agency components reported establishing a policy or parts of their components establishing a policy to comply with the technical requirements for video and multimedia products.  Twenty-four percent of agency components reported not establishing a policy and had no plans to establish a policy to comply with the technical requirements for video and multimedia products.

• Self Contained, Closed Products.  Forty-three percent of agency components reported establishing a policy or parts of their components establishing a policy to comply with the technical requirements for self contained, closed products.  Twenty-one percent of agency components reported not establishing a policy and had no plans to establish a policy to comply with the technical requirements for self contained, closed products.

• Desktop and Portable Computers.  Fifty percent of agency components reported establishing a policy or parts of their components establishing a policy to comply with the technical requirements for desktop and portable computers.  Twenty-seven percent of agency components reported not establishing a policy and had no plans to establish a policy to comply with the technical requirements for desktop and portable computers.

Section 508 Standards on Software by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

Section 508 Standards on Websites by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Section 508 Standards on Telecommunication Products by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Section 508 Standards on Video/Multimedia Products by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Section 508 Standards on Self Contained, Closed Products by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Section 508 Standards on Computers by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

F. Section 508 Functional Performance Requirements

The Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards contain functional performance requirements that are intended for overall product evaluation and for technologies or components for which there is no specific requirement under the technical requirements.  In this section, agencies and their components were asked a question relating to their policies and procedures to comply with the functional performance requirements of the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.

Functional Performance Criteria by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

G. Section 508 Information and Documentation Requirements

Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards require agency components to use alternate formats and alternate methods in providing individuals with disabilities access to information and documentation for EIT products.  Agencies and their components were asked to identify the alternate formats and alternate methods used by their components.  In this section, agency components were allowed to select any number of available options.  Thus, the total of percentages within each column of the tables may exceed 100%.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.

In general, agency components identified varying demand for each of the available alternate formats and alternate methods. [15]  Overall, website, E-mail, and large print were the most common alternate formats used by agency components.  Braille was the least common alternate formats used by agency components.  Similarly, website, E-mail, TTY, and sign language were the most common alternate methods used by agency components.  Mobile texting was the least common alternate methods used by agency components.

A total of 122 agency components (38.4%) were unable to identify any alternate formats used because they did not track this information.  Another 113 agency components (35.5%) could not identify any alternate formats used because they reported that no requests were received.  In addition, 38 agency components (11.9%) could not identify any alternate formats used because the components were not responsible for providing EIT product support.  In general, agency components reported different demand for each of the available alternate formats.  Overall, website (21.1%), E-mail (17.3%), and large print (15.1%) were the most popular alternate formats used by agency components for EIT product support documentation.  By contrast, Braille (8.5%) was the least popular alternate format used by an agency component.

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Product Support Documentation Provided in Alternate Formats  by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

A total of 128 agency components (40.3%) were unable to identify any alternate formats used because they did not track this information.  Another 119 agency components (37.4%) could not identify any alternate formats used because they reported that no requests were received.  In addition, 35 agency components (11.0%) could not identify any alternate formats used because the components were not responsible for providing EIT product support.  Agency components’ responses to this question were very similar to the responses in Question 1.  Again, website (18.9%), E-mail (17.3%), and large print (13.5%) were the most common alternate formats used by agency components for descriptions of EIT accessibility features.  Braille (7.2%) was the least common alternate format used by an agency component.  The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Accessibility/Compatibility Descriptions Provided in Alternate Formats

by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

In addition, a total of 120 agency components (37.7%) were unable to identify any alternate methods used because they did not track this information.  Another 102 agency components (32.1%) could not identify any alternate methods used because they reported that no requests were received.  Thirty-five agency components (11.0%) could not identify any alternate methods used because the components were not responsible for providing EIT product support.  In general, while reported responses varied among agency size categories, providing information by website (19.8%), E-mail (18.2%), TTY (17.0%), sign language (17.0%), and voice (15.1%) were reported to be the most popular options.  By contrast, mobile texting (5.7%) was the least popular alternate method used by an agency component.

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Accessibility/Compatibility Descriptions Provided in Alternate Methods

by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

A total of 111 agency components (34.9%) were unable to identify any types of accommodations used because they did not track this information.  Another 89 agency components (28.0%) could not identify any types of accommodations used because they reported that no requests were received.  In addition, 31 agency components (9.7%) could not identify any types of accommodations used because the components were not responsible for providing EIT product support.  In general, agency components reported different demand for each of the available types of accommodations.  Overall, E-mail (28.9%), website (28.0%), and voice (26.1%) were the most common types of accommodations used by agency components.  By contrast, mobile texting (7.2%) was the least common type of accommodation used by an agency component.

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Communication Accommodations Provided in Alternate Methods

by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

H. Section 508 Training

Agencies and their components were asked questions regarding the Section 508 training of various employees in their workforce.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 187 agency components did not complete this section because they did not offer Section 508 training to their employees.

The following provides a brief summary of the agency components’ responses:

• Nearly sixty percent of agency components reported not providing Section 508 training to their employees.  Slightly more than forty percent of agency components reported providing Section 508 training.

• Agency components that offered training reported that Section 508 coordinators, purchase card holders, and website developers were the three most often identified employees to receive mandatory Section 508 training.

• Agency components that offered training reported providing the most average hours of training to Section 508 coordinators (a little more than four hours) and the fewest average hours of training to IT help desk staff (less than one hour).  Very small agency components reported the highest number of average hours of Section 508 training for many of the available types of employees.

• Sixty-seven percent of agency components that offered training reported online training as the most common method for providing Section 508 training.  By contrast, mid-size agency components reported classroom instruction and conferences as their most common method for providing Section 508 training.

• A majority of agency components that offered training reported Section 508 statute, Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards, and procurement of accessible EIT among the three most common subject areas covered by their Section 508 training.  Captioning was the least common subject area covered by agency components’ Section 508 training.

The agency components reported the following:

Section 508 Training Provided by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Mandatory Section 508 Training by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Section 508 Training Provided to Personnel by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Section 508 Training Methods by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Section 508 Training Subject Matter by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

I. Section 508 Challenges

Agencies and their components were asked a question regarding challenges in implementing and complying with Section 508.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Section 508 Challenges by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

J. Other Rehabilitation Act Issues

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in any program or activity that receives financial assistance from any federal agency.  This means recipients of federal financial assistance must provide individuals with disabilities an opportunity to participate in and benefit from aids, benefits and services that are equal to and as effective as that provided to individuals without disabilities.  Today, due to advances in technology, recipients of federal financial assistance may provide benefits and services via websites and other EITs.  In this section, agencies and their components were asked questions regarding their policies of requiring recipients of federal financial assistance to ensure accessibility of their websites and other EITs.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 195 agency components did not complete this section because they did not provide any federal financial assistance to recipients.

The following provides a brief summary of the agency components’ responses:

• Nearly forty percent of agency components that provided federal financial assistance reported not having any knowledge whether recipients of federal financial assistance were required to ensure accessibility of websites and other EITs.  Another twenty-four percent of agency components did not require recipients to ensure accessibility of websites and other EITs.  Thirty-five percent of agency components required recipients or parts of their components required recipients to ensure accessibility of websites and other EITs.
• Among the agency components that required recipients to ensure accessibility of EITs, a majority reported that they used the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards as the standard for compliance by recipients of federal financial assistance.
• Among the agency components that required recipients to ensure accessibility of EITs, a majority reported that they had established an EIT accessibility policy or parts of their components had established an EIT accessibility policy for recipients of federal financial assistance.

The agency components reported the following:

EIT Accessibility Under Section 504 by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

EIT Standards Used Under Section 504 by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Section 504 EIT Accessibility Policy by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

III. Procurement

Procurement policies and practices are critically important to an agency component’s compliance with Section 508 for two reasons.  First, Section 508 authorizes civil actions and administrative complaints by persons with disabilities when federal departments and agencies procure electronic and information technology that is not compliant with the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards. [16]  Second, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) was amended to incorporate the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards, and the amendment became effective on June 25, 2001.

The procurement section of the survey focused on five areas:

• Contract Requirements
• Market Research
• Decision Documentation
• Exceptions and Commercial Non-Availability Determinations
• Pre or Post Award Protests

The following provides a brief summary of findings for each of the five subsections of Section III – Procurement.

• Contract Requirements.  Agency components most often relied on basic contract requirements (such as general language requiring Section 508 compliance).  Also, agency components most often relied on reviewing the materials the vendor submitted rather than actual product testing to validate Section 508 compliance.
• Market Research.  Agency components reported that the two most popular means of conducting market research were via internet research and vendor information (e.g., Voluntary Product Accessibility Template[17] or Government Product Accessibility Template).

• Decision Documentation.  Agency components most often conveyed their decisions regarding Section 508 applicability or exceptions on EIT procurements in writing.  However, only a small number of agency components have established formalized systems for tracking and documenting Section 508 decisions.

• Exceptions and Commercial Non-Availability Determinations.  Nearly forty percent of agency components reported establishing a formal, written policy to document Section 508 exceptions claimed on EIT procurements.  Many of these agency components reported that their EIT procurements met the Section 508 requirements and that reliance on an exception was unnecessary.  Agencies made occasional use of the available exceptions and reported most frequently using the exception for products located in non-occupiable locations. [18]  Where an undue burden determination was necessary, forty-six percent of agency components required approval at the top agency or top component level, while nearly twenty percent of agency components allowed the contracting official to make undue burden determinations without higher approval.

• Pre or Post Award Protests.  One component in a very large agency reported receiving and sustaining one procurement protest based on Section 508.

A. Contract Requirements

Agencies and their components were asked questions relating to how Section 508 requirements were met in their EIT procurements.  This section included specific questions covering the initial contract process through the assessment of deliverables.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 57 agency components did not complete this section because they were not responsible for EIT procurements.

In general, agency components reported reliance on simple Section 508 tools, such as standard clauses and basic conformance materials from vendors.  Seventy percent of agency components reported using general language requiring Section 508 compliance as the most common means of incorporating Section 508 requirements in their solicitations.  Sixty percent of agency components reported reviewing the materials vendor submitted as the most common means of evaluating EIT related deliverables.  Surprisingly, a small number of agency components reported not incorporating Section 508 requirements in their solicitations, and not conducting any evaluation before accepting EIT related deliverables.

Across all agency size categories, general language requiring Section 508 compliance was the most common means of incorporating Section 508 requirements in their solicitations, used by 184 agency components (70.5%).  Specific applicable requirements from Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards were the second most common means of incorporating Section 508 requirements in their solicitations, used by 125 agency components (47.9%).  VPATs were the least common method of incorporating Section 508 requirements in their solicitations, used by 75 agency components (28.7%).  Surprisingly, 20 agency components (7.7%) did not incorporate Section 508 requirements in their solicitations for EIT procurements.

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Section 508 Incorporation Methods by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Section 508 Requirements in Source Selection Criteria by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

Testing Methods by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

B. Market Research

Agencies and their components were asked a question relating to market research in complying with Section 508 for EIT procurements.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 57 agency components did not complete this section because they were not responsible for EIT procurements.

Market Research Source by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

C. Decision Documentation

Agencies and their components were asked questions relating to their methods to document decisions regarding Section 508 applicability or exceptions on EIT procurements.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 57 agency components did not complete this section because they were not responsible for EIT procurements.

In general, a majority of agency components reported that requiring officials convey their decisions regarding Section 508 applicability or exceptions on EIT procurements in writing.  However, twenty-one percent of agency components reported that they did not document decisions at all.  In addition, a small number of agency components reported using an electronic system for tracking and documenting Section 508 decisions.

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Decision Documentation Methods by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Decision Documentation for Micro-Purchases by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Decision Documentation Tracking by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

Automated Decision Documentation Tracking System by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

D. Exceptions and Commercial Non-Availability Determinations

Agencies and their components were asked questions relating to their use of Section 508 exceptions on EIT procurements.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 57 agency components did not complete this section because they were not responsible for EIT procurements.

In general, nearly forty percent of agency components established a formal, written policy to document Section 508 exceptions claimed on EIT procurements.  Many of these agency components reported EIT products they procured fully met the Section 508 requirements and that reliance on an exception was unnecessary.  Where an exception was used, the exception most frequently claimed by agency components was the exception for product located in non-occupiable locations. [19]  The exception least frequently claimed by agency components was the exception for undue burden.  In addition, with regard to the level of review required for undue burden determinations – forty-six percent of agency components required approval at the top agency or top component level, while nearly twenty percent of agency components allowed the requiring or procurement official to make undue burden determinations without higher approval.

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Decision Documentation Policy by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Exceptions Used by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

Specifically, the agency components’ provided the following responses:

Minimal Level of Approval for Undue Burden Exception by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Minimal Level of Approval for Exceptions Other than Undue Burden

by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

E. Pre or Post Award Protests

Agencies and their components were asked questions relating to protests on EIT procurements.  A total of 102 agency components that established a decision documentation policy responded to the survey questions.  The agency components’ responses are summarized below:

• Questions 1 and 2 asked whether agency components received any procurement protests, and if so, to estimate the number of procurement protests filed claiming that the component did not properly follow the requirements of Section 508.  One very large agency component reported receiving one procurement protest based on Section 508.

• Questions 3 and 4 asked whether agency components sustained any procurement protests, and if so, to estimate the number of procurement protests sustained based on Section 508 related issues.  One very large agency component reported sustaining one procurement protest based on Section 508.

IV. Administrative Complaints and Civil Actions

Persons with disabilities can file administrative complaints or civil lawsuits on or after June 21, 2001.  29 U.S.C. § 794d(f)(1)(B).  Section 794d(f)(1(B) provides:

This subsection shall apply only to electronic and information technology that is procured by a Federal department or agency not less than 6 months after the date of publication by the Access Board of final standards described in subsection (a)(2). [21]

By statute, persons with disabilities who file administrative complaints alleging that an agency’s procurement has violated Section 508 must file it with the agency alleged to be in noncompliance.  29 U.S.C. § 794d(f)(2).  Specifically, section 794d(f)(2) provides:

Complaints filed under paragraph (1) shall be filed with the Federal department or agency alleged to be in noncompliance.  The Federal department or agency receiving the complaint shall apply the complaint procedures established to implement section 794 of this title for resolving allegations of discrimination in a federally conducted program or activity.

Thus, Section 508 adopts the section 504 complaint processes of the federal agencies. [22]

This section of the survey focused on administrative complaints and civil actions related to Section 508 within the agency components.  Two specific areas were analyzed:

• Policies and procedures for processing Section 508 complaints
• Number of complaints and civil actions

The following provides a brief summary of findings for Section IV – Administrative Complaints and Civil Actions.

• Policies and Procedures for Processing Section 508 Complaints.  Slightly more than thirty percent of agency components had already established an appropriate set of policies and procedures specifically to process Section 508 complaints.  Fifty-seven percent of the agency components were either using existing Section 504 complaint processes or some other process.  Also, a majority of agency components reported success at incorporating ADR into their complaint processes, and about half of the agency components widely disseminated complaint filing information on their website.

• Number of complaints and civil actions.  Agency components reported that 140 administrative complaints and seven civil actions were filed against agency components alleging a violation of Section 508. [23]  Most of the administrative complaints and civil action were filed against very large and large agency components.

A. Policies and Procedures for Processing Section 508 Complaints

Agencies and their components were asked questions regarding their policies and procedures for processing complaints under Section 508.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 128 agency components did not complete this section because they were not responsible for receiving or processing their own administrative complaints under the Rehabilitation Act.

In general, slightly more than thirty percent of agency components had already established an appropriate set of policies and procedures specifically to process Section 508 complaints.  Fifty-seven percent of the agency components were either using existing Section 504 complaint processes or some other process.  Also, a majority of agency components reported success at incorporating ADR into their complaint processes, and about half of the agency components widely disseminated complaint filing information on their website.

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Section 508 Complaint Process by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

ADR Incorporation by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Complaint Filing Information Availability by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

B. Number of Complaints and Civil Actions

Agencies and their components were asked questions regarding administrative complaints or civil actions filed against the components alleging a violation of Section 508.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, 187 agency components did not complete this section because they did not offer Section 508 training to their employees.

Question 1 - 5 asked agency components to estimate the number of administrative complaints and civil actions filed, assessed, and resolved.  Agency components were asked to answer the following questions using information since June 21, 2001, the effective date of the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards.  Overall, agency components reported that 140 administrative complaints and seven civil actions were filed against agency components alleging a violation of Section 508.  Most of the administrative complaints and civil action were filed against very large and large agency components.

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Administrative Complaints and Civil Actions by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

V. Website Compliance

This section of the survey focused on policies and practices established by agency components to ensure accessibility of their websites.  This section also was designed to evaluate whether an agency component’s web pages, web-based forms, and web-based applications were accessible to people with disabilities.  Specifically, this section was divided into two areas concerning website compliance:

• Web Policies and Practices
• Four Representative Web Pages

The following provides a general summary of findings for Section V – Website Compliance.

• Web Policies and Practices.  Nearly ninety percent of agency components reported having control over their website development and maintenance, and seventy percent of these agency components reported establishing formal, written web accessibility policies.  Agency components also reported that Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) files and video and audio multimedia content were the most frequently used content on their websites, and a majority of agency components reported that their web accessibility policies addressed the use of Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) files and video and audio multimedia content.  In addition, almost fifty-eight percent of agency components reported performing routine automated and/or manual evaluation and remediation on their websites.

• Four Representative Web Pages.  Agency components reported that their web pages, web-based forms, and web-based applications were generally accessible to persons with disabilities.  A majority of agency components reported success in using alternative text attribute or other descriptive elements to represent non-text elements (images).  Also, a majority of agency components reported success in identifying row and column headers for data tables and associating data and header cells.  A majority of agency components reported that their forms permitted users of assistive technology to access the information, field elements, and functionality required for completion and submission of the form.  In addition, a majority of agency components reported that their applications provided sufficient information about user interface elements (such as check boxes, radio buttons, menus, toolbars, dialog and popup windows and controls) to assistive technology.  Agency components did, however, report some difficulty in providing captioning, audio description, and keyboard accessibility.

A. Web Policies and Practices

Agencies and their components were asked questions regarding their policies and practices for ensuring that their websites are accessible to people with disabilities.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, ten agency components did not complete this section because they did not have a website.

The following provides a brief summary of the agency components’ responses:

• Nearly ninety percent of agency components reported creating and/or maintaining their own websites, and seventy percent of these agency components reported establishing formal, written web accessibility policies.

• Agency components reported that Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) files and video and audio multimedia content were the most frequently used content on their websites, and a majority of agency components reported that their web accessibility policies addressed the use of Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) files and video and audio multimedia content.

• Almost fifty-eight percent of agency components reported performing routine automated and/or manual evaluation and remediation on their websites.  Specifically, twenty-eight percent of agency components performed both automated and manual evaluation, while twenty-four percent of agency components performed only manual evaluation, and six percent of agency components performed only automated evaluation.

• Nearly seventy-three percent of agency components reported designating and widely advertising e-mail addresses on their websites to allow people with disabilities to inform the agency components of accessibility problems encountered on their websites.

The agency components reported the following:

Website by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Website Creation and Maintenance by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Website Elements by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

Specifically, the agency components provided the following responses:

Section 508 Web Policy by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Section 508 Web Policy by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Section 508 Web Policy on Website Elements by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

Section 508 Web Policy on Testing by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Designated E-Mail Address by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

B. Four Representative Web Pages

Agencies and their components were asked to evaluate the accessibility of their Internet home pages, Intranet home pages, web-based forms, and web-based applications.  A total of 318 agency components participated in this section.  However, some agency components did not complete parts of this section because they did not have an Internet home page, Intranet home page, web-based form, or web-based application.

The following provides a brief summary of the agency components’ responses:

• Agency components reported very similar findings for their external Internet and internal Intranet home pages.  More than eighty percent of agency components reported either complying with the web requirements in the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards or that the requirements were not applicable.  For example, slightly more than eighty percent of agency components reported the use of alternative text attribute or other descriptive elements to represent non-text elements (images) on their external Internet home pages, while five percent of agency components reported that this requirement was not applicable.  Also, slightly more than fifty percent of agency components reported identifying row and column headers for data tables on their external Internet home pages, while forty percent of agency components reported that this requirement was not applicable.  Agency components did, however, report some difficulty in providing captioning and audio description for multimedia content.

• More than eighty-five percent of agency components reported either complying with the requirements in the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards for web-based forms or that the requirements were not applicable.  For example, seventy-five percent agency components reported the use of alternative text attribute or other descriptive elements to represent non-text elements on their web-based forms, while almost ten percent of agency components reported that this requirement was not applicable.  Also, eighty percent of agency components reported that their forms permitted users of assistive technology to access the information, field elements, and functionality required for completion and submission of the form, while seven percent of agency components reported that this requirement was not applicable.  Agency components did, however, report some difficulty in providing keyboard accessibility.

• More than eighty percent of agency components reported either complying with the requirements in the Section 508 EIT Accessibility Standards for web-based applications or that the requirements were not applicable.  For example, seventy-five percent of agency components reported the use of alternative text attribute or other descriptive elements to represent non-text elements on their web-based applications, while almost seven percent of agency components reported that this requirement was not applicable.  Also, slightly more than sixty percent of agency components reported that their applications provided sufficient information about user interface elements (such as check boxes, radio buttons, menus, toolbars, dialog and popup windows and controls) to assistive technology, while slightly more than twenty percent of agency components reported that this requirement was not applicable.  Agency components did, however, report some difficulty in providing keyboard accessibility.

1. External Internet Home Page

A total of 289 agency components that use external Internet home pages responded to the following survey questions.

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Purpose of Web Page by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

Specifically, the agency components provided the following responses:

Text Equivalence by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Multimedia Content Accessibility Synchronization by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Appropriate Use of Color by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

Style Sheet Accessibility by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Server-Side Image Map Accessibility by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Use of Client-Side Image Map by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

Specifically, the agency components provided the following responses:

Row and Column Header Identification by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Data and Header Cell Association by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Frame Accessibility by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

Designed to Avoid Screen Flicker by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Alternative Text-Only Page Availability and Accessibility by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Java/Flash Accessibility by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

Specifically, the agency components provided the following responses:

Plug-In or Other Programmatic Object Accessibility by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Electronic Form Accessibility by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Navigational Link Skipping by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components reported the following:

Time Limits by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table summarizes the responses provided by the agency components:

Keyboard Accessibility by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Screen Focus by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

Specifically, the agency components provided the following responses:

Availability of User Interface Information by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The agency components’ responses are summarized in the table below:

Captioning by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

The following table provides the agency components’ responses:

Audio Description by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

2. Internal Intranet Home Page

A total of 260 agency components that use internal Intranet home pages responded to the following survey questions.

The following table provides the specific responses by the agency components:

Purpose of Web Page by Number (Percent) of Components in Differently-Sized Agencies

Specifically, the agency components provided the following responses: