results from a dbtac study on municipal compliance with the americans with disabilities act (ada)...

Results from a DBTAC study on municipalcompliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act

(ADA) and the effects on civic participation by citizenswith disabilities.

Paul M.A. Baker, Ph.D. Southeast Disability and Business Technical Assistance Center (SEDBTAC), Center for Advanced Communications Policy (CACP)Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, [email protected] James White, Ph.D. Center for Advanced Communications Policy (CACP)Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, [email protected]

Prepared for the 2011 RESNA Annual ConferenceJune 5 –8, 2011

Toronto, Ontario

mailto:[email protected]


http://www.sedbtac.org/index.php

Accessibility & Community Participation Project

Accessibility

Functional Access

Community Participation

Physical Access

ADA Implementation &

Oversight

Burton Blatt Institute at Syracuse University (NIDRR Grant # H133A060094) © 2010 All Rights Reserved.

The Experience of A

ccessibility

Site Reviews:Physical & Functional

Accessibility

Policymaker & ADA Coordinator

Interviews

Community Participation

Survey

Project Overview Multi-phase ADA compliance study

- (1) assessment of actual compliance with ADA requirements regarding physical barriers and program accessibility;

- (2) policy impact of community decision-makers that are not necessitated by the settlement agreements

- (3) community participation of persons with disabilities

Project Civic Access (PCA)– The U.S. Department of Justice PCA program works with local

governments to improve accessibility for individuals with disabilities under ADA titles II and III

– 170 settlement agreements with 156 localities in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico

Study: Actual (Assessment) and Policy (Context Interviews)

Research Approach

Participatory Action Research (PAR)– Partnership between those affected by an issue and scientists– Research focus stimulated by persons with disabilities– Research methods informed by persons with disabilities– Research findings owned by and relevant to multiple stakeholders

Mixed team of researchers with and without disabilities– Southeast DBTAC– Southeast DBTAC Affiliate Leadership Council– Syracuse University– Georgia Institute of Technology

Cross-disability local research teams conduct site reviews

Research Setting and Strategy

Originally 8 states in the Southeast Now 14 communities in 7 states* with varying degrees of accessibility

– Department of Justice Project Civic Access communities– Comparable communities without settlement agreements

5 Title II Site Reviews/community (survey, use services, evaluate accessibility)

– City Hall (raise issue to City Council)– Civic Center / Auditorium (attend event)– Public Library (search for book)– Park (have a picnic)– Police Services (emergency evacuation procedures)

Target of 4 policymaker interviews per community

50 community participation surveys per community

Policy Research Overview Public administrators and policy makers contacted, from each of six

low compliance and six control cities or counties, and one county public library system

Interviews queried status of ADA coordinators; understanding, perceptions and mechanics of compliance; accessibility of municipal services; levels of civic engagement/participation, and municipal sensitivity

External factors, including “churn” in city positions/job responsibilities, complicated identification of correct individual

A number of entities and individuals refused to take part in the interviews, often on legal advice

In each location a minimum of four individuals were identified and contacted, with an average of five phone or e-mail contacts made, per person: a very lengthy process!

Results SummaryCity/County/Library Completed

InterviewsSnapshot Analysis

Durham, NC (A) 3 Highly cooperativeGreensboro, NC 2 CooperativeBiloxi, MS (A) 2 Limited cooperation (impact of Katrina)Tupelo, MS 0 Refusal to cooperateMemphis, TN (A) 0 Refusal to cooperate, advice of counselKnoxville, TN 0 Unable to cooperate, ADA related lawsuit pendingBirmingham, AL (A) 2 Highly cooperativeMontgomery, AL 1 CooperativeCoral Gables, FL (A) 0 Refusal to cooperate, interview deniedNorth Miami Beach, FL 1 CooperativeFlorence County, SC (A) 1 CooperativeAiken County, SC 1 Uncooperative, information obtained outside

Daviess County PL, KY (A) 2 CooperativeHardin County PL, KY 0 Refusal to cooperate

A = Agreement

Does your city/county have an ADA Coordinator(s) in office now, and was the role appointed or competitive?

City/County/Library ADA Coordinator Appointed/CompetitiveDurham, NC (A) Yes CompetitiveGreensboro, NC Yes AppointedBiloxi, MS (A) Yes AppointedTupelo, MS No response UnknownMemphis, TN (A) Yes AppointedKnoxville, TN Yes CompetitiveBirmingham, AL (A) Yes AppointedMontgomery, AL Yes AppointedCoral Gables, FL (A) Yes AppointedNorth Miami Beach, FL No UnknownFlorence County, SC (A) Yes AppointedAiken County, SC Yes CompetitiveDaviess County PL, KY (A) Yes AppointedHardin County PL, KY No response Unknown

A = Agreement

What kind of training/qualification does the ADA Coordinator have, to help in knowing how to implement the law?

City/County/Library Training/Qualifications

Durham, NC (A) Member of Assoc. of ADA Coordinators

Greensboro, NC Runs a call center: includes disability questions

Biloxi, MS (A) None

Tupelo, MS Unknown

Memphis, TN (A) Unknown

Knoxville, TN Unknown

Birmingham, AL (A) Masters degree in special education, history of working with disabled

Montgomery, AL Training in ADA law and requirements for compliance

Coral Gables, FL (A) Unknown

North Miami Beach, FL Unknown

Florence County, SC (A) Unknown

Aiken County, SC Worked as ADA coordinator for a college

Daviess County PL, KY (A) State ADA coordinator is able to train and advise staff

Hardin County PL, KY Unknown

Please describe the ADA Coordinator role in terms of bureaucratic structure and reporting line

A = Agreement

City/County/Library Bureaucratic Structure/Reporting Line

Durham, NC (A) Mid-level Manager reports to Assist. Director of General Services

Greensboro, NC Works in Public Affairs Dept. reports to City Manager’s Office

Biloxi, MS (A) Downtown Services Manager reports to the Mayor

*Tupelo, MS Unknown

*Memphis, TN (A) Low/Mid-level Manager reports to Labor Relations Manager

*Knoxville, TN Mid-level Manager reports to Community Development Dep. Director

Birmingham, AL (A) Mid/High-Level Manager reports to Mayor’s Chief of Staff

Montgomery, AL Under Public Works Dept. reports to Public Works Director

*Coral Gables, FL (A) Unknown



Aiken County, SC Well Positioned in County Admin reports to Assist. County Admin.

Daviess County PL, KY (A) Appointed by Library Board Reports to Library Board

*Hardin County PL, KY Unknown

A = Agreement *= Interview Denied

Is there a city/county disability commission or committee?

A = Agreement

City/County/Library Commission/Committee

Durham, NC (A) Mayor’s Comm. on Persons with Disabilities , Parks and Rec Comm.

Greensboro, NC Mayor’s Comm. for Persons with Disabilities, Para-transit Comm.

Biloxi, MS (A) Mayor’s Awareness Committee

Tupelo, MS Unknown

Memphis, TN (A) Mayor’s Advisory Council for Citizens with Disabilities

Knoxville, TN Mayor’s Council on Disability Issues

Birmingham, AL (A) Committee meets once a month

Montgomery, AL Mayor’s Advisory Committee for Improved Accessibility

Coral Gables, FL (A) Coral Gables Advisory Board on Disability Affairs

North Miami Beach, FL No


Aiken County, SC Yes

Daviess County PL, KY (A) Used to be: No contact since we moved

Hardin County PL, KY Unknown


Please describe any ADA compliance specific training programs in place or planned for staff/elected officials.

A = Agreement

City/County/Library Compliance Training

Durham, NC (A) Train employees with slide show/interactive exercise

Greensboro, NC Unknown

Biloxi, MS (A) Trained during 5 year ADA process – Not now

*Tupelo, MS Unknown

*Memphis, TN (A) Unknown

*Knoxville, TN Unknown

Birmingham, AL (A) Part of report to Department of Justice

Montgomery, AL ADA related staff attend ADA continuing education programs




Aiken County, SC New manager training quarterly, compliance training every 3 years

Daviess County PL, KY (A) None



Please describe the level of interest on the part of elected officials in issues that impact the disability community.

A = Agreement

City/County/Library Level of Interest

Durham, NC (A) Council approves; have broad support from financial committee

Greensboro, NC Active disability community with reg. attendance at council meetings

Biloxi, MS (A) The Mayor is concerned about the impact

*Tupelo, MS Unknown



Birmingham, AL (A) Had council member in wheel chair; now council chambers are accessible, and awareness seems high

Montgomery, AL Medium interaction




Aiken County, SC Elected officials intermittently attend commission meetings

Daviess County PL, KY (A) Board member is attorney for mental health organization



What would the city find useful in terms of additional guidelines or support from the Department of Justice?

A = Agreement

City/County/Library DoJ Support

Durham, NC (A) Real life interpretation of ADA; Funding for compliance of old buildings

Greensboro, NC In-house ADA training for department managers

Biloxi, MS (A) Hands-on training (e.g. regional seminars or conferences)

*Tupelo, MS Unknown



Birmingham, AL (A) Presentations from DoJ to see what other cities are doing

Montgomery, AL Unknown




Aiken County, SC Emphasis on problems about physical disabilities

Daviess County PL, KY (A) Contact with other ADA coordinators



Preliminary Findings: ADA Coordinator is key Difficulties identifying policymakers/ADA coordinators

Difficulties interviewing some policymakers/ADA coordinators

Awareness: Difficulty in determining ADA compliance responsibility predictive indicator of general compliance attitude

Most ADA coordinators are appointed, not chosen through competition

ADA coordinators have no consistent training, and often have multiple responsibilities

Status of the ADA compliance person in the local government bureaucracy is important: most are mid-level; access to power is important

In many locations ADA coordinators’ responsibilities loosely defined: initiative and enterprise shown by the individual makes a big difference.

Despite a perceived lack of resources, some cities/counties show awareness of and sensitivity towards ADA implementation

Coordinators who are members of the ADA Coordinators Association more engaged and aware

None of the cities/counties had a firm grip on the costs associated with ADA compliance, beyond a general perception that it was expensive. Some saw it as an “unfunded mandate”

Elected officials reluctant to be interviewed, regarding ADA compliance as an area for specialists

Many requests for direct, relevant training and for help in interpretation of the requirements of the ADA: should become part of any recommendations for future action

Preliminary Findings: Confusion on ADA

Implications for Communities

Most locations that agreed to be interviewed were proactive in ADA implementation, but the goal of full accessibility is an ongoing challenge

Changing staff results in loss of institutional memory

Consider accessibility issues for all contact and staff members

Learn from successful communities

Provide tools and assistance to promote accessibility

Provide organizational power to ADA coordinators

Implications for Communities

Employment is key to greater community participation

Holistic understanding of persons with disabilities Awareness of laws do not necessarily mean

compliance Accessibility impacts:

– Job seeking, attainment, and success– Ability to contribute to one’s community– Ability to access and enjoy the life one desires

Policy Implications Major “disconnect” between Fed level and local level –

perception of program materials delivered and utility of these at odds

Available materials may not meet the needs of end-users – knowledge transfer/best practices sharing would be helpful

Awareness of laws does not necessarily mean compliance Basic “awareness” generally achieved, but education and

implementation needs are ongoing and continuous Policy changes should address requests for direct, relevant, local

training and for help in interpretation of ADA PCA/non PCA interpretation unclear – are cities compliant as a

result of enforcement or merely “putting out policy fires”

Next Steps …

• Complete analysis of responses, including comparative Matrix Analysis of policymakers /administrators perceptions (CDPSI);

Comparison of the accessibility results of the PAR field evaluators with the results of the policymakers awareness

Develop best practices recommendations Output: Policy briefs and papers, policy guidance, “best

practices” Outreach/Dissemination: Presentations for NARRTC, APPAM,

APSA, and Journal articles

Acknowledgements

Southeast DBTAC• Pam Williamson• Shelley Kaplan• Sally Weiss

Southeast DBTAC Affiliate Leadership Council• Rene Cummins • Donna DeStefano • Christy Dunaway • Karen Hamilton • Nancy Duncan • Christie Woodell

CACP• Ben Bellamy• Braeden Benson• Marshall SimsWorkplace Accommodations RERCWireless RERC

Burton Blatt InstituteSyracuse University• Meera Adya• Katie McDonald• Tal Araten-Bergman• Kari Inners• Kaitlin Powers

Thank you!Contact …

Center for Advanced Communications Policy (CACP) Atlanta GA, 30332

www.cacp.gatech.edu

Paul M.A. Baker, Ph.D. Director of Research

404.385.4618

[email protected]

Burton Blatt Institute at Syracuse University (NIDRR Grant # H133A060094) © 2011 All Rights Reserved.

This is a publication of the DBTAC: Southeast ADA Center (Southeast DBTAC), Burton Blatt Institute at Syracuse University, which is funded by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) of the U.S. Department of Education under grant numbers H133A060094. The opinions contained in this publication are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of Education.


results from a dbtac study on municipal compliance with the americans with disabilities act (ada)...

Documents