University Councils and Committees
Page tree

Accessibility ICT Policy Council 
Tuesday, March 9th, 2021
3:00 PM - 4:00 PM
Zoom (Please see Outlook Invite for Details)

Members Present: Lisa Andreotta, Melanie Domanico, Bethany Heaton Crawford, Angela King Taylor, Vince Patriarco, Lana Pettit, Miguel Pica, Paula Possenti-Perez, Pamela Thomas, and Brian Tibbens

Co-chairs: Jenny Gluck and William Myhill

Minutes: Christian Jones

Agenda

  1. Welcome/Announcements (Jenny and William)
     
  2. Debriefing from 2/23 Discussion (Group)
    • The team we invited to the 2/23 meeting are the ones who deal most often with the largest enterprise software solutions. We wanted to come to a common understanding of the mammoth pieces that help the business to run. 

    • They may not be able to make the current application fully accessible. We could come up with a 10-year plan, during which time the software may also be replaced. The base product may/may not be accessible. 

    • We may want to find a middle road with a defined understanding of “legacy” to create benchmarks in helping to move them along, which will demonstrate that we’re addressing the inaccessibility of our tools. 

       

  3. Discussion of "Legacy" Software (Group)
    • Legal definition of legacy:

      • Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, legacy speaks to things that predate laws around compliance. For ICT, do you only have to update to the next version or to the most current version when updating to the current set of standards?

    • An enterprise system is getting mixed in with legacy. It has to do with predating the policy. At what point does it have to meet the policy? Maybe that will be the definition of whether it’s a version change or add-on. We should be descriptive. 

    • Is it the vendor software that’s not compliant or our implementation of the software that’s noncompliant? A lot of PeopleSoft is custom web interface. Like with building codes, a percentage could determine whether a piece or the whole product is brought up to speed. 

    • Vince Patriarcho noted that depending on whether it's an enterprise system or not If enterprise-wide, we have to give them the room and availability. 

    • Definition:

      • As a baseline, legacy software can be any software that was already in place before January 2018.

    • Types of software

      • For small products, such as desktop or products that can be refreshed quickly, even if they are legacy, if renewed, we should assume that they will be compliant with accessibility standards. If not, we would require a roadmap to get them there. 

      • Scope, size, and scale differ significantly. If talking about every software package on campus, this would be an enormous undertaking. For renewals, every one of those needs to go into this process. 

      • If I get a new version of the Outlook client, only the first person in the door needs to make sure it’s accessible. Not sure if they need to go through this process every time someone installs something, but the person who installs something for the campus needs to go through the process, even if only desktop software. 

      • Brian offered the  specific classification of “contract renewal or major version change.”

      • Every unique piece of software needs to go through the process. 

      • We don’t have an inventory of everything on campus. We should be thinking about the interval at which products need to be renewed. 

    • Two conversations:

      • (1) What things go through the process of being evaluated and what triggers that process?

      • (2) What do we do about the systems that, whether legacy or enterprise or not, are large in scale and have a lot of accessibility issues? Do we need to come up with a way to make them become more accessible?

    • Two categories of legacy software:

      • (1) Enterprise software: Software that satisfies the needs of the University rather than individual users

        • Develop a plan with time and resources required to make fully accessible.  Plan must include check points to ensure progress.

      • (2) Non-enterprise software: Software used by an individual (productivity software).

        • Upon renewal follow current policy for accessibility or receive x-year conditional approval to make product accessible or to find and implement a new solution.

    • There was mention of a provision that instructs requesters/owners to put together a comprehensive plan that documents how long they think it will take and how to come through the council for approval. More discussion will be needed to define the parameters. 

    • For bigger systems, we need to give them enough time. Steering them towards a more workable plan such as targeting certain form fields may prove best. We could say that roadmap plans need to focus on the most heavily used part(s) of the software, and work with them on a plan for remediation.

      • It should be noted that the targeted areas for remediation may come on a case-by-case basis; if the portal just to login to an application isn’t accessible, it doesn’t really help to remediate what’s inside. 

    • To recap, we’re looking for:

      • Large, high-impact enterprise software

      • A roadmap/plan that’s realistic; at a minimum, begin with a plan to make improvements. 

    • For large systems that predate the policy that we can’t modify or change:

      • If renewing or getting an upgrade, if a certain percentage is inaccessible, such as a small operating piece, it’s that piece that needs to be made accessible.

      • If a product is truly outdated, we should mandate that it is replaced. 

      • Give them a date to deal with whatever it is they’re going to do (1 year, 5 years, etc).

      • The policy will define how long they have to mull over the implementation. 

         

  4. Reminder - Feedback from Constituents Regarding the Standards Table
    • Review with your constituents by next meeting (3/23)

    • We could send out to the web accessibility listserv group, and also to folks who come through the AAC. 

    • Once we get a little further along, we can run it by the TLC.

       

  5. Homework/next steps
    1. Review next recommendations
    2. Review AICTPC Standards Table by the 3/23 meeting
      • We’re just waiting on approval from your constituents then will update Recommendations 7 and 8 in the Table. Please have your groups review by the next meeting.
         
  6. Next/Future Meeting
    1. Continue Discussion around legacy software
      1. Invite General Counsel to discuss legacy key points
    2. Legacy Content
      1. Inventory
      2. Strategy 
        1. Legacy ICT without Modifications
        2. Legacy ICT with Modifications 
        3. Auto-renewing ICT 
    3. Terminology/Use of Language 
      1. Disability language

Supplemental Materials:

Accessibility ICT Policy 

Accessibility ICT Policy - Working Document

 Standards Table for AICTPC (Draft)

Next Meeting: Tuesday, March 23, 2021


  • No labels