Skip to Local Navigation
Skip to Content
California State University, Long Beach
Print this pageAdd this page to your favoritesSelect a small fontSelect a medium fontSelect a large font

CSULB Year 2 Web Accessibility Report, August 15, 2008

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Section 508 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act (as amended in 1998), the California State University Coded Memorandum AA-2007-04 requires annual reporting of the implementation of the Accessible Technology Initiative by all CSU campuses. This report focuses Priority One: Web Accessibility (Administrative), due August 15, 2008.

The questions identified in this form address your original plan from 2007 and provide a narrative description of your progress as well as obstacles in achieving your goals. Please provide updates to your original plan, reporting on significant tasks that were completed; what you expect to accomplish next year; areas of difficulty and barriers to completion; and any comments on your observations and discoveries. You may provide any attachments that you believe are relevant to this report.

Auditing and monitoring processes: What do you have in place and what is planned to track your prioritized redesign of websites? What criteria do you use to establish priority; who measures outcomes; who audits?

1a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

Campus webmasters have a specific set of checkpoints for ATI compliance that allow them to evaluate and, if appropriate, certify web pages as compliant. Since the campus is currently developing a standard data-collection matrix for ATI, individual web groups are using their own record-keeping methods to track evaluation and certification.

1b. Plans for 2008/2009

The university will formalize a standard data-collection matrix and provide web publishers with both the document and guidelines for its use, including timelines.

1c. Barriers to completion

Formal tracking, evaluation and certification needs to be better integrated into existing administrative and business practices.

1d. Observations/discoveries

Roles and responsibilities beyond those of the campus webmasters and web-content producers need to be more clearly articulated.

Accountability and documentation procedures: Who is responsible? What is documented? How is information that is gathered used to improve the process?

2a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

Currently, only the campus webmasters are formally accountable for ensuring accessibility and documentation. Their information is shared regularly with the University Web Committee.

2b. Plans for 2008/2009

We will clarify and expand the accountability (roles/responsibility) scope.

2c. Barriers to completion

See 1c.

2d. Observations/discoveries

See 1d.

New websites and content: How does your campus encourage accessible design and authoring for new additions to the administrative web?

3a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

Campus webmasters conduct peer review quite robustly, which has established accessibility as a marker of a professionally conducted website. An enormous amount of reciprocal support has emerged.

3b. Plans for 2008/2009

Consider ways to provide executive recognition for web publishers who meet the campus ATI standard, building on the peer-review foundation noted in 3a.

3c. Barriers to completion

ATI compliance is still widely regarded as an edict that carries with it dire individual consequences for "failure". We need to reshape the charge in a more positive, proactive fashion.

3d. Observations/discoveries

None cited.

Exceptions to accessible administrative web content (such as People Soft, your LMS or library web applications): Have you identified exceptions, and if so, how do you document these issues and your decision to leave them as an exception to accessibility? What are your plans for specific exceptions to provide accommodation to achieve equally effective alternate form?

4a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

The campus ATI web and IMAP groups are working together on a protocol for addressing exceptions. The campus 508 Compliance Officer currently is providing a wealth of critical adjudication services.

4b. Plans for 2008/2009

Standardize protcols in tandem with articulation of roles and responsibilities.

4c. Barriers to completion

None cited.

4d. Observations/discoveries

None cited.

Critical administrative websites that require remediation: What is your process for identifying critical administrative websites that require review and possible redevelopment? How will you select the most important 500 pages that need evaluation and a commitment to redevelop if needed?

5a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

Since there was general agreement on critical sites from the beginning of our ATI work, the sites' respective managers began work immediately.

5b. Plans for 2008/2009

CSULB has formed a group that will map the "enterprise web" in consutation with executive leadership. The map will then be used to evaluate progress and identify/prioritize subsequent sites.

5c. Barriers to completion

Accurate mapping is expected to take a great deal of time.

5d. Observations/discoveries

None cited.

Training Plan: What is your plan to train administrative web developers, student assistants and content contributors? Have you developed curriculum? Do you have regular training times? Do you require certification and / or continuing education?

6a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

Funding for training was included in the annual RPP request.

6b. Plans for 2008/2009

Offer multi-modal training in accordance with actual funding and concurrent resources.

6c. Barriers to completion

Training needs cannot be met until the roles / responsibilities are fully articulated and prioiritized.

6d. Observations/discoveries

There is considerable debate about whether training needs differ substantially between faculty and staff web communicators.

Communication plan: How has your communication plan proceeded this year? Have faculty, staff and students been contacted? What approximate percentage of each group has been exposed to the campus web accessibility requirements?

7a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

An ATI PowerPoint presentation was given to all levels of campus senior leadership, as well as Associated Students, Staff Council and the Universiity Web Committee.

7b. Plans for 2008/2009

Expand awareness of ATI compliance through incentives and recognition in campus media and other communications channels.

7c. Barriers to completion

None cited.

7d. Observations/ discoveries

None cited.

Evaluation process: How is progress measured? What metrics do you use to determine if you are better off this year than last year? How did you choose your metrics?

8a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

The need for a standard ATI data-collection matrix has been communicated to the responsible parties.

8b. Plans for 2008/2009

We plan to finalize the matrix, distribute it to campus accessibility evaluators and collect/interpret the resultant data.

8c. Barriers to completion

None cited.

8d. Observations/discoveries

None cited.

Roles and responsibilities: Please identify the responsible parties and their roles associated with the above processes.

9a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

Webmasters are thoroughy informed of their roles and responsibilities.

9b. Plans for 2008/2009

We will define the roles and responsibilities of other participants in the communications and administrative processes and implement accordingly.

9c. Barriers to completion

In the university’s extremely decentralized web-development environment, it is difficult to commonly articulate and manage roles /responsibilities.

9d. Observations/discoveries

ATI enjoys nearly universal acceptance at all campus levels, but this has yet to carry over to such practical issues as job descriptions and performance evaluations.

Milestones and timelines: How do your milestones and timelines conform to the ATI Coded Memoranda? Did you meet your milestones? If you will miss a deadline why do you think that happens? Please list strengths and weaknesses in your planning. Both will be useful for the CSU to analyze system trends.

10a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

We generally met the milestones and timelines.

10b. Plans for 2008/2009

Meet the milestones/timelines in accordance with actual funding.

10c. Barriers to completion

ATI language tends toward extremes (e.g., "ALL administrative websites"), which makes it far more difficult for larger sites to meet one-size-fits-all systemwide deadlines.

10d. Observations/discoveries

None cited.