Information and Guidance on the Americans with Disabilities Act 
Spring 2003 Volume 7, Number 2

This Issue Highlights Information Regarding State and Local Government Programs and Services

What's Inside?

Feature Stories

• Paratransit: Increased Ridership and Costs
• Supreme Court to Review Key Employment Issues, California Withdraws from Title II Case
• Three Cities Struggle with Sidewalk Access

Project Director's Report
Access Board News
DOJ Update
Employment Update
News From the Center
Regional News
Frequently Asked Questions
Great Web Sites
Publications
Events/Announcements

FEATURE STORIES

Paratransit: Increased Ridership and Costs

As recently as 15 years ago, residents with disabilities in many communities had few guarantees that they could get to and from work, doctors' offices or shopping malls when they needed. In 1990, the ADA aimed to change that by requiring transit agencies with fixed-route service to provide complementary paratransit programs. Minimum requirements for paratransit services include providing curb-to-curb pick up and drop off, allowing passengers to make appointments for rides, and keeping those appointments within a reasonable window of time. As paratransit ridership increases, public transit agencies are searching for ways to keep costs in check.

Court challenges rise
Over the past few years, cities and counties have been challenged in court to meet ADA's minimum requirements. Complaints of unreliable and inflexible service have resulted in court-ordered fines and prompted transit agencies to address deficient service. For example, Philadelphia's paratransit service, which falls under the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA), has been sued several times. For the year ending May 2000, SEPTA stranded an average of 74 passengers a day. Last year, SEPTA was ordered by a US District Court to comply with ADA regulations. To meet the court's challenge, SEPTA increased spending this year to $24 million and boosted its fleet by 200 vehicles.

The gatekeeper approach
Transit agencies experiencing similar service problems have begun evaluating ridership policies, tightening eligibility requirements, and are stepping up efforts to encourage residents with disabilities to take fixed-route buses and trains. Determining whether a potential rider's disability prevents them from using mass transit can help in controlling costs, says David Koffman, principal associate for NelsonNygaard Consulting Associates.

In the past, most transit systems based paratransit eligibility decisions on paper applications, supplemented by doctor verification. Today, many systems are turning to in-person interviews to determine whether applicants are capable of using conventional public transportation. Besides tightening ridership policies, transit agencies are improving travel instruction programs to divert passengers from paratransit to regular route service. For example, Metro Mobility, the paratransit service for Minneapolis-St. Paul, has begun providing transit instruction classes through the Metropolitan Center for Independent Living.

Law allows local options
In addition to restricting ridership, agencies are limiting the amount of time passengers have to make advance reservations for rides. Many systems are opting for shorter advance reservation windows to reduce the administrative costs of handling cancellations and to reduce the rates of missed rides. Some transit agencies have adopted subscription policies, or standing order reservations, to cut costs.

To further reduce costs, King County encourages group shopping trips for paratransit passengers by providing premium services such as carrying packages and assisting passengers from door-to-door. By picking up several passengers in one trip and delivering them to the same destination, the county improves efficiency, and it saves money on fuel and staff time. For individual trips, the King County Council passed an ordinance in 1999 structured to guarantee only minimum federal requirements.

Cabs supplement service
Other cities have contracted with private fleet operators to help contain costs. Raleigh, NC's paratransit program provides some rides through agreements with taxi companies. Any taxi company with more than six cabs is required to provide rides for residents with disabilities and receives reimbursement for the rides. Twenty livery companies participate in the plan. The program allows flexibility for riders, yet does not cost the city more than the usual paratransit ride and it saves the city administrative and dispatch service costs, says Todd Allen, senior transit planner for Raleigh. Metro Mobility also has begun using taxis to supplement its regular paratransit service. The Taxi Ticket reimbursement program permits regular riders that are denied a paratransit ride because of overcapacity to take a cab and get reimbursed.

Interactive technology
For transit agencies that operate their own paratransit vehicles, technology is helping contain administrative and fleet costs. Mobile data terminals (MDTs) in vehicles allow dispatchers to send data messages to drivers to reflect on-the-spot schedule changes. King County recently completed a pilot test of 30 MDTs and is installing MDTs in its entire paratransit fleet of 280 vehicles. Through an automated vehicle locator/global positioning satellite mapping feature, the county's system automatically alerts drivers if they have driven past their specified pick-up addresses. Eventually, the county plans to expand the MDTs with an interactive voice response system that will generate an automatic telephone notice to passengers that a van is about to arrive. The county also is considering installing an automated touch-tone telephone system which would allow passengers to make reservations, check on previous reservations or cancel a ride, reducing the number of required call center personnel.

FTA offers paratransit course
The Federal Transit Administration offers a course, entitled "Managing the Cost of ADA Paratransit," through the National Transit Institute at Rutgers University. The course addresses management, planning and service delivery methods that public transit agencies can use to comply with the ADA while retaining control of budgets. The course is free to employees of federal, state and local government, and private non-profit transit operators. For more information, visit www.ntionline.com, e-mail contactus@nti.rutgers.edu or call 732-932-1700. (Source: "Cities Struggle to Stabilize Paratransit Costs," by Donna Rogers, American City & County, January 2, 2003.)

Supreme Court To Review Key Employment Issues, California Withdraws From Title II Case

The Supreme Court will review two ADA employment cases during its spring and fall sessions; meanwhile, the State of California has withdrawn from an important Title II case. The first case the high court will decide is Clackamas Gastroenterology Associates v. Wells, No. 01-1435. Debra Ann Wells was responsible for managing the books and payroll of Clackamas, an Oregon professional corporation. She developed a rare autoimmune disorder and asked her supervisors for administrative support in completing her duties. Wells contended Clackamas discriminated against her because of her disability by demoting her to receptionist, then fired her while she was on a doctor-approved medical leave in 1997.

Without deciding the merits of the case, a federal district court dismissed her claims on the basis that Clackamas was not an employer under the ADA because it did not have 15 or more employees. The lower court did not count four physician shareholders toward the threshold level of employees; Clackamas employed 12 to 15 other employees during the relevant time period. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court and held that the four physician shareholders actively managed the medical practice's operations and had employment agreements, so they were employees within the meaning of the ADA. The Supreme Court is expected to settle the issue of whether business owners in a partnership -- who also actually work for the business -- should be considered employees for purposes of federal discrimination laws. A decision in this case is expected in late spring or early summer.

In the fall, the Supreme Court will consider the case of Raytheon Company v. Hernandez, No. 02-749. Joel Hernandez, a 25-year employee of Hughes Missile Systems, resigned while facing dismissal as an assembly-line worker at a Tucson, AZ plant in 1991, after testing positive for cocaine. He reapplied 2 1/2 years later, with documents and testimonials to his recovery from addiction, but the company said he was ineligible. Hughes, since acquired by Raytheon Company, said it had a policy against re-employing workers who had been fired for misconduct.

Hernandez sued for damages under the ADA. The suit was initially dismissed by a federal judge, but reinstated by the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, which said the ADA protects qualified applicants who are denied a job because of their former addiction, which can be perceived as a disability.

In support of Raytheon's appeal, a business group called the Equal Employment Advisory Council, which represents about 340 companies, argued that the appeals court's decision would undermine employers' rules against workplace misconduct.

"Based on the reasoning that the Ninth Circuit used, an employer could be liable under the ADA for refusing to rehire an employee who was terminated for embezzling company funds, or for sexual harassment...as long as the employee could claim that the misconduct for which he was fired was due to a disability," said Ann Reesman, a lawyer for the employers' group.

Hernandez's lawyer, Stephen Montoya, countered that the ADA doesn't protect disabled employees who are guilty of misconduct on the job but should entitle them to equal consideration once their conditions have been treated. A decision is expected later in the year.

A threat to Title II of the ADA was averted when the Medical Board of California voted 14-1 to withdraw its "petition for certiori" to the Supreme Court and ask it not to proceed with Medical Board of California v. Hason, No. 02-479. The Court was scheduled to hear the case March 25. Disability activists had been pressing California public officials to drop the case. Governor Gray Davis wrote to the board asking it to withdraw the appeal, calling the ADA "a cornerstone of our nation's civil rights protections."

The case involves a doctor, Michael J. Hason, who sued the state's medical licensing agency in 1999 for discrimination, saying it unfairly rejected him because of his history of depression. He argued that the licensing board should have accommodated his disability by offering him a probationary license that required him to get psychotherapy or other help. A federal district judge dismissed Hason's suit, saying that the state had sovereign immunity. The US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reinstated Hason's claim, over the dissent of four judges who accused the majority of "blithely ignoring" Garrett.

Medical Board of California v. Hason is a sequel to a case the Supreme Court decided two years ago, Alabama v. Garrett, in which the court struck down part of Title I of the ADA, which protects people with disabilities against job discrimination. By 5 to 4, the court ruled that individuals with disabilities who feel that a state employer has discriminated against them cannot sue for monetary damages. Writing for the majority in Garrett, Chief Justice Rehnquist said Congress had failed to identify a clear pattern of state discrimination against people with disabilities or show that lawsuits for money damages were an appropriate response. At that time, the court said it would reserve judgment on the question of whether states could be sued for discrimination in public services. (Sources: "Justices Agree to Review Disabilities Act Protections," by Charles Lane, Washington Post, November 19, 2002, Page A12; "Recovering Addict Suit Goes to Supreme Court," by Bob Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle, February 25, 2003, Page B1; and "Threat to ADA Title 2 Withdrawn as CA drops Supreme Court Fight," The Center for an Accessible Society,www.accessiblesociety.org/topics/ada/hasonappealdropped.html, March 4, 2003.)

Three Cities Struggle With Sidewalk Access

In a landmark settlement of federal court litigation brought by the Eastern Paralyzed Veterans Association (EPVA), New York City has agreed to commit approximately $218 million to make all of its 158,738 corners accessible to wheelchair users. The settlement was approved by US District Judge Thomas Griesa of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 9, 2002. EPVA sued because the city had not installed curb ramps at two-thirds of its street corners, and had no transition plan in place.

Under the settlement, the city will commit $217,862,000 for installation of curb ramps on 61,074 street corners that remain inaccessible - 27,747 in Queens; 13,008 in Staten Island; 10,710 in Brooklyn; 7,007 in the Bronx; and 2,602 in Manhattan. Instead of adding the ramps in an ad hoc fashion, as the city has long done, transportation officials have agreed to engage in what is called blitz construction, concentrating on large areas where curbs have no ramps. The method is faster and saves money - $2,500 per corner for a standard ramp, versus $3,000 per each ramp built individually. Most city street corners will have curb ramps by 2008.

Another city faced with the challenge of making sidewalks, curbs and crosswalks more accessible to people with disabilities is Tallahassee, FL. Last year, the city was sued by a disability rights group for not complying with the ADA. A settlement agreement between Miami-based Access Now and the city was approved last May by US District Court Judge Robert Hinkle.

Tallahassee is inaccessible, but no more so than other cities across the state and the United States, said Richard Londono, an architect/accessibility consultant hired to inspect the designated zones. The most significant problems he has found are steeply angled and uneven sidewalks and steep grades on curbs, which could cause wheelchair users to tip over. Other violations include a lack of detectable warnings, raised surfaces on curb ramps, to let people who are blind know they're approaching an intersection and signs near sidewalks that are too low.

The challenge now will be determining the price tag for ensuring public rights of way near Tallahassee's two hospitals and several commercial districts comply with the ADA. "Best case scenario, it will be under $1 million, worst case scenario, $8 million," Michael Spellman, an assistant city attorney, said of the potential cost. Those numbers mean very little right now, he added, because the city won't have an estimate until the streets named in the agreement are inspected for specific violations. The city is working under a deadline. The settlement requires that all the changes be made within five years.

Sidewalk accessibility is a central issue for a third city as well. Last November, Sacramento, CA petitioned the US Supreme Court to overturn a lower court ruling requiring the city make sidewalks accessible to people with disabilities by moving obstacles such as bus benches and utility poles. The case, expected to be a precedent-setting national test of whether the ADA applies to sidewalks, is being watched by cities across the country. At stake, Sacramento officials say, are potentially budget-stressing costs for cities, counties and other local districts if they must remove sidewalk obstructions and redo uneven sidewalks that people with disabilities cannot traverse.

Advocates for people with disabilities respond that the bigger issue is their right to move freely in their daily lives through the city, and the ADA requirement that governments provide accessibility, without forcing "undue" financial burdens. Nine plaintiffs, represented by Disability Rights Advocates of Oakland, sued Sacramento in 1999 saying the city was not complying with the ADA. The group won a ruling in 2000 that forced the city to speed up construction of sidewalk curb ramps at intersections. The city has since agreed to put in 1,500 curb ramps per year for the next 27 years. Cost is about $3,500 to $4,000 per ramp, or about $5 million a year, city Public Works Director Mike Kashiwagi said. He estimated total cost could reach $170 million.

The two sides, however, disagree over whether the ADA also requires cities and counties to make the length of every sidewalk accessible from corner to corner. A US District Court judge initially ruled in the city's favor, but the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals concluded last summer that sidewalks are among the government programs, services and activities that need to be accessible. Plaintiff attorney Melissa Kasnitz argues that makes sense, given the ADA requires curb ramps. "Curb ramps don't do you any good if all they do is let you get onto the sidewalk so you can experience the next barrier and turn around and go right back into the street," she said. (Sources: "Tallahassee Plans for Sidewalk Access," by Archana Pyati, Tallahassee Democrat, December 19, 2002 and "City, Disabled Battle Over Sidewalks Before High Court," by Tony Bizjak, Scripps Mcclatchy Western Service, November 29, 2002.)

Back to top

PROJECT DIRECTOR'S REPORT

Title II of the ADA: Public Entities Serving More with Less

Did you know that one in five people, 20% of our population, has a disability (based on the 2000 U.S. Census)? We are living in a time of unprecedented demographic diversity, and more of the population appears to define themselves as having a disability. This presents a great challenge and a great opportunity to our nation's public entities. The great challenge is that state and municipal governments must address accessibility within a climate of increased demand for services, while also having fewer resources with which to provide those services. A great opportunity lies in an awakening to the realization that disability has touched and will touch most of us at some point in our lives and that now is the time to create a society that guarantees people with disabilities equal access and equal treatment under the law.

This issue of Access New England focuses on Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Title II is the part of the ADA that guarantees people with disabilities equal access to and equal treatment by such public entities as state and municipal government, public transportation, public education, and polling places. In essence, Title II provides that "no qualified individual with a disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by such entity." (42U.S.C. 12132). All state and local governments, their department and agencies, and any other instrumentalities or special purpose districts of state and local governments must adhere to Title II requirements. Our articles this month take a look at a current court challenges to Title II, and also highlight the creative efforts of several cities grappling with Title II problems.

Presently, a person with a disability can file a complaint and sue a state for damages under Title II. This June, the Supreme Court had intended to decide whether states will be exempt from damages as a result of suits from individuals with disabilities under Title II. This decision was to be based upon the Supreme Court's ruling of Medical Board v. Hason Case (No. 02-479) (See Feature Story:Supreme Court to Review Key Employment Issues, California Withdraws from Title II Case). However, the State of California filed a formal motion with the Supreme Court to withdraw the case slated to have been heard by the Court on March 25.

Some cities are searching their souls and their pockets to provide equal access. In a time when resources are scarce, two cities are figuring out how to make their sidewalks accessible. Sacramento, CA and Tallahassee, FL have made the commitment to accessibility and are now determined to find the resources to make their promise a reality. (See page 12 for further details). In addition, other cities across the country are dealing with increased paratransit demands and the rising cost of providing services. Read about Philadelphia's strategies to make paratransit service available and accessible and minimize the costs. (See Feature Story:Three Cities Struggle with Sidewalk Access for further details).

As always, the New England ADA & Accessible IT Center will provide relevant and up-to-date information, guidance, resources and trainings to keep you informed as society and the ADA changes.

Wholeheartedly,

Oce Harrison, Project Director

Announcement: Invite and ADA Specialist for Lunch or Anytime!

• Get AIA credit
• Discuss and get answers to your ADA questions
• Learn how to use the ADA Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG)
• Find out how the ADA relates to model building or local and state accessibility codes

Back to top

ACCESS BOARD NEWS

Board Sponsors Research on Mobility Aids and Human Measures

The size, design, and functional characteristics of mobility aids have become increasingly diverse over the past decades. Various types of powered wheelchairs and scooters have become commonplace and are being used by a broader and more varied range of people with disabilities. This growing diversity among both mobility aids and people using them has underscored the need for research to collect data upon which existing criteria for accessibility, particularly design specifications for facilities and vehicles, can be assessed. In its update of the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG), the Board received comments from the public urging changes to various long-standing specifications for wheelchair access in order to better accommodate motorized devices, which can be larger than standard manual wheelchairs and which have different maneuvering characteristics.

Much of the research upon which common accessibility requirements are based is dated and no longer representative of today's product market or the population of mobility aid users. Most of the research that had been done involved a limited range of human subjects who used standard manual wheelchairs; reliable data on powered devices and their users remains limited. To fill this knowledge gap, the Board is sponsoring a multi-year project to help develop a database on human measures that takes into account the various types of mobility aids now in use.

The Board's funding will further work underway by the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Universal Design at the University at Buffalo, NY. The Center uses research, product development, and information dissemination to create new resources for Universal Design practice. Universal Design, as a design practice, emphasizes careful planning and execution so that a product, environment, or system is easily usable by the broadest range of people. The Center has developed and tested protocols for collecting measurements of people who use various types of wheelchairs and scooters. The Board is particularly interested in data on space requirements, maneuvering parameters, reach ranges, and other key measures and dimensions. The aim is to establish a database on mobility aids and user sizes and functional task performance that will support the development of three-dimensional digital models of wheelchair and scooter users. Such models would provide a valuable tool in evaluating accessibility specifications and in the planning and design of products and spaces. For further information on the RERC on Universal Design and its research program, visit its website at www.ap.buffalo.edu/rercud/ or contact the Center at (800) 628-2281 (v), (716) 829-3861 (fax), or rercud@ap.buffalo.edu (e-mail). (Source: Access Currents, Volume 8, No. 6 November/December 2002.)

Maine Architect Appointed To US Access Board

President Bush has announced the appointment of Denis Pratt to the US Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board). Denis is currently an Architect and Accessibility Specialist with Alpha One, based in South Portland. He is a graduate of Rhode Island School of Design and has over 20 years of experience working with accessible design. In his 12 years at Alpha One, Denis has been involved in hundreds of Access Design consultations, projects, and presentations. Licensed in Maine and New Hampshire, Denis specializes solely in "barrier free" and "universal" design.

The Access Board is an independent Federal agency devoted to accessibility for people with disabilities. It operates with approximately 30 staff and a governing board of representatives from Federal departments and public members who are appointed by the President. Key responsibilities of the Board include:

• developing and maintaining accessibility requirements for the built environment, transit vehicles, telecommunications equipment, and for electronic and information technology;


• providing technical assistance and training on these guidelines and standards; and


• enforcing accessibility standards for federally funded facilities.

Board meetings, which are open to the public, are held every two months, usually in the Washington, DC area.

Back to top

DOJ UPDATE

Massachusetts Advocates Meet With DOJ

At the invitation of Massachusetts Office on Disability, Ralph Boyd, Assistant Attorney General, US Department of Justice (DOJ) met with disability advocates from across Massachusetts on November 22nd to hear concerns about the major barriers impacting the disability community. Mr. Boyd began the meeting by providing a brief overview of DOJ's top priorities, what progress they have made in these areas, and how they intend to work on them in the future. These priorities are: transportation, accessible housing, title II obligations, and Olmstead issues.

Among the problems that advocates identified were a lack of accessible and affordable housing options, difficulties in using paratransit systems, Massachusetts' failure to implement the Olmstead decision, and municipalities' failure to comply with Title II obligations. In response, Mr. Boyd stated that DOJ would be combining litigation, publicity, education, and technical assistance efforts to address these barriers.

Housing: DOJ has been aggressively enforcing the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. They have sued private developers and architects for failing to design and construct accessible housing. DOJ is also working with HUD to set goals/timetables for local housing authorities that have serious access problems

Transportation: On October 25, DOJ and the US Department of Transportation (DOT) submitted a brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit firmly establishing the right of ADA eligible paratransit users to next day service. The brief states unequivocally that DOT's ADA regulation requires transit agencies to "design, fund, and implement a next-day service to meet the foreseeable needs of all ADA-eligible individuals." The brief was prompted by a request to DOT from the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to interpret its ADA regulation in the case Anderson v. Rochester-Genesee Regional Transit Authority. The brief will hopefully play a good role in the outcome of that important lawsuit and others as well. Further, the brief signals to transit agencies that lax ADA compliance is not acceptable to DOT and DOJ, and it provides another tool to disability advocates.

Olmstead: Even during a budget crisis, Mr. Boyd maintained that the implementation of Olmstead is considered a priority. DOJ will make choices about litigation that support the decision. Olmstead v. LC was decided by the Supreme Court in 1999. By a vote of 6-3, the court ruled that states may have to place people with mental disabilities in community-based settings, when appropriate, as opposed to placement in facilities like state hospitals. Central to the case is the contention that federal regulations for Title II of the ADA require state and local government entities to "administer programs...in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities." 28 CFR 35.130(d).

Title II: Through Project Civic Access, DOJ continues to identify municipalities that have significant access problems. DOJ has used its authority to enter into administrative consent decrees with twenty-two municipalities across the country. New England municipalities involved in settlements include: Windham, CT; Farmington, ME; Brookline, MA; and Narragansett, RI. If advocates can identify municipalities with major problems, they should report concerns to DOJ at 800-514-0301 (v) or 800-514-0383 (TDD).

Back to top
 

EMPLOYMENT UPDATE

Colorado City Considers Genetics Law

City officials in Boulder, CO want to add genetics to civil rights laws that ban race, gender and age discrimination to ensure residents are not hurt by information gathered about their genetic makeup. Boulder is the first city to consider a comprehensive proposal covering housing and public accommodations as well as employment, according to the National League of Cities.

"This is an area where the technological capabilities have grown rapidly and it is important that the social institutions respond and take responsibility,'' Mayor Will Toor said.

Boulder officials believe the proposed measure could help as genetic science advances and testing becomes cheaper. New research may make it possible to identify an individual's lifetime risk for cancer, heart attack and other diseases. City leaders say such research raises ethical and legal questions. For example, employers and other companies could use the information to screen out candidates. In a recent survey of 2,100 businesses nationwide, 30 percent said they asked applicants for genetic information; of them, 7 percent used the data in hiring and promotion decisions, according to the American Management Association.

"This is a crystal ball," said Doug Peterson, a senior policy analyst at the National League of Cities. "If you can predict with even high probability that some people are going to be a risk and others aren't, you can deny things."

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission contends even predispositions are covered under the ADA, although courts have not ruled on any cases. A lawsuit brought against Burlington Northern Sante Fe was settled for $2.2 million in August 2000. The railroad had sought genetic testing to determine whether workers complaining of carpal tunnel syndrome were predisposed. A second suit is pending in Florida by a woman fired by her employer after a genetic test showed she had a rare disease called alpha-1 antitrypsan deficiency, which sometimes results in emphysema or liver disease. Federal employees have been protected from genetic discrimination for two years under an executive order signed by former President Clinton.

At present, 47 states and one county have some form of law prohibiting genetic discrimination. Some states have added the use of genetic information to discrimination statutes while others protect the information under privacy laws. Colorado law says that genetic information is a property right, that it is owned by the individual and should be governed by privacy statutes. Twenty-seven other states take a similar approach, protecting genetic information under privacy laws. (Source: "Colo. City Mulls Anti-Discrimination Law," by Jennifer Hamilton, Associated Press, December 19, 2002.)

Back to top
 

NEWS FROM THE CENTER

Audio Conferences Co-Sponsored By The ADA Center

The following audio conferences are a collaborative effort among regional ADA Centers. Participate from your home or office, and call in to toll-free number.

April 15 - Best Practices in Reasonable Accommodation: Policy and Procedure
May 20 - Ask the Department of Justice (DOJ)
June 17 - Demystifying the Federal Accessibility Requirements: ADAAG, UFAS, and Fair Housing
July 15 - ADA Update: 13 Years Later
August 19- Accessibility of the Performing Arts: Assuring Access for Everyone
September 16 - Best Practices in Accessible Electronic & Information Technology Policy

All audio sessions run from 2-3:30 pm EST. Cost per session is $35 for government and not-for-profit groups and $50 for for-profit entities. Audio conference descriptions are available at www.adagreatlakes.org/training/schedule.htm. To register e-mail adainfo@adaptiveenvironments.org or call 800-949-4232 (v/tty).

ADA Center Awards Incentive Grants

The New England ADA & Accessible IT Center is pleased to announce the recipients of our 2003 Incentive Grant awards. Awardees include: the ADA Coalition of Connecticut; the Rhode Island Governor's Commission on Disabilities; the Vermont Center for Independent Living; the Southeast Center for Independent Living in Fall River, MA; the New Hampshire Association for the Blind; and ATECH (An Alliance for Assistive Technology, Education, and Community Health) Services in Laconia, NH.

The incentive grant program is part of the ADA Center's capacity building goal. Six grants of $4,000 each have been awarded. This initiative supports a collaboration among the ADA Center and the New England states. Priorities established under the incentive grant program include:

• Increasing access to employment for people with disabilities
• Increasing access to information technology for people with disabilities

Projects will be completed by September 30, 2003.

ADA Center To Exhibit At Upcoming Events

April 16-17, 2003 - New England Building and Facilities Show - Bayside Expo Center - Boston, MA

April 30-May2, 2003 - Massachusetts Library Association - Sheraton Springfield Monarch Place - Springfield, MA

Universal Design And Housing Conference

Adaptive Environments in cooperation with Citizens Housing and Planning Association (CHAPA) through a grant from the Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council (MDDC) will be sponsoring a one day conference on residential universal design. The conference, Unlimited by Design: The Advantages of Universal Design in Housing, will focus on how universal design can be used to produce well-designed affordable housing. The workshop topics will include:

The Nuts & Bolts of Residential Universal Design
An overview of residential universal design presented by Rex Pace an architectural engineer and illustrator with 13 years of experience as a specialist in accessible and universal design.

How to Create Usable Kitchens and Bathrooms
Mary Jo Petersen, a nationally recognized expert on universal kitchen and bathroom design, will discuss how these concepts can be used in affordable housing.

Addressing the Spectrum of Human Needs in Housing
Paraig O'Brien, a researcher for the National Health Service in Northern Ireland, will discuss research on residential universal design's ability to encompass the spectrum of human needs, aging in place and a cost analysis.

The conference will be held on April 22, 2004 at the John F. Kennedy Building in Boston. Further information regarding registration will be made available at Adaptive Environments www.adaptiveenvironments.org and CHAPA www.chapa.org or call Barbara Chandler, Adaptive Environments Housing Project Director at 617-695-1225, ext. 34 V/TTY.

Back to top
 

REGIONAL NEWS

STATE AFFILIATES

The New England ADA & Accessible IT Center affiliates with one organization in each New England state. Many of these organizations conduct access audits and have information about state and local resources for ADA implementation, such as where to obtain sign language interpreters; how to get material Brailled; and where to rent assistive listening devices.

Connecticut
ADA Coalition of Connecticut(ADACC)
c/o Office of Protection and Advocacy
60B Weston Street
Hartford, CT 06120-1551
860-297-4383 v/tty
860-566-8714 fax
e-mail: ADACoalitionCT@aol.com

Maine
Alpha One
127 Main Street
South Portland, ME 04106
800-640-7200 v/tty
207-767-2189 v/tty
207-799-8346 fax
e-mail: info@alphaonenow.com
website: www.alphaonenow.com

Maine Consumer Information and Technology Training Exchange (Maine CITE)
46 University Drive
Augusta, ME 04330
207-621-3195 v
207-621-3482 tty
e-mail: iweb@doe.k12.me.us
website: www.maineCITE.org

Massachusetts
Massachusetts Office on Disability
One Ashburton Place, Room 1305
Boston, MA 02103
800-322-2020 v/tty
617-727-7440 v/tty
617-482-8099 fax
website: www.state.ma.us/mod

CAST (Center for Applied Special Technology)
39 Cross Street
Peabody, MA 01960
978-531-8555 v
978-538-3110 tty
978-531-0192 fax
e-mail: cast@cast.org
website: http://www.cast.org

New Hampshire
Governor's Commission on Disability
57 Regional Drive
Concord, NH 03301
800-852-3405 v/tty
603-271-2773 v
603-271-2774 tty
603-271-2837 fax
website: http://webster.state.nh.us/disability

ATECH (An Alliance for Assistive Technology, Education, and Community Health) Services
5 Right Way Path
Laconia, NH 03246
800-932-5837 v/tty
603-528-3060 v/tty
603-524-0702 fax
website: http://www.nhassistivetechnology.org

Rhode Island
Rhode Island Governor's Commission on Disabilities
John O. Pastore Center
41 Cherry Dale Court
Cranston, RI 02920-3049
401-462-0100 v
401-462-0101 tty
401-462-0106 fax
e-mail: disabilities@gcd.state.ri.us
website: www.gcd.state.ri.us

Vermont
Vermont Center for Independent Living (VCIL)
11 East State Street
Montpelier, VT 05602
800-639-1522 v/tty
802-229-0501 v/tty
802-229-0503 fax
e-mail: vcil@vcil.org
website: www.vcil.org

Connecticut Youth Outreach Program

The ADA Coalition of Connecticut (ADACC) has developed a youth outreach program in conjunction with its initiative to expand and enhance Connecticut's human rights statutes protecting people with disabilities. The program sends intern Nick Marshall-Butler into schools and legislators' offices to talk about ADACC's legislative efforts. Nick conducts outreach to youth with disabilities, encouraging them to get involved in these efforts by contacting legislators and testifying at upcoming public hearings. In his presentations to youth, Nick also addresses how a bill becomes law and encourages teens to act on their own ideas for change.

Renovations To Rhode Island Courthouses

The Rhode Island Governor's Commission on Disabilities recently completed a nine-month, $300,000 renovation project on two state courthouses. The renovations, which were overseen and funded by the Commission, brought the courthouses into full ADA compliance. Another $200,000 is slated for additional work during the next two years, and will bring every state courthouse into compliance.

The Commission recently partnered with the Rhode Island State Council on the Arts and VSA arts of Rhode Island to kick-off an innovative program designed to support artists with disabilities. In December, VSA sponsored an exhibition and invited all state agencies to attend and choose artwork for their offices. A portion of the $50,000 Commission donation was used to purchase artwork for display in state offices. Over thirty original works were placed in eight agencies throughout the state.

Alpha One Evaluates Maine Judicial Courthouses

Alpha One, a center for independent living, was awarded a contract with the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), to inspect and evaluate forty-three sites and properties owned and/or operated by the court system for compliance with ADA's title II obligations. These properties represent most of the Superior and District Courthouses in Maine, as well as three judicial branch administrative locations. Alpha One has been visiting court system properties located from York to Fort Kent, conducting surveys and documenting physical and programmatic barriers to accessibility. Preliminary assessments and budget estimates to correct deficiencies at each of the properties were submitted in September 2002. These budget estimates were used in support of the AOC's efforts to secure funding from the Maine Legislature in order to make necessary modifications at each of the properties. Final reports and budget estimates were completed at the end of February 2003.

Home And Community Access Go Hand In Hand In Vermont

Grants from the New England ADA & Accessible IT Center are helping the Vermont Center for Independent Living (VCIL) to fund a series of community access trainings in four Vermont communities. Vermonters are being teamed together to learn how to review the accessibility of local buildings and services. Teams include local community members, interested advocates, and representatives of arts, human rights, and senior organizations, as well as VCIL staff. Access consultants Renee Wells and Jim Ross are completing the first phase of trainings, which focus on facility access. Later trainings will cover communications and program access.

In a related effort, VCIL's Home Access Program and the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board are cosponsoring a Chore Buddies initiative. VCIL staff are conducting disability awareness workshops in Vermont schools and students from service learning programs are helping to stain ramps, do basic repairs, and do other chores for seniors and individuals with disabilities served by the Home Access Program. For more information about these projects, contact Sarah Wendall at VCIL (800) 639-1522.

New Hampshire Is Taking ACTION

Carol Nadeau is the new Executive Director of the NH Governor's Commission on Disability and a resident of Concord, NH. As the ADA Coordinator for the state, she is initiating a new project called ACTION (All Can Travel In One's Neighborhood). The project involves having citizens with disabilities working with city or town officials to evaluate problem areas that could impede a person with a disability from getting around the block they live on. Are there curb cuts on each of the corners? Are there cracks or holes in the pavement that could present obstacles to wheelchair users? Are there tree branches or other protrusions that could hamper pedestrians who are blind or using wheelchairs? A checklist that people can use to evaluate their block will be developed. In addition to asking people with disabilities to "adopt a block," Carol is planning her own walk around the block in early spring. For more information, contact Carol at (800) 852-3405 (v/tty)(NH only), (603) 271-6895 or cnadeau@gov.state.nh.us.

Congress Passes Election Reform Measure

The Help America Vote Act of 2002 establishes requirements for voting systems used in Federal elections that will allow voters to verify and correct their selections before casting a ballot, remove language barriers, and permit provisional voting where eligible voters are not listed on official registration lists. The act authorizes almost $3.9 billion to cover the cost of these reforms. It also contains key provisions on improving access to polling places and voting systems for persons with disabilities.

The law requires every precinct in the country to have at least one voting machine or system accessible to persons with disabilities, including those with vision impairments, by January 1, 2006. Access is required so that persons with disabilities have the same opportunity for participation, including privacy and independence, afforded other voters. The law authorizes $100 million in grants to improve access to polling places and provides $40 million in grants to state protection and advocacy organizations to help fund services to enhance the participation of people with disabilities in the electoral process. Further details on the law are available at www.citizen.org/congress/govt_reform/election/articles.cfm?ID=8487. (Source: "Congress Passes Election Reform Measure," US Access Board, www.access-board.gov/news/voting-reform.htm.)

NCD Evaluates Federal Enforcement Of Section 504

The National Council on Disability (NCD) finds that five federal agencies (Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, Justice, Labor, and State) responsible for enforcement of disability rights provided by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act have given the task low priority and minimal leadership, although some progress has been made. Section 504 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act is acknowledged as the first national civil rights law to view the exclusion and segregation of people with disabilities as discrimination. In its report, NCD found that:

• The Department of Justice, which has oversight responsibility to coordinate compliance with Section 504 across the agencies, provided insufficient leadership and failed in its Interagency Disability Coordinating Council (IDCC) coordination duties;
• The IDCC, that was set up to ensure coordination functions across federal agencies, never met; and
• The Department of State has never had a Section 504 federally assisted program. It has not allocated any resources to determine whether the recipients of its grant funds comply with any of the civil rights laws.

NCD's findings are contained in its report, Rehabilitating Section 504. Copies are available at www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/section504.html.

Back to top
 

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Work At Home/Telework as a Reasonable Accommodation

Q: Does the ADA require employers to have telework programs?

A: No. The ADA does not require an employer to offer a telework program to all employees. However, if an employer does offer telework, it must allow employees with disabilities an equal opportunity to participate in such a program.

Q: May permitting an employee to work at home be a reasonable accommodation, even if the employer has no telework program?

A: Yes. Changing the location where work is performed may fall under the ADA's reasonable accommodation requirement of modifying workplace policies, even if the employer does not allow other employees to telework. However, an employer is not obligated to adopt an employee's preferred or requested accommodation and may instead offer alternate accommodations as long as they would be effective.

Q: How should an employer determine whether someone may need to work at home as a reasonable accommodation?

A: This determination should be made through a flexible "interactive process" between the employer and the individual. The process begins with a request. An individual must first inform the employer that s/he has a medical condition that requires some change in the way a job is performed. The individual does not need to use special words, such as "ADA" or "reasonable accommodation" to make this request, but must let the employer know that a medical condition interferes with his/her ability to do the job.

Then, the employer and the individual need to discuss the person's request so that the employer understands why the disability might necessitate the individual working at home. The individual must explain what limitations from the disability make it difficult to do the job in the workplace, and how the job could still be performed from the employee's home. The employer may request information about the individual's medical condition (including reasonable documentation) if it is unclear whether it is a "disability" as defined by the ADA. The employer and employee may wish to discuss other types of accommodations that would allow the person to remain full-time in the workplace. However, in some situations, working at home may be the only effective option for an employee with a disability.

Q: How should an employer determine whether a particular job can be performed at home?

A: An employer and employee first need to identify and review all of the essential job functions. The essential functions or duties are those tasks that are fundamental to performing a specific job. An employer does not have to remove any essential job duties to permit an employee to work at home. After determining what functions are essential, the employer and the individual with a disability should determine whether some or all of the functions can be performed at home. For some jobs, the essential duties can only be performed in the workplace. For example, food servers, cashiers, and truck drivers cannot perform their essential duties from home.

Several factors should be considered in determining the feasibility of working at home, including the employer's ability to supervise the employee adequately and whether any duties require use of certain equipment or tools that cannot be replicated at home. Other considerations include whether there is a need for face-to-face interaction and coordination of work with other employees; whether in-person interaction with outside colleagues, clients, or customers is necessary; and whether the position in question requires the employee to have immediate access to documents or other information located only in the workplace. An employer should not, however, deny a request to work at home as a reasonable accommodation solely because a job involves some contact and coordination with other employees. Frequently, meetings can be conducted effectively by telephone and information can be exchanged quickly through e-mail.

Q: How frequently may someone with a disability work at home as a reasonable accommodation?

A: An employee may work at home only to the extent that his/her disability necessitates it. For some people, that may mean one day a week, two half-days, or every day for a particular period of time (e.g., for three months while an employee recovers from treatment or surgery related to a disability). In other instances, the nature of a disability may make it difficult to predict precisely when it will be necessary for an employee to work at home. For example, sometimes the effects of a disability become particularly severe on a periodic but irregular basis. When these flare-ups occur, they sometimes prevent an individual from getting to the workplace. In these instances, an employee might need to work at home on an "as needed" basis, if this can be done without undue hardship.

(Source: "Work At Home/Telework as a Reasonable Accommodation," Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, February 3, 2003, .) www.eeoc.gov/facts/telework.html

Back to top

GREAT WEB SITES

Electionline.org
www.electionline.org
Electionline.org is a forum for learning about, discussing, and analyzing election reform issues. Serving policymakers, officials, journalists, scholars, and concerned citizens, electionline.org provides a centralized source of data and information about reform efforts for everyone with an interest in the issue. The Election Reform Information Project also provides research on questions of interest to the election reform community and sponsors conferences where policymakers, journalists and other interested parties can gather to share ideas.

National Transit Library
www.fta.dot.gov/ntl/ADA/index.html
Through the Federal Transit Administration's National Transit Library, the Department of Transportation offers technical assistance concerning the transportation provisions of Title II and Title III of the ADA. The ADA section of the library links to the ADA regulations for paratransit services and fixed route access, and the Paratransit Eligibility Manual.

National Association of Towns and Townships (NATaT)
www.natat.org/natat/
Links to local and international government HomePages and state and local government sites. Federal Web Locator provides access to wide range of federal agencies, documents, statistics, information.

National Association of ADA Coordinators
www.4naadac.com/
Membership organization of state and local government ADA coordinators, with a special section for college and university coordinators. Produces a bi-monthly newsletter and hosts regional conferences with representation from federal agencies (EEOC and DOJ).

National Association of Counties (NACo)
www.naco.org
Will research questions about the ADA for any county elected official or ADA coordinator.

Back to top

PUBLICATIONS

State and Local Government Publications

Title II Technical Assistance Manual
DOJ in-depth explanation, questions, answers and practical examples. 77 pp.

DOJ Title II State & Local Regulations
22 pp.

Title II Highlights
8 pp., $1

Title II Action Guide for State and Local Governments and Employment Supplement
Explains state and local government obligations; has forms for conducting a self-evaluation. 201 pp., $24

How to File a Title II Complaint
1 pp.

ADA Self-Evaluation Guide For Public Elementary and Secondary Schools
US Dept. of Ed. guide explains Title II & Section 504 requirements and assists school districts to conduct a self-evaluation. 278 pp., $21

Law Enforcement Q & A
DOJ publication provides information for law enforcement agencies in question and answer format. 13 pp.

Telephone Emergency Service Q & A Sheet
DOJ publication provides information on TTY and modem direct access requirements for telephone emergency services, including 911. 3 pp.

ADA National Access for Public Schools Briefing Sheets
The five sheets range from 6 - 10 pp.
Bound set of five $10
Administrative Requirements $2
Nondiscrimination Requirements $2
Program Accessibility (includes info on facility access) $2
Effective Communication $2
Employment $2

ADA & Public Schools: Access for All
18:46 minute video covers ADA/504 requirements for public elementary and secondary schools. $30

Common Questions About Title II
DOJ document on facility access, braille, large print and sign language interpreter requirements. 6 pp.

ADA Guide for Small Towns
DOJ document addresses facility access, historic buildings, effective communication, administrative requirements. Includes illustrations. 21 pp.

The ADA and City Governments: Common Problems
DOJ document addresses "grandfathering," program access, historic facilities, curb ramps, effective communications, self-evaluation and transition plan. 9 pp.

Small Towns Practical Guide
Explains Title II basics for small towns and rural counties. Includes sample grievance procedure and public notice plus forms for conducting a self-evaluation and developing a transition plan. 58 pp.

These publications are available from our Center by calling 800-949-4232 V/TTY or order online using our new online publications sstore at www.adaptiveenvironments.org/store.

Announcement:
Sections 508 & 255 Information Technology Communication and Accessibility A Technical Assistance CD Rom
Order your copy today!
Specifically designed as a teaching and training tool
Comprehensive information on compliance, enforcement and implementation
Include examples of do's and don'ts for web accessibility
Cost: $10

To order:
1-800-949-4232 v/tty, or 617-695-0085
ADAinfo@NewEnglandADA.org

Funded by Information Technology Technical Assistance and Training Center (ITTATC)

Back to top

Events/Announcements

Fair Housing Accessibility FIRST Program
Design and Construction Resource Center

Adaptive Environments, in collaboration with Bearing Point, Inc. and the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), is providing design and construction technical assistance nationwide on the Fair Housing Act of 1988 to builders, design professionals, housing authorities, fair housing organizations, advocates, service providers and consumers. Adaptive Environments, as the Design and Construction Resource Center, will respond to questions regarding fair housing compliance through a national toll-free number 1-888-FH1RST1 / 1-888-341-7781 (v/tty) or by e-mail at contact@fairhousingfirst.org. The Fair Housing Accessibility FIRST Program has information on training events, resources and additional assistance through its website www.fairhousingfirst.org.

Attention Subscribers!
Are you interested in receiving our newsletter via e-mail? Send us a message at info@AdaptiveEnvironments.org and we'll drop Access New England directly into your e-mail letterbox. Moved recently? Changed your name? No longer interested in receiving our newsletter? Let us know so we can keep our mailing list up-to-date and effective. Call us at 800-949-4232 V/TTY or drop us a line at 374 Congress Street, Suite 301, Boston, MA 02210. Questions about the ADA? Call us at 800-949-4232 V/TTY for answers and guidance.

Back to Top

Back to Previous Page