- From: Angela Barker <angela.barker@ukg.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 14:52:02 +0000
- To: Stacey Swinehart <stacey.swinehart@gmail.com>, David Fazio <dfazio@helixopp.com>
- CC: Jeff Kline <jeffrey.l.kline@gmail.com>, Susana Pallero <susipalleroarguello@gmail.com>, Maturity Model TF <public-maturity@w3.org>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Message-ID: <BYAPR11MB32075C6337BFB05075827AC4EFC02@BYAPR11MB3207.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Regrets for me today as well, and unfortunately the 19th and 26th as well with vacation and a work conference. Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef> ________________________________ From: Stacey Swinehart <stacey.swinehart@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2024 4:48:52 AM To: David Fazio <dfazio@helixopp.com> Cc: Jeff Kline <jeffrey.l.kline@gmail.com>; Susana Pallero <susipalleroarguello@gmail.com>; Maturity Model TF <public-maturity@w3.org>; Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> Subject: [External Origin] Re: Minutes: [Maturity] Model Task Force 06-05-24 Meeting Agenda Regrets for today. I'm out of town. sent from my phone On Wed, Jun 12, 2024, 1:25 AM David Fazio <dfazio@helixopp.com<mailto:dfazio@helixopp.com>> wrote: I’ve reviewed the Google doc that we are updating the Editor’s draft with to see if Jason’s request about including monitoring effectiveness has been addressed. It appears every dimension has at least one stage where effectiveness is somehow monitored. I’ve pasted the findings below. We will discuss tomorrow and should be able to resolve Github Issue 154. Communications: The level is in Optimize when proof points demonstrate that:: * authoring, editing, and reviewing processes, procedures, and tools are in place, used consistently, and are regularly evaluated and refined to ensure that all internal and external communications are fully accessible * accessible communications training relevant to each individual’s position is required, measured, and monitored for improvement. Proof Points: None listed Knowledge and Skills The level is in Optimize when proof points demonstrate that: * all personnel position descriptions, hiring announcements, and project management consistently communicate the required and preferred accessibility knowledge and skills * the workforce is periodically evaluated to ensure knowledge and skills are current with the most up-to-date standards and accessibility practices * training is part of the onboarding process * periodic analysis has been used to identify gaps in knowledge as well as training materials * annual training (conferences, events, online, etc.) is provided to maintain skills current with ICT accessibility requirements and industry best practices * workforce inclusion training incorporates accessibility for persons with disabilities, and certification programs are available * tracking systems are in place and consistently used to maintain training inventory, measure skills, and track completion * training to enhance accessibility knowledge and skills relevant to each individual’s position is required, measured, and monitored for improvement. Proof Points: 3.2.2.1<http://3.2.2.1> Assessing Current Skills to Identify and Address Gaps Assessments may include: * organizational surveys that identify current skill levels and gaps * tracking employee training for ICT accessibility skills * certification or competency reviews and programs * accessibility criteria integration into employee performance measurements. Support The level is in Optimize when proof points demonstrate that: * fully trained customer support staff able to support users' accessibility questions * multiple ways to communicate with technical support that meets the needs of customers with disabilities are provided * ICT accessibility support is available for all internally and externally used ICT * training programs are in place for ICT support staff, and staff has been trained * continuous improvement plans are ongoing * accessibility support training relevant to each individual’s position is required, measured, and monitored for improvement. Proof Points 3.3.2 Proof Points Support proof points may include but are not limited to: * written policy on requesting and providing employee ICT-related accommodations * publicly available (and accessible) web accessibility statement with pointers to support mechanisms * support mechanisms are accessible * help topics or FAQs that are specific to accessibility * training for customer support agents (or internal ICT support staff) in accessibility, assistive technology, and disability etiquette and awareness * established disability-focused employee resource groups (ERG) with executive sponsorship * validation process in place to manage accessibility feedback * accessibility feedback is incorporated to facilitate continuous improvement of identified ICT * defined and documented methods to evaluate the effectiveness of accessibility support, actively in use. ICT Development Lifecycle The level is in Integrate when proof points demonstrate that: * there are ongoing process improvement efforts for accessibility in the ICT development lifecycle per role or discipline * accessibility requirements are considered and practiced but not consistently applied during ICT design, development, and testing across the ICT portfolio * remediation of existing products, applications, and websites has started * training on ICT development lifecycle accessibility, relevant to each individual’s position, has started. The level is in Optimize when proof points demonstrate that: * there’s an ICT development accessibility thought leader at the organization who adheres to a structural, standardized, and reporting approach * design specifications include accessibility guidance, developers consistently create accessible User Interfaces (UI), manual and automated accessibility testing is performed during development, and automated accessibility testing is incorporated into Continuous Integration/Continuous Delivery (CI/CD) build pipelines * release management includes gates for accessibility quality * maintenance releases are re-inspected for accessibility * ACRs are updated and made available, as needed, for procurable ICT * research deliberately seeks out and evaluates input from users with disabilities * ICT development lifecycle accessibility training, relevant to each individual’s position, is required, measured, and monitored for improvement. Proof Points None Personnel The level is in Optimize when proof points demonstrate that: * employees with disabilities are leveraged throughout the organization<https://w3c.github.io/maturity-model/#dfn-organization> to achieve full ICT accessibility maturity * organization-wide, disability inclusion staffing efforts are well-defined, evaluated, remediated, and integrated with ICT accessibility efforts and goals across the organization * employees with disabilities hold critical decision-making positions and are included in all areas of the organization to drive accessibility in every facet of the business * the disability employee resource group (ERG) is leveraged to inform accessibility decision-making * employees with disabilities are leveraged to audit accessibility * employees with disabilities are leveraged for product development * employees with disabilities are leveraged for the development of accessible services. Proof Points 3.5.2.1<http://3.5.2.1> Recruiting * established goals for recruiting employees with disabilities * hiring announcements with diversity statements encouraging and attracting applications from people with disabilities * a gap analysis or needs assessment to understand where the business is falling short of including applicants with disabilities * preferential hiring initiatives to recruit employees with disabilities, where not prohibited by law Procurement The level is in Optimize when proof points demonstrate that: * full and consistent use of accessibility processes, criteria, contract language, and decision-making to procure and maintain accessible products and services throughout the procurement life cycles * procurement processes are regularly reviewed and refined as needed * training on accessibility procurement knowledge and skills relevant to each individual’s position is required, and improvement is measured and monitored. Proof Points 3.6.2.5<http://3.6.2.5> Accessibility in Procurement Program Management * an accessibility audit to determine where the procurement program system is not meeting accessibility requirements has been conducted * lifecycle of procurement contracts has a defined, documented, and tracked lifecycle * procurement-related accessibility metrics are tracked and documented * a defined process for identifying and addressing complaints Culture The level is in Integrate when proof points demonstrate that: * cultural programs have been created and initially deployed * metrics have been established, and hiring practices have been implemented * policies are in place with partial execution * diversity and inclusion are promoted, but no action plan has been developed * communities of practice have been established * training on accessibility culture knowledge and skills relevant to each individual’s position has started. The level is in Optimize when proof points demonstrate that: * there’s a strong cultural awareness, appreciation, sensitivity, and support for all aspects of ICT accessibility and people with disabilities * policies, processes, and practices are in place, used consistently, and regularly reviewed and refined as needed * all employees understand and are sensitive to the importance of ICT accessibility and how it fits within their roles and responsibilities. They also appreciate the value of a diverse population within and outside the organization<https://w3c.github.io/maturity-model/#dfn-organization> * training on accessibility culture knowledge and skills relevant to each individual’s position is required, measured, and monitored for improvement Proof Points 3.7.2.1<http://3.7.2.1> Organizational Culture of Disability Inclusion * executive sponsor for digital accessibility * executive-level digital accessibility program leadership * executive statement of the organization’s commitment to digital accessibility * IT accessibility policy in place and implemented * a proactive approach to digital accessibility included in business strategy * digital accessibility promotion as a market differentiator included in business strategy * core values incorporate digital accessibility as a necessity for disability inclusion * code of conduct includes digital accessibility * diversity, equity, and inclusion activities include a disability focus * communities of practice include a digital accessibility focus * ICT accessibility criteria are integrated into employee/officer performance plans (if relevant) * mandated and monitored employee support for digital accessibility and disability inclusion * monitoring and improvement of digital accessibility program * accessibility and disability inclusion-specific questions included in regular employee satisfaction surveys * defined and documented process for employee feedback on accessibility and disability-inclusion efforts From: Jeff Kline <jeffrey.l.kline@gmail.com<mailto:jeffrey.l.kline@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, June 5, 2024 at 9:48 AM To: Susana Pallero <susipalleroarguello@gmail.com<mailto:susipalleroarguello@gmail.com>>, Maturity Model TF <public-maturity@w3.org<mailto:public-maturity@w3.org>>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net<mailto:janina@rednote.net>>, David Fazio <dfazio@helixopp.com<mailto:dfazio@helixopp.com>> Subject: Re: Minutes: [Maturity] Model Task Force 06-05-24 Meeting Agenda David, Thanks for the discussion today on how to integrate Metrics and goals into the model. For next week’s call, I would to propose that the other members of the team the team share their thoughts on the topic / implementation and how / where include this in the model. On further investigation using the latest (Stacey document) language in the Procurement Dimension, there is currently a proof point here: 3.6.2.5<http://3.6.2.5> Accessibility in Procurement Program Management • an accessibility audit to determine where the procurement program system is not meeting accessibility requirements has been conducted • lifecycle of procurement contracts has a defined, documented, and tracked lifecycle • procurement-related accessibility metrics are tracked and documented • a defined process for identifying and addressing complaints but it is sort of buried there. To ensure higher prominence and indication of importance, I think it would be best to remove the proof point from that subsection and put in a new, separate proof point subsection such as: 3.6.2.5<http://3.6.2.5> Procurement Metrics and Goals • Establish appropriate / meaningful goals and metrics the procurement organization, to measure and track progress towards achieving those goals. If that makes sense, we would then to review the other dimensions for similar proofpoints already included, and handle the same as the above example, ensuring consistency across all of the dimensions. Again, using Procrement as an example, I would also argue that such a new proofpoint can easily be subject to all 4 of the maturity stages, not just “integrate” and Optimize”. See the latest language in Stacey’s document below: _____________________________________ 3.6.1 How to Evaluate Procurement Maturity Level 1. Download the maturity model spreadsheet<https://www.w3.org/TR/maturity-model/#assessment-template-excel>. 2. List all the organization’s current “Procurement” efforts. 3. Compare the list to the spreadsheet to decide which proof points will be used to assess your organization’s “Procurement” accessibility maturity. Not all proof points will be used for every business or organization. The proof points in section 3.6.2 are non-exhaustive examples of criteria. The level is Inactive when proof points demonstrate that: • no effort has been made or only isolated efforts have been identified. The level is in Launch when proof points demonstrate that: • work has been initiated to identify and integrate accessibility into procurement processes and accessibility language into all ICT-related solicitation and contract documents and vendor responses throughout the procurement life cycle • some plans are in place for providing accessibility procurement knowledge and skills relevant to each individual’s position. The level is in Integrate when proof points demonstrate that: • solicitation and contract language are complete, and responses have been analyzed by accessibility or trained procurement professionals • vendors are required to submit accessibility documentation to be evaluated as part of the overall vendor assessment • a communications mechanism has been put in place to inform vendors of accessibility requirements • accessibility is a monitored element of the procurement life cycle • accessibility criteria are included in contract renewal negotiations • training on accessibility procurement knowledge and skills relevant to each individual’s position has started. The level is in Optimize when proof points demonstrate that: • full and consistent use of accessibility processes, criteria, contract language, and decision-making to procure and maintain accessible products and services throughout the procurement life cycles • procurement processes are regularly reviewed and refined as needed • training on accessibility procurement knowledge and skills relevant to each individual’s position is required, and improvement is measured and monitored. Looking forward to the continued discussion and resolution. Regards, [A picture containing text, black, clock Description automatically generated]<http://strategicaccessibility.com/> Jeff@strategicaccessibility.com<mailto:Jeff@strategicaccessibility.com> 5 1 2 . 4 2 6 . 9 7 7 9 From: Susana Pallero <susipalleroarguello@gmail.com<mailto:susipalleroarguello@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, June 5, 2024 at 11:06 AM To: Maturity Model TF <public-maturity@w3.org<mailto:public-maturity@w3.org>>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net<mailto:janina@rednote.net>>, David Fazio <dfazio@helixopp.com<mailto:dfazio@helixopp.com>> Subject: Minutes: [Maturity] Model Task Force 06-05-24 Meeting Agenda Hola a todos, Please find attached the link for the minutes: https://www.w3.org/2024/06/05-maturity-minutes.html<https://www.w3.org/2024/06/05-maturity-minutes.html> -- Susana Pallero
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2024 14:52:19 UTC