Further/Additional Readings

All of these readings are linked to in the back of the Body of Knowledge.

Table of Contents

  1. Domain One (16 Readings)
  2. Domain Two (1 Reading)
  3. Domain Three (19 Readings)

Domain One

United Nations: Chapter V: Breaking Down Barriers

We open with a cautionary statement on demographics. Throughout this article, the authors will repeatedly emphasize that more practical data needs to be collected regarding the prevalence of disability and the living conditions of Disabled people, as well as the efficacy of the programs that are on the books in different nation states.

How many Disabled people are poor, and how many poor people are Disabled? There's a high correlation, but we don't know how high it is internationally. Disabled people are less likely to be employed and Disabled children are less likely to go to school, especially in developing countries. Inaccessible employment and education options exacerbate this state of affairs, but not all barriers are physical: attitudinal barriers concerning the capacity and worthiness of Disabled people also lead to troubling outcomes.

Disability Benefits: Comprehensive Coverage

The UN has identified various kinds of coverage that support three stages of life. Care/support benefits (additional budget to cover AT, support workers, and rehabilitation) should be provided throughout.

A child disability benefit should be provided to a Disabled child's parents through their childhood.

Disabled adults should have access to income replacement benefit, disability-related costs benefit, partial or full disability pension, and employment injury compensation.

Older Disabled adults should have access to an old age-pension in addition to disability-related costs benefit.

Disability Benefits: Effective Coverage

Comprehensive coverage is not the same as 'effective coverage.' A program may be comprehensive but it's only effective if Disabled people know it exists and can be accepted into their program. Apparently, only about 28% of people with severe disabilities receive disability benefits, with South-East, Central, and Southern Asia having particularly low percentages.

The authors note that "notable strides" have been made since the CRPD, but the numbers speak clearly for themselves: More work is to be done.

Disability Benefits: Adequate Coverage

When coverage is adequate, disability benefits are sufficient to guarantee income security.

Many countries, however, purposely set disability benefit values below the minimum wage in order to avoid any potential negative impact on the employment of persons with disabilities

Apparently Uzbekistan and Brazil are the best when it comes to this. Speaking from my perspective, it is not uncommon to hear, especially from Disabled people in America and Canada, that one cannot live off of disability benefits provided. There are also many people who lose the ability to qualify for disability benefits if they get married, if they receive gifts of money, if they hold a part-time job or do gig work. The support offered is highly conditional, meaning that Disabled people cannot supplement inadequate resources lest they risk losing all the benefits they are granted. People in this situation are trapped.

Another hole people can fall through is when their disability is not recognized as such. In places like India and Japan, as we've learned from other readings, the actual percentage of Disabled people is estimated to be higher. In India, this may be due to the fact that only a limited number of disability types are recognized.

Disability Benefits: Who Qualifies

Disability assessments and knowledge of disability programs stand in the way between Disabled people and these benefits. Shifting eligibility criteria compounds the problem.

Recent disability social protection reforms have concentrated on removing benefits for persons who have disabilities but a significant capacity to work.

The authors note that doing this effectively results in less Disabled people in the labour force. They note that Australia and Ireland have tried to combat this progressively; Australia allows pension receivers to work up to 30 hours/week without losing the benefit. These efforts have been more successful in increasing labour participation than reforms that attach benefits to participation in training and job-searching activities.

Conclusion

The article concludes with a call to research the impact of disability benefits on a global scale, and recommends that whatever social protections offered to Disabled people should not hinder the larger goal of social inclusion of Disabled people in the workplace and in public life.

Additional Commentary

I think this article's conclusion operates from a rehabilitation first mindset that prioritizes the health of the economy over the quality of life of Disabled people. The article's conclusion should finish with a call for effective, comprehensive, and adequate coverage provided to all, but perhaps the authors shy away from this in recognition that this is a large jump ahead from what many developing countries are able to procure.

It's a pragmatic conclusion and non-preachy conclusion, but I think they could have crafted a similar idealistic call using the CRPD and SDG frameworks that would still come across as motivating and realistic.

WHO, Assistive Technology for Children with Disabilities

This document has an easy-read version, good to get a gist of the general argument before you jump into the statistics and paragraphs.

Summary

It is estimated that only 10% of Disabled children in low-income countries go to school. The main argument of this paper is that access to assistive technology is a major reason for this statistic. They emphasize assistive technology as a "precondition for achieving equal opportunities" and that the right to assistive technology is enshrined in the CRPD and Convention on the Rights of the Child, with particular reference to Article 23 of the CRC.

Assistive technology helps Disabled children with mobility, vision, hearing, communication, and cognition. Children who use AT have higher confidence and are viewed with 'better attitudes from community members.' It also may reduce broader economic burden from formal support services or caregiver responsibilities.

The global need for AT has not been identified statistically. For example, the number of people who need hearing aids and the number of people who have hearing disabilities is not the same.

Current barriers to getting AT include financial barriers, lack of national programs, lack of awareness of AT solutions, lack of regional supply, and inaccessibility that might make the AT less effective.

The WHO recommends that AT provision programs should be developed under the principles of availability, accessibility, affordability, adaptability, acceptability, and quality, and while engaging in international cooperation.

Some Commentary

I would have liked if they would have covered something related to how products marketed towards Disabled people or as AT have an enormous markup. It also seems a bit distasteful to imply that AT can be a replacement for more formal service provision. Some clarification on the interaction of support services with AT would have been appreciated, or it may have been better if the scope of this article was widened to the provision of formal services and AT to children.

Under the CRC and CRPD, children have a right to both. They also aren't easily separated from one another. For example, an audiologist might work with a speech language pathologist to determine appropriate technology for a Deaf child. Additionally, all of the suggestions for what characterize good AT provision programs indeed also apply to the provision of formal services.

Project IDEAL: Speech or Language Impairments

Content from this section already integrated into my page on Speech and Language Disorders.

Scottish Muscle Network: Information about Fatigue Management

Content from this section integrated into my page on Mobility Disabilities.

University of Florida: Teaching Students with Disabilities: Orthopedic Impairment

Summary

Orthopedic impairments include neuromotor impairments, degenerative diseases, and musculoskeletal disorders. This article argues that instructors teaching students with an orthopedic disability ought to make their teaching accessible, because it likely won't be accessible by default. It calls on instructors to collaborate with the student's support team to understand how accommodations should be incorporated, to stay creative and flexible, and to take special consideration in hands-on learning settings like labs and field trips.

Some Commentary

A lot of this article emphasizes communication with the student's support team, mentors, and individualized education plans, but it doesn't really emphasize the need to collaborate with the student themself. Like, I would really hate if someone just emailed my orthopaedic specialist without my consent or consultation, and assumed my orthopaedic specialist knew how to best accommodate me. No, my experience with that guy is very sour and he is not the best assessor of my access needs (he couldn't even assess my treatment needs properly). The authors of this article need to give the Disabled student more of a role, more voice, and more autonomy in their recommendations here. Especially because the article seems to be aimed at university instructors, where the students are adults.

On another note, orthopedic disability is a great term and really encompasses most of the things that IAAP's Mobility/Flexibility/Size-and-Shape category tries to speak to. I think the IAAP should change the name of this category to Orthopedic Disability in the future.

European Agency for Inclusive Education: Country Information for Europe

I have no idea what we are supposed to glean from this source. In terms of applying this to recommended study activities of Domain 1, I see literally zero relevance. Perhaps familiarizing with disability statistics for different countries, but this is a horribly clunky way to do it.

I'm skipping this one. I swear if they ask me 'What are the European Countries with the highest rate of children enrolled in inclusive education programs,' steam is absolutely going to leave from my ears.

Cognitive Criteria Project: Prototypes of cognitively accessible features for websites

This is another non-source. There is no link, and Google searches retrieve nothing. Skipping.

ETSI EG 203 350 V1.1.1 (2016-11): Guidelines for design of mobile ICT devices and their related applications for people with cognitive disabilities

This is a technical document, 86 pages. I recommend reading Annex A where it lists the usage needs, or the skill gaps that people with various cognitive disability profiles might have. I also recommend Annex B, which lists the principles underpinning the project. In the next section, I list each of the principles underpinning ETSI EG 203 350 and compare them to principles we see in WCAG 2.X, the Universal Design for Learning Guidelines 2.2, and the Universal Design Principles.

Conformity with user expectations.
Similar to WCAG 3.2 Predictable, UD Principle 3b "be consistent with user expectations and intuition." Shares some similarity with UDLG 3, 'Provide options for Comprehension.'
Support for Individualization
WCAG 1.3 Adaptable is what comes to mind, but the most one to one is probably the Level AAA SC 1.4.8 Visual Presentation, which is filed under WCAG 1.4 Distinguishable. In terms of UDLG, look to 1.1 'Offer ways of customizing the display of information.'
Perceivable
Shares a name with the first WCAG Guideline, Perceivable. Similar to UDLG 1, 'Provide options for Perception.' Also similar to UDL 4, 'Perceptible Information.'
Understandability
Shares a name with WCAG Guideline 3: Understandable. Lots of overlap with UDLG 2 'Provide options for Language and Symbols' as well as UDLG 3 'Provide options for Comprehension.' Minimal overlap with UD Principle 3b, 'Accommodate a wide range of literacy and language skills' and other guidelines under Principle 3, 'Simple and Intuitive.'
Controllability
Maps pretty cleanly onto WCAC Guideline 2: Operable.
Error Tolerance
UD Principle Tolerance for Error is most relevant here.
Compatibility with Other Systems
Most relevant here is WCAG 4.1: Compatible. Also adjacent would be UD Principle 4e: 'Provide compatibility with a variety of techniques or devices used by people with sensory limitations.' Also might be relevant is WCAG 2.5 Input Modalities.
Suitability for Learning
This one exclusively maps to WCAG SC 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions.
Freedom from Distractions
Most relevant here is UDLG 7.3 Minimize threats or harm. Also relevant is UD Principle 5d 'Discourage unconscious action in tasks that require vigilance.' In WCAG, one of the big ones for this is Pause, Stop, Hide.

Institute of Entrepreneurship Development: Learning difficulties in Europe

Very short post on dyslexia, this may be the source for some of the statistics we have seen pushed by the Body of Knowledge. This article acknowledges that dyslexia can be an even more serious issue for people living in countries that use a language other than their native language, or have a lot of language diversity, or frequently use multilingual communication.

IACEP: References Cognitive Education, Dynamic Testing & Assessment

Literally no idea what this is doing here since it's just a portal to a bunch of different websites selling courses and programs.

From what I can gather, the IACEP is an organization primarily focused on something called 'Dynamic Assessment' which is a supposedly culture-neutral way to see if children are struggling cognitively. It measures a student's ability to learn a skill in an interactive activity. This is opposed to traditional intellectual testing, which assumes a static intellectual quotient and ultimately fixed capacity.

But if that was the point, this is a horrible webpage to point to. This website assumes you are already familiar with what dynamic assessment is. Highly strange.

National Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Facts about Intellectual Disability

Broken link, but I found it on wayback. I found that the material here was sufficiently covered by the notes on intellectual disability that I have in Cognitive Disabilities.

I personally learned one new thing from this article. There's an implication here that if a child had some kind of brain injury at 17 years old, they would be considered to have an intellectual disability. But if a person had a brain injury at 18 years of age, they would not be considered to have intellectual disability, but maybe just brain damage. I am curious as to what the formal diagnosis would be in such a case.

Braddock, Rizzolo, Thompson, and Bell: Emerging Technologies and Cognitive Disability

This source is more than twenty years old at this point.

Summary

At the dawn of a bunch of new innovation happening in the field of tech, this is a paper that speculates as to what new technology can do for people with cognitive disabilities. They also include 'severe and persistent mental illness' in this category.

Under the 'Personal Support Technologies' heading, they speculate on the efficacy of interfaces that can guide a person to do various daily living, vocational, or educational tasks. They also talk about potential advancements in AAC. However, they do say that "a wearable data glove has been developed by an engineering student at the University of Colorado that translates American Sign Language." It is misinformation at worst, and a sloppy mistake at best, to include this example. It feels like every other year some engineering student makes some glove or program to interpret 'American Sign Language' when all it does is sometimes get some fingerspelling right. We're in the LLM age and still, we haven't gotten at all close.

They also acknowledge the technology gap between the Disabled and non-Disabled population, still a persistent problem (especially on an international scale), but not to the same extent as it was in 2001.

Under the subheading 'Assisted Care Systems Technology,' the authors talk about smart houses that can care for aging family members and people with cognitive disabilities, including speculation on how effective such systems could be made with machine learning. They also talk about 'smart transportation' systems that could be integrated into public transportation, as well as trackers that can be planted on older adults to prevent them from wandering. Personal robots are suggested as a way to fix the anticipated surplus of beds in nursing homes. VR is explored as a way for people with cognitive disabilities to gain daily life skills and vocational training in a safe setting.

Some Commentary

The vision that this paper puts forward, though it comes across as 'optimistic,' is actually quite disturbing at times. It seems to want to point out every single juncture at which the provision of face-to-face care could be automated away to robots, task assignment devices, and even smart homes that do maintain themselves. The systems that these researches suggest should be accompanied with plenty of caveats underscoring the essential human task that care provision is (it's incredibly valuable work, and the support providers who do it deserve to earn so much more than they do). I would have appreciated some skepticism or critique here, or some other indication that the authors didn't see disability merely as 'a problem that can be fixed if we throw enough robots at it.' I have yet to read Against Technoableism but I feel like the speculative 'optimism' of this paper includes arguments that would be broadly classified as technoableist.

I suppose I need to back that accusation up slightly more. This article mostly frames the group benefitting the most from this kind of technology not as the people with cognitive disabilities, but the relief of 'burden of care' for family caregivers and for the nation state's economy broadly. The implications that more independence among people with cognitive disabilities leads to more people with cognitive disabilities being able to enjoy all their human rights is the argument that should have at least been pointed to. There is an argument to be made here, that emerging technology can help facilitate the independent living movement and the deinstitutionalization movement, which were front-of-mind at the time of the article's writing. But that is not what is being celebrated throughout the article. It's about cutting costs, reducing perceived burden, and minimizing risk.

It's also a very old article and I really do wonder why the IAAP included it, given its very speculative nature. I'm sure there are articles out there that are far more evidence-based.

European Commission: Technology for people with cognitive, learning, and neurological impairments

This is a list of EU-funded research projects that are meant to be directed at developing tech for people with cognitive, learning, and neurological disabilities.

So the page lists out a bunch of different projects and links to all of them. Unfortunately, every single link is broken. Don't you worry. I dug them all up on Wayback.

Insension (2.256 million Euros)
Using AI to try to track and interpret 'unconventional behavioural signals such as specific body movements, facial expressions, or vocalizations.'
Easy Reading (2 million Euros)
Currently, the project appeals to be a kind of Chrome or Firefox extension that appears as an overlay onto web content and offers '16 tools' including text to speech, reading mode, screen-rule (to show where to read), injects symbols into paragraphs, changes the font or background color, a picture dictionary and word dictionary, among many others. The actual goals of the project would be to create software that s the legibility of web content for people with cognitive disabilities, among other research activities. All of Easy Read's deliverables are available for download. The team has apparently also worked on COGA with the W3C.
GABLE (1 million Euros)
A project that developed a series of 'serious games' intended to improve balance in children with Cerebral Palsy. A serious game is a game that has a motive other than just amusement, in this case the goal is balance rehabilitation and physical therapy. As CP children have a range of functionality, the series of games that the GABLE team developed included a highly customized level editor that could be edited to give the game an appropriate intensity and progression to each individual child. The games were designed to have single-player and multiplayer modes, intending to foster social development alongside physical capacity.
DE-ENIGMA (4 million Euros)
This project centers mostly around this child-like robot doll, called Zeno, who is used to train Autistic children in how to recognize facial expressions. The doll can make a bunch of facial expressions, and presumably, is less threatening than an adult engaging in the same kind of training. The DE-ENIGMA training recorded a whole bunch of interactions of Zeno and Autistic children. I personally presume that it is those interactions that will be the most significant deliverable of this project, as the interactions with Zeno are very formulaic and are a great data set for researchers to work with.
FocusLocus (1 million Euros)
FocusLocus is another 'serious games' project targeting children with ADHD. Their platform, REEFOCUS, is this little marine virtual world that has a bunch of mini games in it aimed at developing skills in delay aversion, inhibitory control, sustained attention, motor coordination, working memory, and selective attention. Children do these games while wearing a headpiece that can monitor electric brain waves. This, in addition to clinician assessments, monitors their progress.
MaTHiSiS (6.5 million Euros)
The weird acronym stands for "Managing Affective-learning THrough Intelligent atoms and Smart InteractionS." MaTHiSiS's website has been hacked so I couldn't glean more than just basic details: The project aimed to create a platform that promoted non-linear schemes aiming to engineer a universal learning approach appropriate for those with mental difficulties including IDD and Autism, and that they were going to use AI to do it. A lot of the material is in Greek, and I don't speak Greek.
InLife (1 million Euros)
InLife is a project that integrates 'serious games' intended to teach basic life skills with feedback from technology in a Smart Home (like a smart freaking recycling bin for example). One example they give is a game that rewards a child every time you put recycling in the recycling and garbage in the garbage. The project was divided into two wings, with one wing specifically targeting at building 'serious games' to help Autistic children develop social skills
Able to Include (1.57 million Euros)
The Able to Include project developed a set of open source tools that can be used as an 'accessibility layer' catering to the comprehension needs of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. This layer can be integrated into existing programs and is released as open source software. The tools include a mechanism that 'translates' text to pictures, a mechanism that simplifies text, and a mechanism that reads text aloud. It is primarily a Spanish language project. The accessibility layer can be integrated into social media apps like Facebook and WhatsApp. The team also created Kolumba, which they dubbed the 'easiest mail client on the web.' It is intended to provide an easy interface with few functionalities, with the primary goal of promoting labour integration for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. In many ways, the Able to Include followed similar goals to the Easy Reading project. But while the Easy Reading project created an overlay, the Able to Include project provided developer functionality to integrate this kind of assistance into apps natively.
Poseidon (3 million dollars)
Poseidon developed a bunch of apps and conducted research on ways that people with Down Syndrome can benefit from ICT-based assistive technology. Their main platform provides assistance in task setting, event setting, and route tracking. It is a platform with two sides. Support providers can control user settings and add new content (such as tasks, events, and routes) on Poseidon's interface for carers, available as a website. Users with Down Syndrome access their account on a mobile app. The app also provides a training mode for people with Down Syndrome to learn the route before they exit the house, and also provides support for shopping and money handling.

Georgia Tech, AMAC: Every Moment Counts

Another broken link. The amount of broken links is frankly undignified.

The biggest takeaway from this slide deck is that it proposes different functions that assistive technology for mental health might have.

The slide deck gives a bunch of examples of apps, many free! that you can download and use today.

Association of University Centers on Disabilities: Portrayal of People with Disabilities

Another broken link. Just speaking of accessibility for mental health and cognitive disabilties, these broken links really drive a wedge through me. Not to be dramatic, but I do feel like I'm being sawed in half with every new link that turns out to be broken.

Material here was basically covered under Disability Etiquette using other sources. It does talk about the End the Word campaign, which is another part of historical context.

Studies in Health Technology and Informatics: 360 Degree Films for Cognitive Inclusion at Workplaces

First Reaction

First reaction is a gut-drop. I have a Mastodon thread that got picked up and passed around a bit where I complained about the usage of dyslexia simulators. From that, some folks pointed me to resources that showed the very negative effect that so-called "disability simulators" have and I was even exposed to one unfortunate "autism simulator" that made me absolutely reel.

This article opens with the statement that three 360-degree films were developed as an exercise in "increasing awareness" amongst the non Disabled population and promises good results. It also has the keyword tag "empathy exercises" which puts me instantly on high alert. Let's see how bad (or good?) this is.

Things This Article Gets Right

Eftring and Kjellstrang, the authors of the article, are actually aware of the 'Crip for a Day' article that reports disability simulations lead to increased feelings of confusion and stigma, among other things. Eftring and Kjellstrang suggest that the reason their project was successful lies in the fact that their 360deg immersive films focus ultimately on the solution and accommodations that would ameliorate the situation, rather than the "disability simulation" itself.

And Not Right

Unfortunately, the videos that this project created are not findable online. They do include this excerpt regarding some of the content, however

When editing the pilot film, some effects were added, including noise from the traffic outside and when a person eats crispbread and a red beating heart with changing frequency, indicating stress level. The film also included thought bubbles to visualise the thoughts of the person at the centre of the scenario.

The fundamental issue is that simulations really, really fail. Thought bubbles cannot capture abstract thoughts. A red beating heart cannot actually show you what stress looks like or feels like. It will always be half-baked and bad and even when it's good, it will only illustrate one person's way of perceiving things. To pretend otherwise is to give non-Disabled people the impression that they know more than they actually do.

When "disability simulators" are developed, I believe that it should be entirely spearheaded by one Disabled individual given full artistic freedom. At the very least, Disabled people should be in charge of it. But Eftring and Kjellstrang's methodology was to solicit kinds of scenarios from Disabled folks, and then do all the artistic work themselves with a team of non-Disabled people.

Imagine if a group of white cisgender men did a half-day fact-finding mission with a focus group of women trying to figure out ways that women feel the workplace didn't accommodate them. Imagine if they contracted a focus group of woman for an afternoon, then proceeded to turn some of that feedback into an immersive 360 simulator of 'what it's like to be a woman in the workplace,'. Imagine if they then showed the simulator to a bunch of cisgender men in middle-management. It's a ridiculous prospect.

Get your goddamn empathy by listening to people talk about their experiences, don't try to make some shoddily edited simulation. The IAAP should link to testimonials of what it's like to be a cognitively Disabled person in modern workplaces, and not this bullcrap.

Buddy Project: Marketplace for assistive technologies for people with cognitive disabilities

The Buddy project's main deliverable was to create a cognitive-friendly app where people with intellectual disabilities and other cognitive disabilities could view their options for assistive technology. The Buddy project identified a barrier, in that most cognitively disabled people received assistive technology passively through their support network, and instead wanted to create an experience where people with cognitive disabilities may browse the options for themselves, and use the app independently.

In the Buddy project's final report, they detailed several steps they took to make their platform more friendly. For example, user testing revealed that email confirmation was too confusing at user sign-up. Instead, Buddy project used a Honeypot strategy to try to combat bots registering accounts en masse, which allows people to create an account without verifying their email. Another step they took was different methods to assess user needs. Users could either fill out a multi-step form, or complete a series of minigames to assess what kinds of AT might be suitable to recommend to them.

Nine 'user need' areas were decided on; they range from reading to calculation to memory and time management. The Buddy platform annotates each of the entries in the AT database with one or more of these user need areas, and then tailors the experience to each user using the assessment data.

Extensive usability testing involving people with disabilities is a real win in this project.

Domain Two

G3ict: Smart Cities for All Toolkit

This is listed as a Domain 2 supplement. Though there's a few materials here in this toolkit, I think the most salient resource that is being pointed to is the package titled, "Communicating the case for a stronger commitment to digital inclusion in cities". I believe this pairs best with the notes we've already taken on the Benefits of Accessibility.

Summary

The package details a bunch of points, accompanied with statistics, that one can use to selectively build a case for the inclusion of digital accessibility within city planning, though the arguments are applicable to basically all domains.

Here are points they made, quoted verbatim.

Some Commentary

For city planners, arguments like 'Cities can be disability rights leaders' blur the distinction between traditional business-case and human rights arguments for ICT accessibility. A novel argument that I haven't quite seen before is the one regarding 'reduction of server load,' where it is argued file size of each page is reduced when made accessible, and that accessible websites can be browsed by users with low bandwidth connections.

Domain 3

Employer Assistance and Resource Network on Disability Inclusion: Creating an Accessible and Welcoming Workplace

Broken link, not a good start to the day. The wild thing is that some of these broken links have been broken since before the BoK was updated in October 2023. This link, for example, shows signs of broken-ness starting in March 2022.

The Employer Assistance and Resource Network, or EARN as they are called, emphasises that it is the employer's obligation to provide an accessible application process and to accommodate Disabled employees. These are required under the ADA.

They also cover Section 508 obligations to make tech accessible, and point to resources that can help business owners achieve accessible physical and technological environments.

EARN's most important contribution is how they go about emphasizing attitudinal barriers, which isn't something we've seen a lot. We saw a little bit of this in the charity model of disability, and a little bit in Disability Etiquette.

Attitudinal barriers include positive assumptions and generalizations, and some have to do more with the culture around disability. EARN names classic attitudinal barriers such as inferiority, pity, ignorance, and backlash. But they also name these:

ITU: ICT accessibility assessment for the Europe Region

The ITU is the International Telecommunication Union. This is their report on the state of ICT accessibility amongst their member states with respect to a few ITU Targets. They note which of their members have signed onto the UNCRPD, the UNCRPD Optional Protocol, the Marrakesh Treaty, which have implemented anti-discrimination laws, recognized sign languages, mandated accessibility for websites and electronic communications. They also note which of their members provide accessible time-based media features, like captions, audio description, and sign language interpretation.

The majority of the document outlines different existing frameworks for ICT Accessibility implementation, and showcases examples of successful implementations.

Their goal is to have 'enabling environments ensuring accessible telecommunications and ICT' established in all countries by 2023.

To this end, they make a long string of recommendations at the end focusing on all the areas I've already mentioned, alongside calls to create capacity in academia, industry, for strong monitoring, and for more training capacity to be emphasized by policy makers. They basically call on member states to continue their efforts implementing the CRPD and various EU related regulations and directives, while also working with and involving Disabled people.

ISSA: ICT-Enabled coordinated service delivery

I'm confused by the relevance of this article. 'ICT-enabled coordinated service delivery' essentially translates to whenever multiple bodies collaborate together in the delivery of social programs. It does seem like an extension of 3F (organizational management,) however this article is completely based on the public sector.

Under the heading, 'critical success factors,' they agree upon elements of management essential to delivering coordinating services, and it mirrors slightly what we saw in the organizational management section. Just look at some of their major points:

John Hopkins University Press: The Diffusion of Disability Rights in Europe

Content from this article was covered in the Cyprus and Denmark sections in the National-Level Standards notes.

European Commission European Network of Legal Experts in Gender Equality and Non-Discrimination: Combatting disability discrimination and realising equality

This PDF is 100 pages long. We're going to look at the Executive Summary and Conclusion.

The primary documents that are being compared are the CRPD, and the Employment Equality Directive (EED). To date, there is no general anti-discrimination directive in the EU. The authors are concerned about the extent to which the EED and the CRPD are in line with each other, the extent to which EED provides coverage of the CRPD, and the points where they diverge.

They emphasize this is super important because member states in the EU might be under the false impression that in tranpslanting the EED, they have met their obligations for equal employment under the CRPD (to which all member states are ratifying bodies: they all ratified independently in addition to ratifying as the EU itself).

Key differences between the CRPD and EED

The report basically goes on to say that EU law doesn't fully implement the CRPD and this ought to be changed at some point. Additionally, the CJEU has the opportunity to make future rulings that are more in line with the interpretations and spirit of the CRPD, and the report encourages case law to move everyone further in the direction of CRPD-based interpretations.

They also note that a general equality directive extending non-discrimination beyond the domain of employment would be a nice thing to do.

University of Pretoria: #RatifyADRP: Call on African leaders to ratify

Material here was covered under Africa: Regional Standards

European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights: EU Framework for UNCRPD

The EU has created its own internal monitoring framework to monitor EU competence with its CRPD obligations. This does not replace national-level monitoring frameworks, which also exist.

They are essentially a working group bringing together the European parliament, European Ombudsman, EU agency for Fundamental Rights, and European Disability Forum. They meet twice a year, there's a chair and a secretariat. All the different agencies have their own responsibilities regarding monitoring, promotion of the CRPD, protection of the CRPD, and they all set their priorities together year after year.

ESCAP: Incheon Strategy

Material here was covered under Asia: Regional Standards

UN Economic and Social Affairs: International Norms and Standards Relating to Disability

This is a review of all the international norms regarding disability prior to the CRPD. This is a good article to read if you want to sort of imagine the problem that the CRPD was meant to address. There's a lot of things written but practically no legally binding things, despite things like the Decade of Disabled Persons.The one exception might be the Convention on the Rights of the Child article 23, which focuses on the rights of Disabled children specifically.

Here is basically a list of what existed prior to the CRPD in terms of things that could be enforced:

Additional Programmes mentioned, unenforceable

The shift to the social, human rights-based model started to be seen in 1982 and picked up from there.

WIPO: Summary of the Marrakesh Treaty

Material here was covered under Marrakesh: International Standards.

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner: Universal Declaration of Human Rights

This fact sheet actually covers the International Bill of Human Rights, which consists of the UDHR along with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), with two optional protocols appended to the latter. The first optional protocol provides a complaint mechanism. The second optional protocol prohibits the death penalty.

The UDHR was conceived alongside a vision for some form of implementation mechanism, first called a 'convention,' later renamed to a 'covenant.' The UDHR itself was completed first, and the two Covenants were introduced later. Much later. There was about a 25 year period where the UDHR was the only international standard for human rights.

So, to re-emphasize, the UDHR is not in and of itself a legal obligation, while the Covenants are explicitly legally binding upon the states that ratify it. This also means that the UDHR is "truly universal in scope." It is viewed as being applicable to every situation for every human being, regardless of whether a jurisdiction has or has not formally recognized it. The Covenants, on the other hand, are only legally binding on states that have ratified them.

Pair this with the other Conventions, that also take from the spirit of Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The implications of the UDHR are enshrined across these instruments, and embedded into national and regional legislations.

France, Law of equal opportunity, participation and citizenship, 2005

Material here was covered under France: National Standards

India, Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (R.P.W.D.)

Material here was covered under India: National Standards

Japan and Sweden: A Comparative Perspective of Disability Policies

Material here was covered under Japan: National Standards and Sweden: National Standards

Korea: Act On The Prohibition of Discrimination Against Persons With Disabilities And Remedy Against Infringement Of Their Rights

Material here was covered under Korea: National Standards.

World Wide Web Consortium: Web Accessibility Laws and Policies

Here is a table where we can easily compare laws and policies available across countries. Additionally, one can browse the countries and regions available for more detailed information .

On larger screens, you can browse all the countries through the sidebar. On smaller/zoomed screens, the sidebar collapses into a hamburger menu and it's very unintuitive. The hamburger menu is basically the first item in the tabbing order, but it opens in the main content underneath the site navigation so if you're tabbing or using a screen-reader, it can be quite disorienting.

This page is only updated through user contributions, so a large portion of it appears to not be up-to-date. Especially considering the overhaul that EN 301 549 will bring to harmonizing standards not just in the EU, but in 'canada' and Australia, might be best to check in on the websites of governments. Laws are changing rapidly right now.

US Federal Communications Commission: Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act

Speaking of changing laws, it is still uncertain whether Section 508 will still have any salt at all through Trump's second term.

This is just the full text of Section 508. See Domain-Specific and Procurement Law, or ICT Regulations and Standards for more on Section 508.

I realized that I didn't know how Section 508 was enforced. It turns out that people should file complaints directly to the offending agency. The Access Board encourages all government agencies to include a web accessibility policy somewhere on the site. Here's the Web Accessibility Policy from Customs and Border Protection as an example.

European Commission Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion: Accessibility Standardisation

Material here is basically covered in ICT Regulations and Standards.

US Department of Justice: Accessibility of State and Local Government Websites

Old article from 2003, clarifies that under the ADA, services and programs provided by State and local governments must be accessible. Has some classic examples of web accessibility blunders and points to some resources. Goes to show that digital accessibility has been around for a long time. Even Skip Links have been around for a long time!