Accessibility Certification Model

Return to the form

In your view, what are the strengths of this model?

Focuses on the issue of accrediting AODA participation. Emphasis on education.

Good vision and roll out startegy

Great strategy and vision, inclusive of all areas of the AODA

This model will get good results It aims to help every one with a disability

I believe it would be great if every build that houses a business could be accessible.

The idea of a score card sounds like a practical tool for assessing businesses, provided it accounts for different types of businesses (for example, base criteria that are supplemented by criteria that are applicable only when the business has sufficient revenues). The score card criteria should also be as unambiguous as possible, to reduce bias or misinterpretation.

Pilot phase also a good strategy, provided feedback from this phase are sufficiently scrutinized and recommendations for improvements to the program are actually implemented. Pilot projects can often suffer from not being "real" and thus outcomes not taken seriously, allowing for pre-determined outcomes to overshadow unexpected results and preventing improvements.

Uses best practices and existing research to adapt and update . Good network reach .

Lead organization has history of service/advocacy

The model is based on a recognized set of standards; it will recognize achievement; is comprehensive and inclusive and includes sponsorship. It has a set model and is tiered with graduated levels of certification and fees can be adjusted based on size and capacity of organization.

This proposed model greatly makes awareness of important aspects which might have been overlooked over the course of time.

This model seems well laid out and easy to follow and flow along with. The pilot stage has not only a time frame stated showing commitment and also allowing accountability but its assessment and evaluation, early adoption,feedback and redevelopment steps also appear as good quality check points which are necessary in generating high quality standards.
I also find the flexibility to adjust fees for service proportional to the size and capacity of the organisation or business by having education and sponsorship as proposed revenue streams a good concept.

Creation of a recognized rating system can allow businesses to participate at a level above and beyond AODA that they choose.

Using the five standards from AODA and excelling beyond

The model includes each of the AODA Standards and engages those using the model in a tiered approach that would not be overwhelming for someone just getting started.

- Provides a roadmap for identifying gaps and establishing goals
- Provides resources to organizations

Good tie in with AODA to strengthen it.

The model is build around the standards, and is looking to pull on experts and best practices.

Offers a variety of tiers to encourage participation by various organization types.

Credible, knowledgeable developers. Very comprehensive

It is a clear well thought out certification model

I like the reference to 'Reduce attitudinal barriers and promote the value of accessibility' - culture change is the biggest priority of all

-Involvement of March of Dimes

scorecard is a great concept and could work well

- Comprehensive, looks to best practices and expert opinions, as well complementing the existing AODA legislation and framework.
- Proposes the use of feedback and evaluation methods to measure goals.
- No cost for selected early adopters in the pilot project is appealing for a range of organizations.
- Has the potential to raise greater public awareness and contribute to a culture of accessibility.

How could this model be improved?

I'm not sure if this organization would be open to including consultants outside of its own to benefit from consulting opportunities that may arise.

Nothing established yet. A bit vague.

Very vague with the process of certification. I don't see a real path or process moving forward. Not sure how March of Dimes is going to improve the Built Environment mentioned above.

The paid sponsorship may hinder some

Feels more about form than substance.

Would like to see more details around the score card.

Nothing need to be improve I think the model was will thought out

The idea of paid membership into the Accessibility Certification Model ‘program’ could be more fully articulated. For example, what incentives are there for organizations to pay for this membership?

The model could have a greater focus on providing guidance, support and mentor ship to businesses or organizations to increase their accessibility.

Needs more emphases on including and employing those with lived experience

Vague description of: score card, how people with disabilities are included in the process?, who will be subject matter experts? how information will be shared with individuals about businesses or organizations

There is no mention of assistance to achieve accreditation, no mention on training. The cost could be prohibitive. Not all organizations are subject to all of the areas of accessibility and there is no mention of WCAG.

I feel this model addresses many situations which have been 'now' visited and it's improved recommendations will be greatly utilized. There are hardly any need for improvements to this proposal.

Including some digital assessment tools may be good, especially considering the different means by which people engage, learn, interpret and share information today. It may already be in the plan but I did not seem to see that area sufficiently explored or stated in this document.

too vague
section titled "benefits and costs" did not identify the costs to business
"pilot phase" does not give businesses certainty

More should be accomplished after five years than only creating a recognized rating system
MOD has limited exposure to persons with various other disabilities
MOD appears to want to maintain rather than improve on accessibility in the community
Having no government funding will make any new process difficult to succeed

The model is very generic in its responses to how it would address topics such as communications and marketing or ecuation.

- Vague
- Tiered approach is confusing and daunting
- Cost may not work for some organization's budgets
- No goverment funding, done my MODC, could be a huge task

Vague overall. Need more detail and test implementation.

This model has been well thought out, however, it will be prudent to ensure that the spirit of the Act and creation of an inclusive society is not lost in completing the accreditation. Cost may be a factor.

Would like to know the "influence" to change - will the pilot target companies that are not only early adopters but influential within their business spere

I am concerned this will not appeal to the majority of businesses as it is complex however I do see the value in key industries.

it is too focused on the AODA and the opinions of experts. The AODA is a minimum standard, and does not necessarily reflect lived needs/experience; emphasis on the role of experts tends to sideline the perspectives of PWD, which can be brought into play through bottom-up digital input - this model seems to miss this key criterion of the model as defined by the Model Design WG.

vague on certification process; needs to include people with disabilities and their lived experience; might be biased towards only using their consultants

- The 5-year vision is vague, what will be developed in these 5-years other than the rating system?
- Consult with disability advocates and self-advocates across a spectrum of abilities both physical and cognitive to gain a wider range of feedback at each step of the process.
- Consider incentivizing the pilot project to generate interest and constructive and meaningful feedback rather than complacency.
- Would like to see the model fleshed out more, there appears to be a lot of potential in the prototype.
- What would be the criteria for organizations to be invited into the pilot project? Would like to see this expanded on.

Is this model likely to raise public awareness of accessibility?

Chart summary for "Is this model likely to raise public awareness of accessibility?"
Yes2573.53%
No926.47%

Is this model likely to influence a business to change its practices?

Chart summary for "Is this model likely to influence a business to change its practices?"
Yes2470.59%
No1029.41%

Rate this prototype. Five stars is top rating. One star is lowest rating.

My rating

Chart summary for "My rating"
5 stars720.59%
4 stars720.59%
3 stars1235.29%
2 stars720.59%
1 star12.94%