Certified for Access

Return to the form

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

Level accreditation good. The 'portable program' idea is good.

The tiered level is a good start.

Easy to understand

The customer aspect is very strong. Acquiring customer buy-in will only increase awareness and recognition.

Incentives are a great motivator for those in the industry who still haven't recognized how important accessibility is to our communities.

Accreditation system and focus on portability

Simple to understand, and effective at raising awareness.

Focusing on improving the knowledge across the board in the accessibility space is a must moving forward.

The benefits to the community and the collaboration amongst organizations

Strong background in digital marketing, proposes a multi-level accreditation system which will support organizations in different stages.


Incentives are massive motivators. This is truly where the basis of strength comes from.

Recognition being recorded and publicized. This can help market a company.

T4G is looking to make digital components accessible to all.

Every organization loves recognition - in the case of this prototype, business have the opportunity to do good by making their sites accessible for everyone and receive recognition and the opportunity to share with the public what they're doing - a win-win situations for sure.

Well defined pilot strategy and a clear vision for growth.

understands the challenges and focuses on how to address. focuses on the banking industry which has very high demands for accessibility

Tiered model of certification may be compelling for some businesses.

It presented a strong case for the business benefits of involvement in this program.

tiered model

The model focuses on accreditation to WCAG which is quite intense and difficult to understand. It focuses on affordable and sustainable ways of embracing accessibility. Focus is on inclusive design and user experience. It has a tiered system for accreditation. This model would be a good to assist one of the other models which do not focus on WCAG.

Great! Tiered system allows businesses measure their progress and allows everyone to be involved.
Simple but effective model

technology focus

- The tiered approach is clear by using the medal grading model, and is understood by a wide audience
- Technology based
- Cost (while not stated yet), does factor in size, an organization's rating, and revenue
- Costs include a pass/fail assessment with remediation report, and a certificate of recognition based on the tier acheived

Portable system and tiered levels good for businesses to try and achieve.

plans to be a leader in digital accessibility with technology going beyond current WCAG standards
incentive program is a good approach
mentorship program is a good approach
Like this feature: Progress towards future accessibility goals would be tracked, and training & knowledge base on accessibility would be maintained
digital technology accessibility is portable in all jurisdictions and sectors

Good idea but lacks more thought to process and implementation given the timelines.

Easy to understand. Geared towards encouraging participation and ongoing improvement.
Backed by solid company with tech along with usability expertise.

Simple and straight forward to understand

The competitive and mentorship ideas are an interesting angle to engage businesses.

recognizes importance of using modern technology; business oriented leadership may have good traction with SMEs

How could this model be improved?

Not enough background. Partners not established yet.

Not sure about the roll out to be with in the GTA and a business sector of "banking" for the pilot. Not all communities have the same economic scale like the GTA, how will this model equate to smaller towns like Perth Ontario.

Additional ties with the city and province programs for commitment to barrier-free accessibility

More details about the pricing for different sectors and business sizes

Can't think of anything right now. Looks good to me.

Not that I see

Named partners.

is this A or AA?

Insufficient details - no explanation or concrete examples on how this program would work.

The present scope seems very limiting. The model seems strong enough to apply in a larger scope then a specific area.

unsure on the capacity of the lead organization and their background/knowledge/experience in community accessibility/inclusion
lack of detail
stakeholders/partners unclear
involvement of people with disabilities unclear

I am not sure if the GTA is indicative of most organizations as a test community.


too vague -- no specifics of how the model would be delivered or measures for success

- Does not state anything about privacy to participants
- Focus on banking, not sure why?
- Resources to move up a level not clearly stated
- Again, cost could be an issue for organizations

Lots of costs to business.

this is a model that limits itself to digital technology and does not include any other areas requiring accessibility

I would recommend adding some pilot sites outside Toronto - to get buy in I think it needs a provincial focus. I would also elaborate on partnerships - who you would consider partnering with?

Better alignment to individual business, business needs hands on support and I am uncertain that a video based program will give them the necessary tools to enable change. Also it seems that businesses will continue to pay in order to achieve a higher level and I am wondering with they will notice the ROI in the initial stages to feel the impact in order to continue.

Identification of partners or proposed sectors where partners would come from. Pilot strategy is a little narrow focused.

vague - not enough concrete explanation; to much focus on marketing; have to go deeper beyond just technology and marketing

Is this model likely to raise public awareness of accessibility?

Chart summary for "Is this model likely to raise public awareness of accessibility?"

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?"

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

My rating

Chart summary for "My rating"
5 stars3767.27%
4 stars23.64%
3 stars59.09%
2 stars1120%
1 star00%