E-mail List Archives

Thread: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?

for

Number of posts in this thread: 15 (In chronological order)

From: Druckman,Geri
Date: Mon, Mar 28 2016 2:20PM
Subject: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
No previous message | Next message →

Hi all,

Here’s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have had to deal with a similar situation before.
The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them to the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said application.

At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant and is seeking an exemption in the contract.

My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to that site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this all on them?

Any information is greatly appreciated.

Geri Druckman

(cross post with wai-ig)
The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

From: Moore,Michael (Accessibility) (HHSC)
Date: Mon, Mar 28 2016 2:31PM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Geri,

I can see a few potential points of pain for your organization.

Does this application provide access to information or services for which your organization receives federal funding? If so you may potentially be risking a compliant under section 504.

You may be risking a complaint under the ADA in the following two situations.

Does this application provide access to information or services to members of the public and is there an accessible alternative to using this application available from the same place where you link to the external application?

Does this application provide access to information or services to employees and/or potential employees and is there an accessible alternative to using this application that is available from the same places where you link to the external application?

Mike Moore
Accessibility Coordinator
Texas Health and Human Services Commission
Civil Rights Office
(512) 438-3431 (Office)

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Druckman,Geri
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 3:21 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?

Hi all,

Here’s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have had to deal with a similar situation before.
The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them to the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said application.

At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant and is seeking an exemption in the contract.

My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to that site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this all on them?

Any information is greatly appreciated.

Geri Druckman

(cross post with wai-ig)
The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

From: Lucy Greco
Date: Mon, Mar 28 2016 2:32PM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

i would think that if your using the tool and requiring people to use it
your the one that is responsible in the case of university if we ask our
students to use inaccessible products we are sued not the products lucy

Lucia Greco
Web Accessibility Evangelist
IST - Architecture, Platforms, and Integration
University of California, Berkeley
(510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
Follow me on twitter @accessaces


On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Druckman,Geri < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Here’s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have had
> to deal with a similar situation before.
> The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a
> vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This
> will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors
> side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them to
> the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said application.
>
> At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant and
> is seeking an exemption in the contract.
>
> My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or
> hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to that
> site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions
> responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this all
> on them?
>
> Any information is greatly appreciated.
>
> Geri Druckman
>
> (cross post with wai-ig)
> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
> confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
> contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
> comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended
> recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any
> further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
> this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is
> strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail
> message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all
> references to it and its contents from your systems.
> > > > >

From: Druckman,Geri
Date: Mon, Mar 28 2016 2:43PM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Michael,

This is an excellent point. At the moment I will assume this is not for
our employees, but by the nature of the institution I work for, any
employee may become a client at any given timeÅ 

We do receive federal funding to an extent, and from a conversation I had
with HR, we de need to comply with sections 508, 504, and 503.
I guess I need to dive head first into Section 504 and catch up on my
reading. If you have some guidance that can get me to the right places in
section 504, I¹ll greatly thankful.

Geri Druckman
Web Development Specialist
Accessibility|Usability|QA
MD Anderson Cancer Center



On 3/28/16, 3:31 PM, "WebAIM-Forum on behalf of Moore,Michael
(Accessibility) (HHSC)" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on behalf of
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

>Hi Geri,
>
>I can see a few potential points of pain for your organization.
>
>Does this application provide access to information or services for which
>your organization receives federal funding? If so you may potentially be
>risking a compliant under section 504.
>
>You may be risking a complaint under the ADA in the following two
>situations.
>
>Does this application provide access to information or services to
>members of the public and is there an accessible alternative to using
>this application available from the same place where you link to the
>external application?
>
>Does this application provide access to information or services to
>employees and/or potential employees and is there an accessible
>alternative to using this application that is available from the same
>places where you link to the external application?
>
>Mike Moore
>Accessibility Coordinator
>Texas Health and Human Services Commission
>Civil Rights Office
>(512) 438-3431 (Office)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
>Behalf Of Druckman,Geri
>Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 3:21 PM
>To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>Subject: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me
>still my concern?
>
>Hi all,
>
>Here¹s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have had
>to deal with a similar situation before.
>The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a
>vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This
>will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors
>side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them
>to the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said
>application.
>
>At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant and
>is seeking an exemption in the contract.
>
>My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or
>hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to
>that site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions
>responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this
>all on them?
>
>Any information is greatly appreciated.
>
>Geri Druckman
>
>(cross post with wai-ig)
>The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
>confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
>contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
>comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the
>intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended
>recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination,
>distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the
>information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that
>you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender
>by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from
>your systems.
>>>at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>>>>>The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

From: Druckman,Geri
Date: Mon, Mar 28 2016 2:44PM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

Thanks Lucy, this is my gut feeling too, I just need to convey it in a
legal/business like way to our sourcing and legal department.

Geri Druckman
Web Development Specialist
Accessibility|Usability|QA
MD Anderson Cancer Center



On 3/28/16, 3:32 PM, "WebAIM-Forum on behalf of Lucy Greco"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on behalf of = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

>i would think that if your using the tool and requiring people to use it
>your the one that is responsible in the case of university if we ask our
>students to use inaccessible products we are sued not the products lucy
>
>Lucia Greco
>Web Accessibility Evangelist
>IST - Architecture, Platforms, and Integration
>University of California, Berkeley
>(510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
>http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
>Follow me on twitter @accessaces
>
>
>On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Druckman,Geri < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Here¹s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have
>>had
>> to deal with a similar situation before.
>> The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a
>> vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This
>> will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors
>> side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them
>>to
>> the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said
>>application.
>>
>> At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant
>>and
>> is seeking an exemption in the contract.
>>
>> My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or
>> hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to
>>that
>> site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions
>> responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this
>>all
>> on them?
>>
>> Any information is greatly appreciated.
>>
>> Geri Druckman
>>
>> (cross post with wai-ig)
>> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
>> confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
>> contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
>> comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the
>>intended
>> recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient,
>>any
>> further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or
>>copying of
>> this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is
>> strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail
>> message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete
>>all
>> references to it and its contents from your systems.
>> >> >> >> >>
>>>>The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

From: Kelly Lupo
Date: Mon, Mar 28 2016 3:02PM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

The actual standards can be found on access-board.gov
<https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-it/about-the-section-508-standards/section-508-standards>,
and WebAIM.org has a breakdown of the regulations
<http://webaim.org/standards/508/checklist>; that is absolutely wonderful in
terms of translating them from legalese into English. (WebAIM also has a
PDF version of the checklist, if you want to print it
<http://webaim.org/standards/508/508checklist.pdf>;.)

Additionally, WebAIM also has a Chrome plug-in for checking compliance
<http://wave.webaim.org/extension/>;, as well as a web-based compliance
checker <http://wave.webaim.org/>; if you can't install things.

Both sites have tons of resources that I've found helpful in my starting to
learn about Section 508. (WebAIM also has WCAG 2.0 guidelines, as well.)

Kelly

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Druckman,Geri < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
> This is an excellent point. At the moment I will assume this is not for
> our employees, but by the nature of the institution I work for, any
> employee may become a client at any given timeÅ 
>
> We do receive federal funding to an extent, and from a conversation I had
> with HR, we de need to comply with sections 508, 504, and 503.
> I guess I need to dive head first into Section 504 and catch up on my
> reading. If you have some guidance that can get me to the right places in
> section 504, I¹ll greatly thankful.
>
> Geri Druckman
> Web Development Specialist
> Accessibility|Usability|QA
> MD Anderson Cancer Center
>
>
>
> On 3/28/16, 3:31 PM, "WebAIM-Forum on behalf of Moore,Michael
> (Accessibility) (HHSC)" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on behalf of
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
> >Hi Geri,
> >
> >I can see a few potential points of pain for your organization.
> >
> >Does this application provide access to information or services for which
> >your organization receives federal funding? If so you may potentially be
> >risking a compliant under section 504.
> >
> >You may be risking a complaint under the ADA in the following two
> >situations.
> >
> >Does this application provide access to information or services to
> >members of the public and is there an accessible alternative to using
> >this application available from the same place where you link to the
> >external application?
> >
> >Does this application provide access to information or services to
> >employees and/or potential employees and is there an accessible
> >alternative to using this application that is available from the same
> >places where you link to the external application?
> >
> >Mike Moore
> >Accessibility Coordinator
> >Texas Health and Human Services Commission
> >Civil Rights Office
> >(512) 438-3431 (Office)
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> >Behalf Of Druckman,Geri
> >Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 3:21 PM
> >To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> >Subject: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me
> >still my concern?
> >
> >Hi all,
> >
> >Here¹s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have had
> >to deal with a similar situation before.
> >The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a
> >vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This
> >will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors
> >side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them
> >to the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said
> >application.
> >
> >At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant and
> >is seeking an exemption in the contract.
> >
> >My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or
> >hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to
> >that site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions
> >responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this
> >all on them?
> >
> >Any information is greatly appreciated.
> >
> >Geri Druckman
> >
> >(cross post with wai-ig)
> >The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
> >confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
> >contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
> >comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the
> >intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended
> >recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination,
> >distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the
> >information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that
> >you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender
> >by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from
> >your systems.
> >> >> >at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >> >> >> >> >>
> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
> confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
> contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
> comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended
> recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any
> further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
> this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is
> strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail
> message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all
> references to it and its contents from your systems.
>
> > > > >

From: Druckman,Geri
Date: Mon, Mar 28 2016 3:10PM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

Thanks Kelly! I’m quite verse with Section 508, sadly not so much with
Section 504 and Section 503.

Geri

On 3/28/16, 4:02 PM, "WebAIM-Forum on behalf of Kelly Lupo"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on behalf of = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

>The actual standards can be found on access-board.gov
><https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-
>it/about-the-section-508-standards/section-508-standards>,
>and WebAIM.org has a breakdown of the regulations
><http://webaim.org/standards/508/checklist>; that is absolutely wonderful
>in
>terms of translating them from legalese into English. (WebAIM also has a
>PDF version of the checklist, if you want to print it
><http://webaim.org/standards/508/508checklist.pdf>;.)
>
>Additionally, WebAIM also has a Chrome plug-in for checking compliance
><http://wave.webaim.org/extension/>;, as well as a web-based compliance
>checker <http://wave.webaim.org/>; if you can't install things.
>
>Both sites have tons of resources that I've found helpful in my starting
>to
>learn about Section 508. (WebAIM also has WCAG 2.0 guidelines, as well.)
>
>Kelly
>
>On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Druckman,Geri < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> This is an excellent point. At the moment I will assume this is not for
>> our employees, but by the nature of the institution I work for, any
>> employee may become a client at any given timeÅ 
>>
>> We do receive federal funding to an extent, and from a conversation I
>>had
>> with HR, we de need to comply with sections 508, 504, and 503.
>> I guess I need to dive head first into Section 504 and catch up on my
>> reading. If you have some guidance that can get me to the right places
>>in
>> section 504, I¹ll greatly thankful.
>>
>> Geri Druckman
>> Web Development Specialist
>> Accessibility|Usability|QA
>> MD Anderson Cancer Center
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/28/16, 3:31 PM, "WebAIM-Forum on behalf of Moore,Michael
>> (Accessibility) (HHSC)" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on behalf
>>of
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>>
>> >Hi Geri,
>> >
>> >I can see a few potential points of pain for your organization.
>> >
>> >Does this application provide access to information or services for
>>which
>> >your organization receives federal funding? If so you may potentially
>>be
>> >risking a compliant under section 504.
>> >
>> >You may be risking a complaint under the ADA in the following two
>> >situations.
>> >
>> >Does this application provide access to information or services to
>> >members of the public and is there an accessible alternative to using
>> >this application available from the same place where you link to the
>> >external application?
>> >
>> >Does this application provide access to information or services to
>> >employees and/or potential employees and is there an accessible
>> >alternative to using this application that is available from the same
>> >places where you link to the external application?
>> >
>> >Mike Moore
>> >Accessibility Coordinator
>> >Texas Health and Human Services Commission
>> >Civil Rights Office
>> >(512) 438-3431 (Office)
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
>> >Behalf Of Druckman,Geri
>> >Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 3:21 PM
>> >To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>> >Subject: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me
>> >still my concern?
>> >
>> >Hi all,
>> >
>> >Here¹s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have
>>had
>> >to deal with a similar situation before.
>> >The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a
>> >vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This
>> >will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors
>> >side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them
>> >to the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said
>> >application.
>> >
>> >At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant
>>and
>> >is seeking an exemption in the contract.
>> >
>> >My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or
>> >hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to
>> >that site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions
>> >responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this
>> >all on them?
>> >
>> >Any information is greatly appreciated.
>> >
>> >Geri Druckman
>> >
>> >(cross post with wai-ig)
>> >The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
>> >confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
>> >contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
>> >comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the
>> >intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended
>> >recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination,
>> >distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the
>> >information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think
>>that
>> >you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the
>>sender
>> >by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from
>> >your systems.
>> >>> >>>archives
>> >at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>
>> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
>> confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
>> contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
>> comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the
>>intended
>> recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient,
>>any
>> further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or
>>copying of
>> this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is
>> strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail
>> message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete
>>all
>> references to it and its contents from your systems.
>>
>> >> >> >> >>
>>>>The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

From: Moore,Michael (Accessibility) (HHSC)
Date: Mon, Mar 28 2016 3:22PM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

Section 504 is really much more general - unlike 508 there are not specific guidelines for accessibility of ICT. It simply states that people cannot be discriminated based upon their disability in the provision of programs that receive federal funding.

One recent example is the following case.

This lawsuit, entitled Figueroa v Burwell , wants “to require HHS to provide blind individuals meaningful and equally effective access to their Medicare information, as required by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794”
The suit claims that:
• CMS regularly communicates information to blind persons using inaccessible electronic formats and print. By doing so, the suit alleges, blind beneficiaries have faced loss of benefits and health care disruption.
• In response to Section 504 complaints filed in 2011 and 2012 with the OCR under Section 504, CMS had entered into an agreement that set forth a time period within which CMS was to take specified actions to provide effective communications for individuals with disabilities consistent with Section 504. CMS allegedly was required to complete a “Long Term Action Plan” by April 15, 2015, to provide effective cross disability communication access and appropriate auxiliary aids and services to CMS beneficiaries and consumers. The suit alleges that no such action plan was provided.

So in other words CMS agreed to fix the accessibility problems in 2011 and 2012, didn't do it and wound up back in court...

Mike Moore
Accessibility Coordinator
Texas Health and Human Services Commission
Civil Rights Office
(512) 438-3431 (Office)

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Druckman,Geri
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 4:11 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?

Thanks Kelly! I’m quite verse with Section 508, sadly not so much with Section 504 and Section 503.

Geri

On 3/28/16, 4:02 PM, "WebAIM-Forum on behalf of Kelly Lupo"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on behalf of = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

>The actual standards can be found on access-board.gov
><https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-a
>nd- it/about-the-section-508-standards/section-508-standards>,
>and WebAIM.org has a breakdown of the regulations
><http://webaim.org/standards/508/checklist>; that is absolutely
>wonderful in terms of translating them from legalese into English.
>(WebAIM also has a PDF version of the checklist, if you want to print
>it
><http://webaim.org/standards/508/508checklist.pdf>;.)
>
>Additionally, WebAIM also has a Chrome plug-in for checking compliance
><http://wave.webaim.org/extension/>;, as well as a web-based compliance
>checker <http://wave.webaim.org/>; if you can't install things.
>
>Both sites have tons of resources that I've found helpful in my
>starting to learn about Section 508. (WebAIM also has WCAG 2.0
>guidelines, as well.)
>
>Kelly
>
>On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Druckman,Geri
>< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> This is an excellent point. At the moment I will assume this is not
>> for our employees, but by the nature of the institution I work for,
>> any employee may become a client at any given timeÅ 
>>
>> We do receive federal funding to an extent, and from a conversation I
>>had with HR, we do need to comply with sections 508, 504, and 503.
>> I guess I need to dive head first into Section 504 and catch up on my
>>reading. If you have some guidance that can get me to the right places
>>in section 504, I¹ll greatly thankful.
>>
>> Geri Druckman
>> Web Development Specialist
>> Accessibility|Usability|QA
>> MD Anderson Cancer Center
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/28/16, 3:31 PM, "WebAIM-Forum on behalf of Moore,Michael
>> (Accessibility) (HHSC)" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on
>>behalf of = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>>
>> >Hi Geri,
>> >
>> >I can see a few potential points of pain for your organization.
>> >
>> >Does this application provide access to information or services for
>>which
>> >your organization receives federal funding? If so you may
>> >potentially
>>be
>> >risking a compliant under section 504.
>> >
>> >You may be risking a complaint under the ADA in the following two
>> >situations.
>> >
>> >Does this application provide access to information or services to
>> >members of the public and is there an accessible alternative to
>> >using this application available from the same place where you link
>> >to the external application?
>> >
>> >Does this application provide access to information or services to
>> >employees and/or potential employees and is there an accessible
>> >alternative to using this application that is available from the
>> >same places where you link to the external application?
>> >
>> >Mike Moore
>> >Accessibility Coordinator
>> >Texas Health and Human Services Commission Civil Rights Office
>> >(512) 438-3431 (Office)
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
>> >Behalf Of Druckman,Geri
>> >Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 3:21 PM
>> >To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>> >Subject: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent
>> >me still my concern?
>> >
>> >Hi all,
>> >
>> >Here¹s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you
>> >have
>>had
>> >to deal with a similar situation before.
>> >The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a
>> >vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution.
>> >This will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the
>> >vendors side, and our clients will receive an email with a link,
>> >directing them to the vendors site, where they will need to interact
>> >with said application.
>> >
>> >At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG
>> >compliant
>>and
>> >is seeking an exemption in the contract.
>> >
>> >My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development
>> >or hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients
>> >over to that site to interact with it. Is it still within my
>> >institutions responsibility to make sure that this vendor is
>> >accessible, or is this all on them?
>> >
>> >Any information is greatly appreciated.
>> >
>> >Geri Druckman
>> >
>> >(cross post with wai-ig)
>> >The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
>> >confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message
>> >may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI
>> >should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not
>> >the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the
>> >intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use,
>> >dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any
>> >attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly
>> >prohibited. If you think
>>that
>> >you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the
>>sender
>> >by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents
>> >from your systems.
>> >>> >>>archives
>> >at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>> >>> >>> >>> >archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>> >>>
>> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
>>confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message
>>may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI
>>should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not
>>the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the
>>intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use,
>>dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any
>>attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly
>>prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message
>>in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all
>>references to it and its contents from your systems.
>>
>> >> >> archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>> >>
>>>archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

From: Kelly Lupo
Date: Tue, Mar 29 2016 12:18AM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

Whoops! Sorry, I misread your last mail. That's what I get for responding
a minute before needing to leave for class! :)

Kelly

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Druckman,Geri < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

> Thanks Kelly! I’m quite verse with Section 508, sadly not so much with
> Section 504 and Section 503.
>
> Geri
>
> On 3/28/16, 4:02 PM, "WebAIM-Forum on behalf of Kelly Lupo"
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on behalf of = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>
> >The actual standards can be found on access-board.gov
> ><
> https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-
> >it/about-the-section-508-standards/section-508-standards>,
> >and WebAIM.org has a breakdown of the regulations
> ><http://webaim.org/standards/508/checklist>; that is absolutely wonderful
> >in
> >terms of translating them from legalese into English. (WebAIM also has a
> >PDF version of the checklist, if you want to print it
> ><http://webaim.org/standards/508/508checklist.pdf>;.)
> >
> >Additionally, WebAIM also has a Chrome plug-in for checking compliance
> ><http://wave.webaim.org/extension/>;, as well as a web-based compliance
> >checker <http://wave.webaim.org/>; if you can't install things.
> >
> >Both sites have tons of resources that I've found helpful in my starting
> >to
> >learn about Section 508. (WebAIM also has WCAG 2.0 guidelines, as well.)
> >
> >Kelly
> >
> >On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Druckman,Geri < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Michael,
> >>
> >> This is an excellent point. At the moment I will assume this is not for
> >> our employees, but by the nature of the institution I work for, any
> >> employee may become a client at any given timeÅ 
> >>
> >> We do receive federal funding to an extent, and from a conversation I
> >>had
> >> with HR, we de need to comply with sections 508, 504, and 503.
> >> I guess I need to dive head first into Section 504 and catch up on my
> >> reading. If you have some guidance that can get me to the right places
> >>in
> >> section 504, I¹ll greatly thankful.
> >>
> >> Geri Druckman
> >> Web Development Specialist
> >> Accessibility|Usability|QA
> >> MD Anderson Cancer Center
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 3/28/16, 3:31 PM, "WebAIM-Forum on behalf of Moore,Michael
> >> (Accessibility) (HHSC)" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = on behalf
> >>of
> >> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi Geri,
> >> >
> >> >I can see a few potential points of pain for your organization.
> >> >
> >> >Does this application provide access to information or services for
> >>which
> >> >your organization receives federal funding? If so you may potentially
> >>be
> >> >risking a compliant under section 504.
> >> >
> >> >You may be risking a complaint under the ADA in the following two
> >> >situations.
> >> >
> >> >Does this application provide access to information or services to
> >> >members of the public and is there an accessible alternative to using
> >> >this application available from the same place where you link to the
> >> >external application?
> >> >
> >> >Does this application provide access to information or services to
> >> >employees and/or potential employees and is there an accessible
> >> >alternative to using this application that is available from the same
> >> >places where you link to the external application?
> >> >
> >> >Mike Moore
> >> >Accessibility Coordinator
> >> >Texas Health and Human Services Commission
> >> >Civil Rights Office
> >> >(512) 438-3431 (Office)
> >> >
> >> >-----Original Message-----
> >> >From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> >> >Behalf Of Druckman,Geri
> >> >Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 3:21 PM
> >> >To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> >> >Subject: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me
> >> >still my concern?
> >> >
> >> >Hi all,
> >> >
> >> >Here¹s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have
> >>had
> >> >to deal with a similar situation before.
> >> >The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a
> >> >vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This
> >> >will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors
> >> >side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them
> >> >to the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said
> >> >application.
> >> >
> >> >At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant
> >>and
> >> >is seeking an exemption in the contract.
> >> >
> >> >My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or
> >> >hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to
> >> >that site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions
> >> >responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this
> >> >all on them?
> >> >
> >> >Any information is greatly appreciated.
> >> >
> >> >Geri Druckman
> >> >
> >> >(cross post with wai-ig)
> >> >The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
> >> >confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
> >> >contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
> >> >comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the
> >> >intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended
> >> >recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination,
> >> >distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the
> >> >information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think
> >>that
> >> >you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the
> >>sender
> >> >by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from
> >> >your systems.
> >> >> >> >> >>archives
> >> >at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
> >> confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
> >> contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
> >> comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the
> >>intended
> >> recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient,
> >>any
> >> further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or
> >>copying of
> >> this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is
> >> strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail
> >> message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete
> >>all
> >> references to it and its contents from your systems.
> >>
> >> > >> > >> > >> > >>
> >> >> >> >>
> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
> confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
> contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
> comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended
> recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any
> further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
> this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is
> strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail
> message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all
> references to it and its contents from your systems.
> > > > >

From: Pratik Patel
Date: Tue, Mar 29 2016 1:02AM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

Hello Geri,

Let me preface the following remarks by saying that I'm not an attorney and what I say does not, in any way, constitute a legal advice. EZFire's legal team has come across several instances where similar circumstances required us to provide legal advice. We have used similar thinking to what appears below. But, your circumstance and the specific situation will guide the specific steps you will need to take.

Here are a couple of points to keep in mind. Others on this thread have correctly pointed out that your institution choosing this product does make your institution liable for a complaint or a law suit depending on the type of institution you work for. This is doubly the case considering the fact that your institution would be granting an exemption based on foreknowledge that the product is not accessible.

In order to do your due diligence, you should identify and consider other vendors who have similar functions to what you're seeking and whose accessibility story is much better than the vendor you're considering at the moment.

What has this vendor said about making the product accessible even though it is not accessible at the moment? Consider a strategy that does not take the vendor off the hook completely. In fact, you are in a good position to demand full accessibility. Rather than providing an outright exemption, you can impose an accelerated remediation timeline and monitor the implementation of such a timeline.

There is also the question of implementation. If your institution is set on using this vendor, delay the implementation as much as possible so that you can take care of what I suggested above. Be sure to include testing for accessibility. Unless the need is absolutely dire, which I highly doubt, a six to twelve month delay will not significantly impact your institution's operation. If the product is complicated, this might not work since twelve months may not be enough for them to test and remediate their product. They can choose to work with an outside consulting firm--sorry for the self-serving note--to make sure that this happens within the timeline you set.

These are considerations based on the limited knowledge I have about your current circumstance. Please feel free to contact me privately should you need to discuss this further.

Pratik Patel
Founder and CEO, EZFire
M: 718-249-7019
E: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = (or = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = )
Follow me on Twitter: @ppatel
Follow me on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/pratik-patel/9/985/882
Skype: Patel.pratik


-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Druckman,Geri
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 4:21 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?

Hi all,

Here’s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have had to deal with a similar situation before.
The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them to the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said application.

At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant and is seeking an exemption in the contract.

My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to that site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this all on them?

Any information is greatly appreciated.

Geri Druckman

(cross post with wai-ig)
The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

From: Joy Relton
Date: Tue, Mar 29 2016 5:36AM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

That is a contractual issue. The federal government is supposed to ensure that all E&IT it uses, purchases, modifies uses etc is conformant. The contracts negotiated by the Feds should have clauses requiring other parties to provide E&IT which is conformant. I have no idea what your contractual obligations are. Also, be careful not to make assurances or warrantees of the product of another in terms of its conformance. Now, if you want to talk about the moral thing to do....

Good luck. HTH



-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Druckman,Geri
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 4:21 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?

Hi all,

Here’s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have had to deal with a similar situation before.
The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them to the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said application.

At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant and is seeking an exemption in the contract.

My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to that site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this all on them?

Any information is greatly appreciated.

Geri Druckman

(cross post with wai-ig)
The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

From: Joseph Sherman
Date: Tue, Mar 29 2016 7:47AM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Geri,



If your e-mail address is the institution you work for (University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center), it seems you are subject to the same standards as the UT System (http://www.utsystem.edu/accessibility) and the Texas Administrative Code<http://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_rloc=&p_tloc=&p_ploc=&pg=1&ti=1&ch 6&rlp>, Title 1, Part 10, 206 Subchapter (c) (206.70), it is the policy of the State of Texas that, "All new or changed web pages and web content shall comply with the standards described in this subchapter" for accessibility.



Also, Michael Moore on this list is the Texas Health and Human Services Commission Civil Rights Office Accessibility Coordinator.





Joseph



> >> >-----Original Message-----

> >> >From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]

> >> >On Behalf Of Druckman,Geri

> >> >Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 3:21 PM

> >> >To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >>

> >> >Subject: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that

> >> >represent me still my concern?

> >> >

> >> >Hi all,

> >> >

> >> >Here¹s a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you

> >> >have

> >>had

> >> >to deal with a similar situation before.

> >> >The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with

> >> >a vendor that will supply us with a web based application

> >> >solution. This will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it

> >> >is 100% on the vendors side, and our clients will receive an email

> >> >with a link, directing them to the vendors site, where they will

> >> >need to interact with said application.

> >> >

> >> >At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG

> >> >compliant

> >>and

> >> >is seeking an exemption in the contract.

> >> >

> >> >My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development

> >> >or hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients

> >> >over to that site to interact with it. Is it still within my

> >> >institutions responsibility to make sure that this vendor is

> >> >accessible, or is this all on them?

> >> >

> >> >Any information is greatly appreciated.

> >> >

> >> >Geri Druckman

> >> >

> >> >(cross post with wai-ig)

> >> >The information contained in this e-mail message may be

> >> >privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This

> >> >e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI);

> >> >dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and

> >> >state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an

> >> >authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further

> >> >review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying

> >> >of this message or any attachment (or the information contained

> >> >therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think

> >>that

> >> >you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the

> >>sender

> >> >by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents

> >> >from your systems.

> >> >
> >> >> >>archives

> >> >at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives

> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives

> >> >> >>

> >> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,

> >>confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message

> >>may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of

> >>PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you

> >>are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of

> >>the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use,

> >>dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any

> >>attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly

> >>prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message

> >>in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all

> >>references to it and its contents from your systems.

> >>

> >>
> >> > >> archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives

> >> > >>

> >
> >> >archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives

> >>

> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,

> confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message

> may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI

> should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not

> the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the

> intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use,

> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any

> attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly

> prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in

> error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

>
> > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives

> >

From: Kline, Jeff
Date: Tue, Mar 29 2016 8:20AM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

Geri,

For Texas state agencies and institutions of higher education, third party websites used to conduct official business (...developed, procured, or used...)by employees or the public , Texas statutes and rules on Electronic and Information Resources (EIR) accessibility are applicable.

When an EIR is deemed out of compliance with Texas regulations on EIR accessibility, the institution is required to file an exception, approved by its Executive Director, Chancellor, President, etc. The approved exception is really an acceptance of risk associated with the use of inaccessible EIR, but does not protect the agency / institution from legal issues outside of the Texas Accessibility regulations purview. (ADA, etc.)



Jeff Kline
Program Director
Statewide EIR Accessibility
Texas Department of Information Resources
Phone 512.463.3248
Mobile 512.426.9779



-----Original Message-----
From: Druckman,Geri [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 3:21 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: [WebAIM] Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?

Hi all,

Here's a dilema I have, and I seek your advice hoping any of you have had to deal with a similar situation before.
The institution I work for is in negotiations over a contract with a vendor that will supply us with a web based application solution. This will NOT be hosted on our servers in any way, it is 100% on the vendors side, and our clients will receive an email with a link, directing them to the vendors site, where they will need to interact with said application.

At the moment to vendor claims not to be section 508 / WCAG compliant and is seeking an exemption in the contract.

My dilemma is, although we have nothing to do with the development or hosting of said application, we are still sending our clients over to that site to interact with it. Is it still within my institutions responsibility to make sure that this vendor is accessible, or is this all on them?

Any information is greatly appreciated.

Geri Druckman

(cross post with wai-ig)
The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

From: Druckman,Geri
Date: Tue, Mar 29 2016 11:01AM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | Next message →

Thank you all for your answers, this has been very helpful. I now have
better understanding on the subject, and can provide better and more
intelligible answers to our sourcing and legal departments.

Thanks!!

Geri Druckman
Web Development Specialist
Accessibility | Usability | QA
Enterprise Business Systems
Digital Experience Team
MD Anderson Cancer Center

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all references to it and its contents from your systems.

From: Kelly Lupo
Date: Wed, Mar 30 2016 12:12PM
Subject: Re: Is the accessibility of a 3rd party that represent me still my concern?
← Previous message | No next message

Along with what Gregg said in his first point - the organization I work for
is not a federal agency (nor do we buy or sell from/to federal agencies),
but we do have many federal grants which keep the non-profit UConn UCEDD
running. In many of those grants, it specifies things like 'all products
and information disseminated as a part of this grant must be Section 508
compliant.' (But don't look at the site - it's being redone!)

If none of your grants specify then it might be a toss-up in a court, but
if they do it might be a stronger likelihood that the ruling would not be
in your favor as to whether 508 applies to you. The University of
Connecticut (UConn) *chooses* to conform to Section 508 - but they can pick
and choose if they want to and be in no trouble. However, the UConn UCEDD
(in my non-lawyer's understanding) is *required* to conform to all of it
because we have federal grants that say so.

FWIW,
Kelly

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Druckman,Geri < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

> Thank you all for your answers, this has been very helpful. I now have
> better understanding on the subject, and can provide better and more
> intelligible answers to our sourcing and legal departments.
>
> Thanks!!
>
> Geri Druckman
> Web Development Specialist
> Accessibility | Usability | QA
> Enterprise Business Systems
> Digital Experience Team
> MD Anderson Cancer Center
>
> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
> confidential, and/or protected from disclosure. This e-mail message may
> contain protected health information (PHI); dissemination of PHI should
> comply with applicable federal and state laws. If you are not the intended
> recipient, or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, any
> further review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
> this message or any attachment (or the information contained therein) is
> strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail
> message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all
> references to it and its contents from your systems.
>
> > > > >