The Accessibility Team provides digital accessibility reviews on request, at no cost, for priority information technology (IT) at the University of Michigan.
IT accessibility reviews are expert evaluations of existing or planned IT, such as websites, applications, vendor products, design mockups, or mobile apps. We test against the international digital accessibility standard, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1, and provide a report and follow-up consultation to guide your next actions.
Reviews provide information to guide change and improvements. They are most valuable when scheduled with plenty of time for decision making and action before a release, launch, update, or purchase.
Prepare for a Review
When you request a review, you commit to taking action as a result of our findings. Actions may include directly improving the IT or advocating for change. We will consult and coach you on this process, with the ultimate goal of improving the accessibility of digital resources at U-M.
For us to do a digital accessibility review, we need information from you about the IT. Without this information, your request may be delayed or declined.
Help us by gathering your information before putting in your request. Our request form will ask you for the following details.
IT Information
We need basic information about the IT.
- Name
- Type: Is this a website, web application, mobile app, other?
- Source: Is the IT developed by U-M staff, purchased from a vendor, or some combination?
- Description: In a few words, who uses this IT and for what purpose?
- U-M IT Executive Sponsor: Who at U-M can make decisions about this IT?
Accessibility and Risk Information
In order to prioritize your request we need you to provide us with some information on the IT you want tested.
- Existing Accessibility Documentation: Do you have info about the IT accessibility from any sources?
- Users and importance of IT: Is this IT essential or required for any groups at U-M? How many people need to use it?
Reviewer Information
We need details to find, use, and test the IT. For more complex IT, see complex testing below.
- How to access the IT: The location or URL, and login and password if needed.
- How people use the IT: Common workflows that people will need to do with the IT.
Additional Considerations for a Review
Complex Reviews
In some cases, we need more than a URL, login, and basic information to access and review IT. In these cases, we may follow up for additional information, including the following:
Detailed User Workflows
How, in detail, will people use the IT?
What are the expected actions and outcomes for different user types? Provide enough detail for us to independently recreate and test all essential workflows and roles. See for example some typical user workflows.
Credentials or Access
How will we access the IT and test all roles and actions?
- Allow access for all uniqnames in the MCommunity group accessibility-reviews.
- If the IT provides different experiences depending on the role of the participant (e.g., students or faculty), provide login credentials or test environment for each of the roles.
- If sequences in the IT involve multiple roles, describe these sequences in detailed test plans. An example may be: “User A Employee submits a timesheet, User B Supervisor denies it, User A Employee edits and resubmits, User B Supervisor approves it”
Configuration
How will we recreate the user experience of each essential role?
Configure and prepare the test environment to provide an experience matching that of actual users.
Sandbox
How will we test actions without changing data?
Provide a QA environment in which we can change data (add, edit, delete information) without causing any harm. If possible, provide a mechanism to roll back changes so we can recreate and demonstrate findings for you during consultation.
Timing
Digital accessibility reviews may take more or less time depending on complexity of the request and current capacity of team members. Start your request when most convenient for your unit. We will add your request to our queue and block that time in our schedules. In general, the following considerations can help you plan for reviews:
Resources and Commitment
During our review process, we may need support from you.
Following the request, we will give you the information you need to take action. In order to facilitate meaningful change as the result of our review, we ask that you:
- For IT in active development, an iterative review approach is most effective, beginning in the design phase if possible
- Reviewing upcoming changes or new releases in advance is more effective than reviewing after release
- Reviewing IT that is near retirement or replacement is usually not an effective use of resources
- The requestor will serve as our main point of contact for questions or support
- If another person is more familiar with the IT or more appropriate for this role, please indicate that person in your request
- For U-M developed products, include someone who can make decisions or changes related to the IT in the review process and the debrief For vendor-supplied products, please assess and inform us of the vendor behavior with respect to accessibility and product improvement. We are available to debrief with the vendor and provide guidance on managing vendor relations.