DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 431 279 EC 307 261

TITLE Research Exchange. Quarterly Newsletter of the National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR). INSTITUTION Southwest Educational Development Lab., Austin, TX. SPONS AGENCY National Inst. on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (ED/OSERS), Washington, DC. PUB DATE 1998-00-00 NOTE 149p. CONTRACT H133D50016 AVAILABLE FROM Available in electronic format on the at Web site: http://www.ncddr.org/ PUB TYPE Collected Works - Serials (022) JOURNAL CIT Research Exchange; v1-3 1996-1998 EDRS PRICE MF01/PC06 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Accessibility (for Disabled); *Disabilities; Evaluation Methods; Federal Programs; Grants; *Information Dissemination; *Research and Development; Self Evaluation (Groups); *Theory Practice Relationship IDENTIFIERS *National Center for the Dissem of Disabil Research; National Institute on Disability Rehab Research

ABSTRACT These twelve issues (3 years) of the newsletter of the National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR) present articles summarizing outcomes of National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) research projects. Articles from Volume 1 include: "What Are the True Outcomes of Research"; "Self Assessment Fosters Dissemination"; "User-Friendly Materials Facilitate Communication"; "Technical Assistance and Training Available for Grantees"; "Strategies for Underserved Groups"; "Availability versus Accessibility"; "Alternate Formats and Accessibility"; "Do You Have a Dissemination Policy?"; "Choosing a Primary Format"; "NCDDR Site"; "Dissemination Patterns of NIDRR Grantees"; "Dissemination Indicators"; "Characteristics of Current NIDRR Grantees: Initial Findings"; "NIDRR Grantees Receive Recognition"; "Literature Review on Dissemination and Utilization of Research Results"; "Literature Can Advise Practice"; and "Guides to Improving Practice." Articles from Volume 2 include: "Accessible Information on the World Wide Web"; "The Internet"; "General Guidelines for Improving Accessibility of World Wide Web Pages"; "Accessibility Design Considerations and Examples"; "Annotated WWW Resource List"; "Dissemination Evaluation Strategies and Options"; "You Can Evaluate Your Dissemination Efforts"; "Dissemination Self-Inventory"; "Thinking about Your WWW Site: Can It be Evaluated?"; "Model Spinal Cord Injury System WWW Gateway"; "Gateways to NIDRR's Disability Research"; "Assessing the Communication Power of Your WWW Site"; NIDRR Grantees and Staff Receive Recognition"; "How Do Consumers Get Information They Can Use?"; and "Is Disability Research Useful?" Articles from Volume 3 include: "Common Characteristics of NIDRR Grantees' "; "How Do You Measure Success?"; "Trends in Dissemination Patterns of NIDRR Grantees"; "How Do Stakeholders Find and Disseminate Information?"; "Surveying for Dissemination Characteristics"; "NIDRR Grantees and Staff Receive Recognition"; "Who Needs Web Site Accessibility?"; "Electronic Accessibility"; "Interactive Elements of the Internet"; "NIDRR Grantees Offer Listservs"; "Update on Strategies for Web Accessibility"; "New Review of +++++ ED431279 Has Multi-page SFR---Leve1.1 +++++ NIDRR Grantees' Web Sites"; "Annotated WWW Resource List"; "The Unemployment of Americans with Disabilities"; "Collaboration in NIDRR's Employment Research"; "The Employment Emphasis in NIDRR's Proposed Long-Range Plan"; "The Federal Initiative To Increase Employment of People with Disabilities"; "The New Employment-Focused RRTCs [Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers]"; and "The Dissemination and Utilization Process and Employment Research." (DB)

******************************************************************************** * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the original document. * ******************************************************************************** The Research Exchange.

Quarterly Newsletter of the National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR).

Volume 1, Numbers 1-4, Fall 1995-Summer 1996 Volume 21 Numbers 1-4, 1997 Volume 3, Numbers 1-4, 1998

BEST COPY AVAILABLE 2 National Center for the NCDDR Dissemination of Disability Research

Dear NIDRR Grantee,

The Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL) is pleased to announce the initiation of a new NIDRR grant effort, the National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research. (NCDDR). This communication represents the inaugural issue of the NCDDR's quarterly newsletter, The Research Exchange, that you will be receiving as a NIDRR grantee. The intent of these quarterly communications with you is to promote creative thought and options in the dissemination of research results and other related project outcome information.

The NCDDR staff will contact you concerning your desired accessible format for future newsletters. The NCDDR staff are excited about the new information and resources that the project will be able to provide to you and your NIDRR project staff.

Sincerely,

pt,fr) .-/Ah411111)41-____

John . Westbrook, Ph.D. Director

SOUTHWEST EDUCATIONAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DISABILITY D EV E LO P M ENT LABORATORYSEDL NIDRRAND REHABILITATION RESEARCH

3 Alei THE RESEARCH EXCHANGE NATIONAL CENTER FOR ME DISSEMINATION OF DISABILITY RESEARCH

VOLUME I, NUMBER 1 FALL, 1995

CONTENTS OVERVIEW OF NCDDR 3 A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR 4

SELF-ASSESSMENT FOSTERS UNDERSTANDING 5

USER-FRIENDLY MATERIALS FACILITATE COMMUNICATION 6 PANELS PLANNED FOR NOMINATION PROCESS 7 MEET THE STAFF 8

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING AVAILABLE 10

STRATEGIES FOR UNDERSERVED GROUPS 11 The Research Exchange, a newsletter to Material in these pages may be copied with promote the effective dissemination and credit to NCDDR. The contents of this utilization of disability research outcomes, newsletter were developed under a grant is published quarterly by the National (#H133D50016) from the National Institute Center for the Dissemination of Disability on Disability and Rehabilitation Research Research (NCDDR) which is operated by (NIDRR), U.S. Department of Education. the Southwest Educational Development However, these contents do not necessarily Laboratory (SEDL). Neither SEDL nor the represent the policy of SEDL, NIDRR, or the NCDDR discriminate on the basis of age, Department of Education; do not assume sex, color, creed, religion, national origin, endorsement by the Federal Government. sexual orientation, marital or veteran For questions, comments, or to request status, or the presence of a disability. this newsletter in alternate formats, contact:

Southwest Educational Development Laboratory 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 Austin, Texas 78701-3281 VOICE/TEXT TELEPHONE: 1-800-266-1832/512-476-6861 FAX: 512/476-2286 E-mAIL: [email protected] INTERNET URL: http://www.ncddr.org

DIRECTOR EDITOR ASSISTANT EDITOR CONTRIBUTING EDITOR John Westbrook Mary Kay Sanders Lin Harris Joann Starks

SOUTHWEST EDUCATIONAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DISABILITY DEVELOPMENT LABORATORYSEDL I NIDRRAND REHABILITATION RESEARCH

0 Printedon recycled paper. NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF DISABILITY RESEARCH

7.° OVERVIEW OF NCDDR The NCDDR seeks to * plan and conduct a variety .-1 0 accomplish two major goals: of training events for (1) ensure the widespread NIDRR grantees in dissemination and utilization selected D & U areas (D & U) of research outcomes * develop and share resulting from NIDRR research periodic communications projects, and (2) increase the such as the NCDDR capacity of researchers to newsletter, The Research identify and use development Exchange, via user-preferred and dissemination strategies accessible formats and modes that meet the needs of their target audiences. * identify outcomes of NIDRR-funded projects To accomplish these goals that are in need of further the NCDDR will dissemination use a variety of The NCDDR's challenge is toand implement strategies that are make the grantee's researchactivities to designed to assist expand NIDRR grantees. outcomes as clear as possible. awareness A sample of these and use of NIDRR include: grantees' outcomes * conduct a survey-based * describe the influence of market analysis to culture on dissemination of describe major D & U information, and develop characteristics of various strategies to meet the target audiences information dissemination * develop user-friendly needs of identified racial written guides, pamphlets, or ethnic minority groups and other materials to This is an age of expanding facilitate understanding of information. The NCDDR's what is known about challenge is to make the effective information grantees' research outcomes as dissemination clear as possible.And, to * develop self-assessment couple that message with an instrumentation to foster effective dissemination strategy calculation of a grant's that targets all potential users of "dissemination quotient" the research. * 5 Alid NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF DISABILMY RESEARCH A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR WHAT ARE THE TRUE OUTCOMES OF RESEARCH? The NCDDR will assist but for the purposes of D & U NIDRR grantees in identifying may not be obvious. The research outcomes that can NCDDR's activities will be benefit their target audiences. performed in a manner that As has been clearly shown fromassumes research outcomes research (Fuhrman,1994;Leung,are not conference presentations, 1992), different perspectives journal articles, monographs, or about research exist between other common "product" researchers and potential formats. The NCDDR will consumers of research perform its activities assuming information. The difference in that NIDRR research outcomes perception carries over are such things as: ideas, to an identification The NCDDR will perform its policies, treatments, of research activities assuming that interventions, exemplary outcomes. NIDRR research outcomes are These differencessuch things as: ideas, policies, programs, assistive have served in treatments, interventions, technologies, and adaptive devices. the past to exemplary programs, This approach to segregate the assistive technologies, potential, ultimate and adaptive devices. describing research beneficiary of outcomes should research from the researcher in assist in making an effective the critical steps of research bridge between the perceptions design planning, implementation,of researcher and user. In data analysis, and reporting of addition, this orientation can help findings. What is important or improve the communication significant to the researcher, between the researcher and the often, is different from what user so that each can benefit many "users" would consider more fully from the sharing of "usable" or important. their respective knowledge. *

Sources: For this reason, the Fuhrman, S. (1994) Uniting producers and consumers: Challenges in creating and utilizing educational research and development. In Tomlinson identification of research & Tomlinson (eds.) Education research and reform: An international outcomes may seem, on its perspective (pp. 133-147). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Leung, P. (1992) Translation of knowledge into practice.In Walcott & Associates, NIDRR National CRP Panel Final Report. Washington, D.C.: surface, almost automatic, U.S. Department of Education. 6 NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF DISABILITY RESEARCH

SELF-ASSESSMENT FOSTERS DISSEMINATION How can researchers * NIDRR research projects as determine if their dissemination a self-administered practices are effective? The diagnostic tool to develop NCDDR will develop a self- plans for the improvement assessment D & U inventory of their dissemination efforts to help NIDRR research * NCDDR staff or staff projects assess their current associates in onsite dissemination efforts and identify consultations focused on dissemination strategies that improving the link between may be more effective. The NIDRR research projects significant research literature and their potential users concerning D & U will serve as the basis for developing * individuals engaged in descriptors or characteristics designing disability research that promote effective to maximize the potential for dissemination. utilization of their Basic areas in the The inventory will examine research analysis of NIDRRinnovativeness in consumeroutcomes research outcomesinvolvement throughout the for dissemination research process. The self- include the research assessment focus, research design, target inventory will audience, and intended be pilot-tested with disability research 'outcomes. Other research groups representing important considerations are thedifferent NIDRR program areas. power or impact of research This process will help determine outcomes and the previous usesthe degree to which the of those outcomes. instrument can serve as a self-directed assessment, as The inventory will examine well as its appropriateness innovativeness in consumer for collecting the expected involvement throughout the data. research process. The self- assessment inventory will The NCDDR will provide incorporate the major elements technical assistance in the of dissemination: the message, use of the self-assessment source, context, audience, and inventory to all interested medium. It can be used by: NIDRR projects.*

7 NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF DISABILITY RESEARCH

USER-FRIENDLY MATERIALS FACILITATE COMMUNICATION The NCDDR will develop The Internet location will serve user-friendly written guides, many purposes such as access pamphlets and periodic to this quarterly newsletter, communications in addition to summaries of project findings, this quarterly newsletter. All and examples of new and technical assistance materials innovative products resulting developed by the NCDDR will from NIDRR-funded research. be available in a variety of Also planned are informative accessible formats. and challenging interactive Typical formats include papersessions that will allow (regular and large print), participants to exchange electronic data, Braille, CD- thoughts, ideas, issues and ROM, and audio. concerns that can However, NCDDR The NCCDRWeb site only enhance future staff recognize that has theURL directions and accessibility is http://www.ncddr.org/ outcomes of disability determined by the research. user, not the originator of the Utilizing these approaches to information.If additional accessibility for target formats are requested, every audiences, NCDDR staff will effort will be made to create thedevelop a series of four guides information in the requested designed to assist NIDRR format. Each format will be grantees in assessing their available through various modesdissemination activities and of distribution. Examples of planning improvements. A distribution modes include U. S. The first guide will provide an mail, facsimile machine introduction to issues and transmission (FAX), telephone concerns about dissemination or text telephone, computer and highlight ways that research diskette, and audiotape. outcomes are used by particular One of the most exciting target audiences. The second means of distribution that guide will define dissemination NCDDR will be using is the as a complex process that Internet. The NCDDR Web sitebegins at the earliest stages of has the URL http://www.ncddr.org/ planning and development, not Z 8 NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF DISABILITY RESEARCH

after the completion of a formats. The guide will research project. address issues of availability and accessibility, provide Dissemination also extends strategies for matching target beyond mere distribution of audiences with their preferred information to facilitating the use information channels and of research outcomes. The third discuss cost-effective guide will outline the principal approaches to distribute elements of dissemination: the information in accessible message, its source, its context, formats. its target audiences, and media used in reaching those target The guide will also explore audiences. Finally, the fourth the latest in electronic media guide will focus on that can be used to reach target dissemination media and audiences. *

PANELSPLANNED FOR NOMINATION PROCESS On a pilot project basis, theplanning process that targets NCDDR will implement a specific audiences and system to solicit nominations mechanisms for further from NIDRR grantees, people dissemination of each with disabilities and their outcome. NCDDR staff and families, direct disability grantees originating the service providers, independentoutcome will work on a living center staff, and others cooperative basis to to identify NIDRR project implement the dissemination research and other outcomes plan. considered useful for further In some cases, the dissemination. Nominations NCDDR staff will convene a and associated materials will focus group of nationally- be reviewed by special- recognized dissemination purpose panels selected for experts to suggest new and their expertise in areas innovative ways to gain reflected by the nominations. visibility and use of sets of Outcomes selected becomeselected NIDRR grant the subject of a dissemination outcomes. *

9 NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF DISABILITY RESEARCH

Lin Harris, Information Services Technician, has been with the Special Education and Rehabilitation Services Program at SEDL since 1987. She also worked as an Administrative Assistant for the Resources for School Improvement group in SEDL's regional educational 1 laboratory. Ms. Harris is an John Westbrook, Director of the NCDDR and the Special Education and Rehabilitation Services Program, has been with the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL) since 1982. A recent project, the Regional Rehabilitation Exchange, began a national movement towards the development of a regional information exchange network. Before coming to SEDL, he served as a consultant and a staff development specialist for interpreter for the hearing several state agencies and worked impaired. Before coming to as a teacher/coordinator at the SEDL, she worked as interpreter Texas School for the Deaf. He coordinator for a three-campus holds three degrees from The junior college, sign language University of Texas at Austin: a instructor, and then as a B.S. in Speech with a major in secretary and vocational Education of the Deaf/Hearing communication specialist for the A Impaired, an M.S. in Special Texas Rehabilitation Commission. Education with a major in Her current interests include Language/Learning Disorders, accessible formats for and a Ph.D. in Educational informational materials and the Administration with a major in management of multiple and Special Education Administration.interrelated databases. His current interests include strategies for the effective dissemination and utilization of disability-related information. MEET... Z 10 NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF DISABILITY RESEARCH

Mary Kay Sanders, Dissemination Specialist,began working at SEDL in 1995. Before coming to SEDL, she was an Education Specialist II with the Texas Education Agency on the

Texas Collaborative Transition Project, a 11.11C_ Program Specialist with Advocacy, Inc. on the Texas Transition Task Force, and a Program Coordinator for

Al Joann Starks, Research Specialist, began working at SEDL in 1995. Currently a doctoral candidate at The University of Texas at Austin in Special Education Administration, with an emphasis in Bilingual Special Education, she completed an internship at the National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE). Ms. Starks worked with Title VII- funded centers at the University Independent Living Skills Training with of Colorado at Boulder and the the San Antonio Independent Living University of New Mexico before Services. She also worked as a returning to graduate school. secondary education classroom She also worked in a community teacher in East Texas schools for development project in San José, ten years. Ms. Sanders' education Costa Rica. Ms. Starks holds a includes a B.S. and M.A. with B.A. in Sociology and a Master of majors in history and English from Arts in Social / Multicultural Stephen F. Austin State University in Foundations of Education Nacogdoches, Texas. Her current (Bilingual Education) from the interests include effective transition University of Colorado at planning for students with disabilitiesBoulder. Her current interests and independent living issues for all include state policies for persons with disabilities. language-minority students with disabilities, the Internet and other electronic dissemination THE STAFF information systems.

11 NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF DISABILITY RESEARCH

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING AVAILABLE FOR GRANTEES Technical assistance Regional training events, activities of the NCDDR will planned and conducted by NCDDR include provision of materials, staff, will focus on dissemination telephone conversations, and utilization principles, and on linkages with appropriate specific strategies to address resources, onsite consultations, the special needs of user groups. and training sessions on These training events will be principles and strategies for scheduled in collaboration with effective dissemination. The planned meetings, such as annual NCDDR maintains a toll-free meetings of the Rehabilitation hotline to facilitate voluntary, Engineering and Assistive confidential, and responsive Technology Society of North technical assistance. America Online interactive Call 1-800-266-1832 (RESNA), the forms of technical to request technical National assistance will be assistance. Association of available to NIDRR Rehabilitation grantees via the Internet. The Research and Training Centers NCDDR will establish an Internet (NARRTC), the Howard Davis information system for questions Society for Knowledge Utilization, and responses from staff and and others suggested by NIDRR others. NCDDR staff will grantees. establish interactive groups to NCDDR staff may conduct a allow NIDRR grantees to talk workshop at the annual NIDRR with staff and each other to Project Director's Meeting to explore issues related to the include orientation to resources utilization of research outcomes.available to grantees through NCDDR staff will be available,the NCDDR, dissemination- upon request by the grantee, to related statistics, strategies for conduct onsite assessments and dissemination, dissemination- problem-solving for dissemination oriented research designs, and and utilization efforts, profile other topics of interest to NIDRR relative strengths/weaknesses project directors. Call 1-800- and itemize potential strategies 266-1832 to request technical to improve dissemination. assistance. * 12 NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF DisABILrn, RESEARCH

STRATEGIES FOR UNDERSERVED GROUPS Often in disability research, minority group R & D issues, the ranks of underserved groupsincluding the following: include people with disabilities * assist in identifying research who are also members of racial, data, documentation, ethnic, or cultural minority groups. products, and other It seems reasonable to expect information resulting from research involving issues faced NIDRR research activities by people with disabilities to reflect that reflect multicultural- an understanding of these related issues cultural and racial differences. This, unfortunately, is not always * evaluate the scope of the case with disability research, identified NIDRR research although some NIDRR-funded outcomes as related to all research is directly targeted at people with disabilities issues of cultural and racial and their families, but difference and its influence on the especially those focusing lives of people with disabilities. on issues of race, ethnicity, Often dissemination strategies underservice and do not take into consideration underrepresentation the special factors that enhance * develop recommendations the utility of disability research for dissemination strategies by minority group target audience that will encourage the members. use of disability research To investigate this area, the results by underrepresented NCDDR will establish a Multicultural groups Research and Dissemination Task * assist in developing plans Force composed of disability and measuring the researchers and users who are progress of the NCDDR in also members of minority terms of its objectives to groups. The Task Force will facilitate the dissemination identify multicultural issues in of useful disability research research and dissemination (R & D), outcomes to minority describe barriers to the use of persons with disabilities and research results by their families * underrepresented groups and suggest strategies for Source: improvements concerning Independent living research. (1994). Rehab BRIEF, XVI, No. 4.

13 How TO CONTACT THE NATIONAL CENTERFOR THE DISSEMINATION OF DISABILITY RESEARCH

Call 1-800-266-1832 or 512/476-6861(Voice/Text Telephone) from 8-5 Central Standard Time, Monday through Friday.

Use a computer modem to contact us through the Internet at our e-mail address [email protected] or use our URL http://www.ncddr.org/

Write to NCDDR, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400, Austin, Texas, 78701-3281.

Visit us in downtown Austin, Texas (t% at the Southwest Tower, 7th and Brazos, one block east of Congress Avenue.

garmilm Fax your request to us at 512/476-2286. 14

SOUTHWEST EDUCATIONAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DISABILITY DEVELOPMENT LABORATORY SEDL NIDRR AND REHABILITATION RESEARCH

A /1._ IEM!MMM'A THE ifiN* Research;Ira*/ Exchange

VOLUME 1, NUMBER W I N T E R 1 9 9 6

Table of Contents Availability Versus Do You Have A 2 Accessibility Dissemination Policy? The ultimate value of research lies in of information rather than the accessibili- Choosing A Primary Format 3 its useleading either to changes in ty of information. The NCDDR staff have Large Print 4 current practices and services or to the analyzed and categorized data reported Audio Tape 4 confirmation of them. Grantees conduct- by grantees and discovered several Braille 5 ing research and research-related activi- predominant trends. In FY 1993, 130 grantees reported Diskette 6 ties through NIDRR funding bear a special responsibility to both demon- products of their NIDRR projects for Conzpact Disk 6 strate and model how all audiences inclusion in the Compendium of Captions 7 especially people with disabilities and Products by NIDRR Grantees and Video and Descnptive Video 8 their familiescan access the informa- Contractors (NARIC, 1994) revealing: Internet 8 tion being generated. However, in spite 19 percent of all products were Format Summary 10 of almost 30 years of efforts to strength- journal articles, and en the way in which the outcomes of NCDDR World Web Site 10 22 percent were books or papers research are shared with those that need (including chapters in books, con- NIDRR Grantees 12 them, problems remain. Leung (1992) cept/working papers, conference Receive Recognition reported on a series of NIDRR regional presentations, monographs, etc.). forums conducted in 1991 that indicated A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR "information dissemination is an issue of Comparing these data with those concern for consumers, family members, reported in the FY 1994 Compendium and professionals" (p. 287). And, in by 110 grantees (NARIC, 1995), the Alternate addition, testimony from the forums following patterns emerge: "suggests the continuing need to move 31 percent of all products were jour- Formats and research and information from those nal articlesan increase of approxi- who generate it to the user and the ser- mately 50 percent from the previous Accessibility vice provider in a form that has direct year, making this the most frequently and immediate application" (p. 295). cited of all categories, and The 1990s have been marked with While research results are frequently 21 percent of all products were books increasing emphasis on the right of a documented and available in some or papersa one percent decline. person with a disability to control and form, they are often not widely accessi- select the services and resources that he ble to several critical audiencessuch Clearly, the trend in most frequently or she will use. Today, consumers are as people with disabilities, their families, reported formats for informational prod- provided more opportunities from advocates, or direct service providers ucts is toward journals, books, and which to choose than has been the (Edwards, 1991). There is a clear distinc- papers. This pattern tends to suggest case in the past. tion between the availability of informa- more of an emphasis on the availability It seems clear, however, that the tionwhich may mean, for example, of information versus the accessibility of power of consumer choice rests on that a scholarly article may be found in information. A copy of the results of this the degree to which the consumer is a professional journaland the accessi- comparison is available from the NCDDR allowed to make an informed choice. bility of informationwhich implies upon request. This issue of The Research Such a choice requires that the con- "ease of access and simplicity of use." Exchange discusses information that may sumer has accessible information that Patterns of dissemination and associ- help in maintaining the availability of is relevant to the choice to be made. ated products reported by NIDRR information while increasing accessibility. continued on page 3 grantees often emphasize the availability continued on page 10 1 5 The Research Exchange Do You Have A Dissemination Policy? A policy statement is a way of-work and is frequently treated as use," for example, the ED states that nothing more than the distribution of unless there are fundamental alter- many organizations express a product to an all-too-frequent small ations or financial and administrative values to their staff and to group of professionals. Concepts of mar- burdens created, all documents will bl keting and are seldom linked the public. Policies serve as a produced in the format most usable to the dissemination plan for research by the requester. foundation for implementation outcomes. Policies are important oppor- identification of specific steps that tunities for leaders to describe new of procedures and often address will be taken to ensure that general ideals and new methods to achieve those public awareness of the availability areas that are regulated by ideals. You may be surprised to know of alternate formats of your material that the U.S. Department of Education legal requirements, as well is planned; in ED's case, their policy (ED) has recently developed its own pol- addresses providing such information as areas that have multiple icy regarding dissemination to people at display booths and on publication with disabilities. The new policy entitled potential staff responses. request forms in addition to the "Policy Statement on Making Materials inclusion of special notices in all Policies help guide staff by and Information Available and Accessible materials produced. to Individuals with Disabilities" highlights establishing a common vision specification regarding the timeliness areas that you should consider in devel- of acquiring information via alternate and a "standard" of accepted oping your own policy statement. If you formats, in other words, will all alter- do not have access to a copy of the E1) behaviors for staff to demon- nate format versions be available policy mentioned and would like one, simultaneously or can an "acceptable strate to achieve that vision. contact the NCDDR. delay and preparation" time frame The ED's policy addresses the be established? The question is: does dissemination following important areas: description of the strategies that are to deserve its own policy? Staff of the be followed to implement the policy; NCDDR feel that the development of clarification of the regulations that the ED policy, for example, discusses such a policy could be useful in support a need for the policy and a administrative structures that will sup- several ways: "standard" of action, for example, port implementation, funding for ED mentions Section 504 of the It helps to clarify the value placed implementation, and rationale for Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amend- upon dissemination by the NIDRR the use of an outside contractor, grantee organization. ed, as establishing its obligations. among others. It provides an opportunity to consider identification of your intended infor- mation users and the way in which The use of policy can be a very effec- the impact dissemination, and deci- tive and low-cost method of addressing sions reached about it, have on the your choices of format and distribu- tion are designed to positively affect issues of dissemination and utilization. ultimate utilization of information. utilization; the ED policy addresses Although impacting the lives of end-usen It facilitates a clarification of the intended users as anyone who may is often a goal of many human service intended groups of users for the benefit from the activities of the ED projects and organizations, seldom do information generated through the such as employees, applicants, pro- these projects and organizations explain disability research function. gram participants, personnel of other how efforts of dissemination will be tied It can establish the value and assur- Federal entities, and members of the to utilization. In these days of discussiom ances that will be engaged to achieve public who have disabilities. about "Universal Services" on the Information Superhighway (U.S. Advisory "ease of access and simplicity of description of how a policy on Council on the National Information comprehension and use"in other dissemination assists in reaching Infrastructure, 1996), clear policy state- words, accessibility. the organization's stated mission, It can reduce staff confusion about ments assist leaders and staff in "teaming for example, ED states that its policy their resources to accomplish impact. s the correct course of action and, as a on dissemination supports the mission result, lower staff costs and increase "to ensure equal access to education timeliness of response. and to promote educational U.S. Advisory Council on the National For unknown reasons, some organi- excellence throughout the nation." Information Infrastructure. (1996.) zations approach dissemination as an clarification of how you intend to A nation of opportunity: Realizing the afterthought. Dissemination is often not achieve accessibility or "ease of access promise of the information superhighway. considered as a part of the "real" scope- and simplicity of comprehension and Washington, D.C. Author. 2 The Research Exchange

Alternate Formats and Accessibility large print version. In this case, you formats for your information primarily continued from page 1 would have produced an alternate for- benefits the information provider. While it is true that the information mat, but it would be a format that is Usually, once the determination of should address issues of interest to the developed without a specific target alternate formats has been made, no consumer and his or her family, it is audience in mind and cannot be said further concern about accessibility is even more important that the informa- to provide accessibility. displayed by the typical information tion be made accessible to, the con- Accessibility of information can only provider. Seldom, if ever, is a follow-up sumer. In discussions of information be determined by the user. In other survey conducted to see if people with accessibility, there often is a focus on words, consumers must be able to various types of disabilities were able to alternate formats, usually for written choose the format or formats with which access the information and use it to materials that have been developed. they can interact or communicate. Once make decisions. The production of alternate formats, this is determined, the production of a Those who attempt to disseminate however, should not be confused responding format becomes an informed their information for the purpose of with the accessibility of information. format. The provision of your information utilization must be sensitive to the differ- Producing an alternate formata to a consumer through an informed ence between producing an alternate large print version, for example format enhances informed decision- format and providing accessible informa- does not mean that you have made making and accessibility. All too often, tion. Ensuring accessibility requires the your information accessible to people the issue of accessibility is discussed production of informed formats. with disabilities. Indeed, if none of your without knowledge of specific accommo- potential readers required this format, dations that individuals in your target John D. Westbrook, Director you would have wasted the time, ener- audience may need to access information. gy, and money it took to produce the Arbitrarily selecting one or two alternate

Choosing rimaryFormat One of the strategies that can meet the needs of some audiences. production and distribution of informa- be used to increase "ease of However, these formats are not usually tion. Effective communication patterns of considered to be formats that guard the the future are most likely to reflect a access and simplicity of use" is timeliness of information nor are these "mixed or merged media" approach to to consider the format(s) that formats easily available to many others, the sharing of information. In other due either to cost or professional dues words, "getting the message across" may will be used to communicate structures. NCDDR staff are currently involve video representation, verbal your information. undertaking a significant research effort descriptions, audio associated sounds, to determine how frequently cited bene- manipulative information databases, in ficiary target groups of disability research addition to the printed word! One can Unfortunately, theway in which infor- outcomes report: easily see the beginnings of this type of mation is formatted and "packaged" for their personal use of research communication pattern emerging on sharing with others sometimes is done findings, electronic formats such as the Internet's automatically. The "automatic pilot" for- the formats and modes by which World Wide Web. The selection of a pri- mat is regular print and the mode of dis- mary format for your information should tribution is through journals and profes- they receive the information they do use, and add to the communicative power of sional papers. While this, no doubt, is your message. Reluctance or indecision an effective way to document and share the way in which respondents would desire to receive information that regarding what to do in the area of pri- relevant information with other profes- mary and alternate formats usually sionals, it also seems apparent that this provides "ease of access and simplici- ty of comprehension and use." involves lack of information concerning: may not be the way in which one Staff time that will be required to would expect to reach the range of While the results of this research are develop various formats; audiences comprised of people with dis- not presently available, it seems proba- Equipment, software, or other abilities, their families, their advocates, ble that respondents will suggest an materials needed to support in-house and their service providers. Nothing array of formats and modes that provide production; here is intended to imply that journals, accessibility. Grantees need to consider a books, and papers do not effectively range of formats and modes for both the continued on page 4 3 17 The Research Exchange

Costs of developing formats or Equipment contracting for services; Large print versions can usually be pro- Complexity of effort required to Large Print duced with no additional equipment make materials ready and usable; and than that found in the average office. Resources available to help provide Costs information and guidance in the Large print costs are minimal and with production phase. the exception of perhaps additional The following are some examples paper, seldom reflect perceptible of formats that may be considered for additional costs. communication by grantees. Information provided about each format addresses Effort the decision/information points above. Little complexity exists in the creation of A relational low-high scale graph large print versions in that they are one- is provided for visualization. In addition, Staff Time to-one representations of the regular "helpful hints" related to individual for- Generally, the production of larger-than- print versions. mats are provided. standard print is a function that can be ResoUrces Large Print accomplished in several ways: Technical support is often available via Audio Tape 1. Many word processing programs offer telephone and manual from software Braille a choice of font sizes. A font size of manufacturers to assist in adjusting font Diskette 18 point or larger would be consid- size and print type. Compact Disc ered large print. Captioning 2. Materials that are in regular print can Helpful Hints In Creating Video and Descriptive Video be magnified through the use of a Large Print Versions Internet copier machine found in many 1. Use an 18 point size typeface. Summary offices. This method may produce 2. Use a 1.25 line space between occasional problems with margins, lines (or larger if needed to avoid This is an example of a requiring special effort in positioning crowding). Large Print format using 18 on each page. 3. Avoid the use of italics. point Helvetica with a 1.25 4. Avoid the use of hyphens at the right line space between lines. margin. 5. Begin all text at the left margin. Helpful Hints for Large Print 6. Avoid the use of columns. 7. Use standard size (8.5" by 11") paper. 1. Use an 18 point size typeface. 8. Use a light yellow paper with black print for the most readable copy. 2. Use a 1.25 linespace between lines (or larger if needed to avoid crowding). Audio Tape 3. Avoid the use of italics. 4. Avoid the use of hyphens at the right margin. 5. Begin all text at the left margin. 6. Avoid the use of columns. Staff Time 7. Use standard size (8.5" by 11")paper. The development of audio recordings creates a highly flexible format that 8. Use' a light yellowpaper with black print. many people with disabilities can easily use. This format is most conducive to narrative materials, however, some tech- nical and visually-related materials can 4 18 The Research Exchange frequently be "converted" into oral individuals and organizations that volun- digital form. This will not be needed if language for incorporation into the teer to assist in producing the narration you already have the material in a word recording. A professional, specially paid for audio tapes for people who have processed, electronic form. speaker is not required to create your visual or physical disabilities. The NLS audio recordings. In fact, many times can be reached by calling (800) 424-8567. Costs having someone that is very familiar The costs of contracting for Braille ser- with the material and has a clear speak- Helpful Hints in Producing vice vary by location in the nation, how- ing voice is all you need to create a Audio Tape Recording ever, services usually charge for the high-quality audio format. Certainly, 1. Select a narrator that is fluent in the original production of a page (usually project staff often meet these require- language and, if possible, knowledge- less than $2 per page) and for each ments. Staff time on this activity will able in the content area. "reproduced" page (usually around $1 per page). If you have a generous time be expected to increase depending 2. Record in a conversational tone at a frame for development, you may be upon the level of in-house production conversational pace. assumed by the project. able to locate a source for your Brailling 3. Prepare in advance how tabular, that is free or reduced cost. If you are Equipment graphic and pictorial information will acquiring a system to produce Braille for A tape recorder that allows recording on be presented orally. your organization, costs will range from standard 30, 60, or 90 minute cassettes 4. While recording, spell out difficult or $350 to $500 for the software, and can be purchased at most office supply unusual wordsespecially words of around $1,500 for a low-end Braille and discount stores. For those organiza- another language. printer. tions that wish to create their own 5. Narrators should read all of the materi- duplicatesonce the initial "master" al for presentation and not include Effort recording has been madea high-speed "editorializing" or personal messages. The production of Braille formats audio tape duplicator can be purchased. requires staff time to locate, contract, The decision to purchase will require a and evaluate the job performed by an determination of the frequency and outside contractor. If appropriate equip- number of audio tape versions that will ment exists, the conversion process from be required over time. Braille the word processed version to the Braille version involves only the prepa- Costs ration of material for the Braille printer. Tape recorders are available in many retail and wholesale outlets today. The Resources prices vary, however, a recorder of suffi- The free National Library Service direc- cient quality for a voice recording can tory previously cited includes a section be obtained for $25 to $75. High speed describing Braille resources and services audio tape duplicators are more avail- available by state and locality. Many of able today than has been the case in these resources will provide free or low- the past. A duplicator of sufficient quali- cost services. If limited local resources ty to produce voice audio tape dupli- Staff Time exist, your state vocational rehabilitation agency for people with blindness can be cates can be obtained for under $1,000. Braille is a tactile system of raised dots contacted for information about vendors that can be read by some people with Effort and services that will assist you in pro- visual impairments and others. The pro- Planning is required to arrange for the ducing materials in Braille. Some of duction of Braille formats are usually equipment, space, and narrator required these state agencies can assist you accomplished by contracting for the ser- to produce the audio tape recording. directly in this effort. In addition, many vice outside your organization. Staff time Additional effort is required if in-house major colleges and universities provide will be required to locate and contract duplication is performed. In many access to equipment that can be used to with a Brailling service, as well as pre- cases, however, the material to be read scan and produce Braille copies. will not require additional interpretation pare materials for Brailling. Helpful Hints About Preparing unless it contains highly technical or Equipment graphically-presented content material. If the Brailling service is contracted with Material for Brailling an outside service, you need no addition- 1. Convert symbols, icons, and other Resources abbreviations to text. A range of resources are available to al equipment. If, however, you wish to 2. Omit the use of "number" (#) signs support organizations in this develop- produce your own Braille materials, you ment activity. The National Library will need to consider the purchase or because they are automatically insert- Service (NLS) for the Blind and Physi- rental of a computer, Braille transition ed in front of numbers in Braille. cally Handicapped produces a , and a Braille printer. In addi- 3. Do not include extra blank lines in directory, Volunteers Who Produce tion, a scanner can be obtained that will your text. Indicate new paragraphs Books, which provides names of convert a printed page into electronic with the use of one tab.

5 19 The Research Exchange

4. Determine what commands your not so equipped can be augmented with Braille software reads from your an additional drive that will allow this word-processed version. Typical transfer to occur. commands include: center, tab, Compact qis indent, (hard) return, and page break. Costs 5. Convert columns to continuous The costs of producing diskettes are low compared to many other formats. Staff Time text. Tables, graphics, and pictorial representations need to be converted Diskettes are manufactured in 3.5 and Equipment 5.25 inch forms and are available in to text. Costs both high density and double density. 6. Eliminate the use of stylistic factors Diskettes can be purchased for less than Effort such as bold type, underlining, and $1 each. If one is purchasing an addi- Resources special symbols. Italics are the only tional low-end external disk drive for a stylistic type form that typically computer, it will cost approximately translates into Brai Red formats. $150 to $300. No cost is usually associat- Staff Time 7. Use both upper and lower case letters ed with the transfer of information in The use of data compact discs is rapidly in words; the use of all upper case, ASCII to a diskette. increasing. The increase is due to several for example, doubles the pages or factors such as the significantly greater space needed for the Braille. Effort volume of data that can be encoded on 8. Convert any bullets (40 used in the Once a word-processed version has a CD than on a diskette (approximately text to an asterisk (*) or a hyphen (-). been produced, limited effort is usually 700 floppy diskettes can be loaded onto required to prepare the material for a high density CD) and the growing transfer to the diskette form. The actual prevalence of CD-ROM player drives on conversion process is automatically new computers and available as attach- Diskette done by the computer system when the ments for older ones. CDs can be used proper commands have been used. to capture audio, video, and text formats Resources at the same time. Depending upon the organization of the CD, individual areas sigammili L I Many software packages include a tele- of the CD can be accessed, thereby not ...iI.L1hiIIi1I1 phone number for technical support. LIII In addition, most software comes with requiring users to linearly search through manuals that can be helpful in determin- data as may be the case on a diskette. ing how to convert from the word- Staff time is required to learn how to processed version to an ASCII version. operate the new equipment that "burns" If all else fails, you can usually contact or records CDs. Once this is mastered, local vendors that sell word processing the process of downloading is similar to that used in other formats. Staff Time software and obtain some technical Requests for information that is format- assistance in using the software. Equipment ted and distributed via diskette are Helpful Hints About Preparing Equipment is needed to create CDs as growing. This is due to the increase in Materials for Diskette opposed to simply reading them. Most computer systems that are augmented by computers that have CD drives only play synthetic speech readers that can read 1. Determine what size diskette your data CDs so an augmentation of most words in addition to displaying them user needs. Typical diskettes come in computer systems will be required to visually. Many people with visual impair- either 3.5 or 5.25 inch sizes. add equipment that allows you to down- ments or learning disabilities find this 2. Convert symbols, icons, graphics, load directly onto a CD. Service organi- format eases their access to information. tables, pictorials, and abbreviations zations do exist in most areas that will The amount of staff time required to to text. assist you in creating a CD master and in produce diskette formats is relatively 3. Do not include extra blank lines in creating copies of a CD. Special software low, involving only the preparation of your text. Indicate new paragraphs is required to create CDs that can be the information and the transference to with the use of one tab. read by several platforms such as a diskette. 4. Convert columns to continuous text. Windows, Macintosh, and UNIX. Equipment 5. Eliminate the use of stylistic factors Costs Most computers have word processing such as bold type, underlining, and Low-end equipment to create data CDs packages that allow information to be special symbols. can be purchased for around $1000. If saved as an ASCII file. Many computers you do not have a CD player, one may today are available with several drives be purchased for $200 to $300. Blank that can be used to transfer ASCII files CDs can be obtained for less than $10 onto diskettes. Most computers that are and copies of CDs can be produced for 6 L' 0 The Research Exchange

about $1 each, if done in volume. If demonstration purposes. The many and "turn around" times: repeated use of the CD technology is possibilities available through the Caption America not planned, it may be more economi- CD format should be considered in 312 Boulevard of the Allies, Suite 200 cal to contract for the service. Services your planning. Pittsburgh, PA 15222 that prepare master CDs usually charge (412) 261-1458 (Voice and Text $250 to up to $1,000 depending upon Telephone) the nature of the information. The Caption Center at WGBH Use a video service or Effort Captions captioning company Consumer Affairs Department The effort associated with using this for- 125 Western Avenue mat is not high. It requires learning to Boston, MA 02134 use new technology. The use of CDs, (617) 492-9225 (Voice and Text however, can be expected to grow and Telephone) it does represent a format that is unique in its ability to capture multi-media pre- Caption, Inc. sentations of information in a format 2619 Hyperion, Suite A that is easily sorted. , CA 90027 (213) 665-4860 (Voice and Text Resources Telephone) Needed equipment can be obtained Staff Time from your local computer supply Real-time Captions, Inc. Acquiring the equipment to perform vendor. Companies that offer mail- 7101 Sepulveda Boulevaid, Room 301 captioning of video is prohibitive for order services often have this Van Nuys, CA 91405 most organizations, therefore, this equipment available. (818) 376-0406 (Voice) service is best performed by a video production or captioning company. TRC Caption Center Helpful Hints About Using 4900 North Lamar Boulevard Compact Discs Equipment Austin, TX 78751 1. Determine what you want to include Typically, captioning is a service that (512) 483-4373 (Voice and Text on your CD remembering that it is will be performed by a contractor; Telephone) more flexible and can accommodate therefore, no special equipment will National Captioning Institute more formats than a diskette. be required by the grantee. 5203 Leesburg Pike 2. If a CD is going to be shared as an Costs Falls Church, VA 22041 accessible alternate format it must be Captioning can be done as a part of (703) 998-2406 (Voice and Text prepared in a manner that will allow originally producing a video or it can be Telephone) a screen reader, for example, to done after a video has been produced. operate. This means you should: Rapidtext It is preferablefor many reasons Voice: (714) 644-6500 convert symbols, icons, graphics, including costthat the planning TDD: (714) 644-5131 tables, pictorials, and abbreviations process include captioning, On average, FAX: (714) 644-5706 to text; it costs approximately $600 per 30 convert columns to continuous text; minutes of video to encode captions. Helpful Hints About indicate new paragraphs with the Working With the Effort Captioning Contractor use of one tab; The production of captioned material *eliminate extra blank lines in your requires staff to review video material 1. Determine whether your contractor text; and and determine the desired text for cap- intends to use opened or closed cap- tioning. Opened captioning is visible eliminate the use of stylistic factors tioning. Many captioning services will also perform this service. It is often use- to everyone while closed captioning such as bold type, underlining, and usually requires special viewing special symbols. ful, however, for you to determine what you think is needed in captioning and equipment to be seen. Although 3. Graphics that may be included on new televisions are being equipped your CD should contain descriptive then discuss any differences with your captioning service. with built-in closed captioning text (and/or audio) portions to relay decoders, opened captioning information conveyed through the Resources is preferable because it can be graphic or pictorial matter. A variety of resources exist to assist you viewed by the broadest range of 4. CDs can be used to supply multiple in captioning material. You should con- equipment today. formats separately or in merged sult with local video companies about 2. Determine how sufficient contrast forms. A simulation of Internet infor- the service and their rates. In addition, between the background video mation systems can be created on you may wish to contact one or more and the text will be assured. Ask CDs for information sharing and of these resources to determine rates to see examples. 7 21 The Research Exchange

3. Determine what size of lettering will costumes, physical characteristics and Helpful Hints About be used. Make sure it is easy to read. body language. The inclusion of this Selecting a Video Service 4. Determine what rate of pacing for the material often provides a richer experi- Contractor ence for people with visual or other text will be provided. Generally, 60 1. Great variation exists in the capa- interpretational impairments. words per minute for children and bilities of video production com- 150 words per minute for adults panies. Shop around for the best is used. Equipment If contracting for video production, no rates and capabilities. 5. In producing captioning text for your special equipment is required. In some 2. Ask companies that you are con- contractor, remember to start a new cases, a grantee may wish to capture sidering to give some examples line with each change of speaker; in some of the video from training, of their video productions. some cases it may be important to therapy, or other therapeutic procedures. identify the speaker. In this case, 3. Determine how the video In this case, a minimum of a standard company will provide services start the dialogue with the name of size, low lux video recorder should be the speaker. themselves versus how they used. It is preferable to consult with will contract with others for 6. Your finished captioning should avoid your video production company prior to the services. the use of symbols. Be sure to check doing this to determine special require- the spelling of all words. 4. Share with the contractor your ments to make the video as high-quality budget for the production and as possible. determine what service features Costs you can obtain for your budget. The production of videos can be quite Make clear those elements that Video and expensive depending on the length, are not optional, e.g., captions, number of remote locations used, special versus those that are optional. graphics and captioning requirements. 5. Obtain a written agreement for Descriptiv Many times, you will need to clarify services from your contractor with your budget for the production of a timelines, video features that will Video video in advance. By making this clear to be included, and cost. the video service contractor, you should be able to avoid surprise expenses. Descriptive soundtrack additions to videos can cost in the range of $1,300 to $4,500 depending upon the length of Internet the video. Effort The production of a high-quality video requires significant effort. Because of the multi-media format that video makes Staff Time available, it means that effort must be The production of high quality videos is focused on the content, message, con- usually a service that is contracted for by text, ant the special needs of the intend- the grantee. Video production services ed user groups. Although video services require a significant amount of informa- can be contracted, many decisions Staff Time tion to produce a desired video. Staff regarding the finished product must The Internet is a computer-based must determine the topic, speakers, visu- be made by you. system that allows mixed media al content, remote location (if desired), information to be shared electroni- informational content, graphics, caption- Resources cally, both nationally and interna- ing and descriptive formatting require- Many local resources generally are tionally. New possibilities for net- ments. While production services can available for the production of video working, marketing, and information help with these, it is necessary for you material. Consult with local television and sharing are inherent in the Internet to know what you wish to communicate video production companies for informa- system. This format also includes the through the video. Descriptive video tion about what services they provide. capability for electronic mail (e-mail). provides an additional synchronized Limited resources to assist in descrip- Technical support may be needed to soundtrack about visual events tive video production are available but help determine the way you will be happening in the video that may not be WGBH's Descriptive Video Services is linked to the Internet, and the incorporated into the original auditory available to work with you. Contact address your server or your site text. Descriptive video is often used to WGBH in Boston at (617) 492-2777 and will have. add descriptions of color, settings, ask for Laurie Everett (extension 3735) Because of the novelty of the or Gerry Field (extension 3496). Internet, many staff may not have 8 22 The Research Exchange skills in preparing information in HTML you plan to purchase and set up a serv- Spectrum University (offers on-line (Hyper Text Markup Language) and er, additional costs would be incurred, classes): http://www.horizons.org/ uploading it onto a site on the World but this is not necessary in the majority The CPB/WGBH National Center for Wide Web. A significant amount of staff of cases. Registering a domain address Accessible Media: time may be required for training as well costs $100 for 2 years and must be http://www.boston.com:80/wgbh/pages/ as the initial effort to set up a site. Once approved by InterNIC Registration ncam/ncamhome. the basics are mastered and a site is run- Services at 703-742-4777 or URL: ning, time can be used more efficiently. http://rsOinternic.net/rs-internic.html WWW Tools & Places: While the medium can save staff time in http://mambo.ucsc.edu/psl/wwwtp.html certain ways, for example, to send a Effort World Wide Web Primer: message to a large audience simultane- The development and maintenance of http://www.vuw.ac.nz/-gnat/ideas/ ously by electronic mail, it is a person- an Internet site is no small undertaking, www-primer.html intensive medium that does requires a if you intend to make it an effective World Wide Web (WWW) Server significant commitment of staff time. communication medium. Operating such Standards and Guidelines: a system requires planning and may http://inet.ed.gov/-kstubbs/wwwstds.html Equipment require staff to learn a new coding system, HTML. In addition, Internet Writing Accessible HUILL Documents: A computer with a modem (or on a net- http://www.gsa.gov/coca/WWWcode.htm work) is required for this format. In versions of certain documents are not addition, there must be a server to link a one-to-one representation. In other Contact the NCDDR to request a copy in to the Internet. Setting up a site on the words, many written documents will another format. World Wide Web may not require addi- require reorganization, and perhaps revision, to be effectively displayed Helpful Hints in Producing tional equipment if you are a part of a Internet Pages system that is already linked to the through an Internet information system. 1. Be sure that your Internet site demon- Internet. Linkage can be directsuch Resources strates special features to make it most as through the computer system of An impressive array of informational a universityor indirectthrough accessible to people with disabilities. resources are available through the Specific informational resources an Internet service provider (ISP). Internet system itself and through your are available through the NCDDR Services such as America Online and local bookstore or library. Many maga- upon request. Compuserve are moving toward provid- zines are now available that are 2. Know your goal and your intended ing Web access. Specifications for dedicated to the Internet and its use. acceptable computer systems vary. The audience. Your Internet site should Consultant help is available through have something to say to those you factors which typically impact your use local computer vendors as well as of the Internet are the memory capability expect to visit the site. through the Internet. The NCDDR has 3. The Internet is an interactive medium. and processing speed of your computer developed a list of information and the speed of transfer possible Provide ways for users to give feed- resources that will be available through back on your site, and plan to update through your modem. The type of our Web site http://www.ncddr.org/ browser and other software used and the site regularly. Following are examples of some of 4. Style is important, but content is more the way you are linked to the Internet these resources: will affect your ability to view graphic important. Do not include graphics images and to download information. A Beginner's Guide to HTML: in your Internet site that do not con- http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/General/Inter tribute to the understanding of the Costs net/WWW/HTMLPrimer.html content you are communicating or The cost of a computer system that Classroom Internet Server Cookbook: help in understanding the organiza- allows you to use the Internet as an http://web66.coled.umn.edu/Cookhook- tion of the information. accessible format for your information contents.htm1 5. Facilitate moving through your site. is approximately $3,000. In addition, Designing an Accessible World (Trace Allow users to search through the depending upon the type of linkage, Center): http://trace.wisc.edu information you have rather than you may have on-line service charges of expecting them to go through every- $10 to $25 per month. Most browsers How to Make a Great Home Page thing to find what they need. such as , and other nec- Without Knowing One Word of H7ML: 6. Review your pages to see how the http://www.valleynet.net/-kiradive/ essary software are available free over information appears using several dif- home.html the Internet system. Low-cost training on ferent browsers. Check any "hot " writing HTML documents is available HTML Overview: you include to make sure they remain from many sources such as colleges and http://www.ora.com/gnn/bus/ora- operative. Software is available that universities. Ultimate cost savings can features/html/index.htni1 will do this automatically. also be seen if information is posted on Resources and Guides for Publishing 7. Visit other sites on the Internet. This the Web where anyone who is interested on the Web: will give you experience in good and can view and download it, rather than http://www.sedl.org/ta/publishlltml bad components of web pages so that printing and distributing text copies. If your own site will be improved. 9 23 concluded on page 10 The Research Exchange

Choosing a Primary Format Availability Versus Accessibility continued from page 9 continued from page 1 Resources: Edwards, L. (1991.) Using knowledge and Format Summary technology to improve the quality of life A need exists to carefully consider how of people who have disabilities: A pro- types of formats that can serve as sumer approach. Philadelphia: you are making your project-related primary and alternate formats for your Pennsylvania College of Optometry. information accessible to all of your information. Some formats will be more potential intended user groups. Leung, P. (1992.) Translation of knowl- helpful in communicating your message edge into practice. In Walcott & Decisions about the manner in which than others. Choices should be based on Associates, NIDRR National CRP Panel your information is formatted will either the information to be disseminated as Final Report. Washington, D.C.: Walcott increase or decrease the "ease of access well as the audience that will receive & Associates. and simplicity of use" experienced by and use it. Our hope is that the informa- NARIC. (1994.) Compendium of products your intended users. The judicious tion presented will assist you in avoiding bry NIDRR grantees and contractots (FY choice of effective, flexible and accessi- the "automatic pilot" choice and in 1993). Silver Spring, MD: National ble formats will facilitate utilization. considering alternatives that may be Rehabilitation Information Center. Comparisons can be made in more effective in different situations. 10 NARIC. (1995.) Compendium of products analyzing and describing various by NIDRR grantees and contractors (FY 1994). Silver Spring, MD: National Rehabilitation Information Center. IS

NCDDR World Wide ,4111goi. lloaillitetsi.btOe.erg Volume I. Number 1- Fall 1995 em Is 1com11 This premiere issue includes An ocieruleui of the SCOWL Information is included Web Site concerning:Information and technical assistance resowees. multiculturalism tiamiagion_autienutuicenia Itt1liurcliffaltillAtauterla and dissemination. arid SCOUR stall. trizatniulAtkall_ktrUos.a.tA mullion T he NCDDR recognizes the World Wide SolinolomotalloovaocionomItAmoUtoormas Uotorm jnolzallint..amt Um KOMI SiOondiir 01-111.111.11-thl lot Falents We %mond issue Mules, the Reed for Using alternate formals in Web (WWW) as a powerful medium that MUM ?milli.IN the terntt ...96 dissemination. Information is included concerning: availability one soitiounlitm accessibility. dissemination policy. Choosing formal, Me Nr00113 World ttecle should be used routinely for information Wen site, and NINO granter recognition. LdIlArtallol.c1 sharing and communication by NIDRR Coming Soon: htto://wWW.ncddr.org/ ...Mon, renter Mr Clissemlnallon 011..1141y lleseOn11 grantees, as well as NIDRR staff. The Stets Vs related sales Updated...lay 15,1996

NCDDR has established a site on the WWW Ma contests I ISO issballe arm elerbessql Owletgrant Orel 1004,111141 trees Ma velent Insole. ea thsabioly sue ibrisaliWilatte Nesse,* 001111111. asotartment ol I localise. Notrever. these ceolcals 0. ..IA.tOt,.,lII that can easily be accessed with Web reureseat babes,. 11001. Vilna. or the eeasirtmeal el lauttten: ea net browser software such as Netscape, Mosaic, assume milersemeal be lee leaerm iesveruseeel. SabIlleielliglifatteneLleollbeffielUeitetilltre and . The Uniform Resource Locator Lesiosumils, ...Bests. Problems: Weellboaltlf26.01 (URL) address for the NCDDR site is: http://www.ncddr.org/ The NCDDR site serves as the hub of an utilize formats and modes of commu- Educational Development Laboratory integrated information system which will: nication preferred by the recipients, (SEDL) where the NCDDR is housed. make readily available pertinent informa- such as electronic mail, fax, and The SEDL site has information about tion to help grantees increase their U.S. Mail. SEDL and the U.S. Department of knowledge and implementation of dis- Education's Office of Educational The NCDDR recognizes that some sernination and utilization strategies, Research and Improvement (OEM), as NIDRR grantees do not currently have particularly for consumers from minority well as current SEDL publications. access to the Internet. Alternate formats backgrounds; of materials and resources found on the serve as a mechanism for organizing NCDDR site will be made available to Multi-Media Focus and sharing materials developed by NIDRR grantees in their desired format Integrated multi-media formats (e.g. NIDRR-funded researchers; and mode. NCDDR staff will also give audio, video, graphics, and written text) facilitate access to technical assistance assistance to grantees who want to will be used to demonstrate the broad materials developed by the NCDDR; increase their use of and presence on range of communication tools that can promote interactive communication the Internet. be utilized in the Internet medium. At among NIDRR grantees with access to The NCDDR site is linked directly to this time, most graphic items are also the WWW; the Web site of the Southwest presented in text format for those who BEST COPYAVAILABLE 10 2 4 The Research Exchange do not have graphics capabilities. Audio version offers links to audio and video and will soon be uploaded to the and video clips will be made available samples for those users who have NCDDR site. These include: on the NCDDR Web site, and audio appropriate helper software, as well as Links to other agencies and important versions of selected materials may be hot links to other sites on the WWW. disability and rehabilitation research offered. Adaptive/assistive devices may Frequently Asked Questions/Ask A Question sites; be presented via 3-D imaging. The A number of questions NIDRR grantees A listing and description of disability- NCDDR will encourage interactive com- may have about dissemination are related listservs with instructions and munication through electronic mail and answered on. this page, with an elec- links to subscribe; and other means. A listserv (automatic elec- tronic mail option at the end for users A searchable, descriptive database tronic mailing list) will be established to to ask additional questions. of NIDRR grantees with electronic provide timely information and allow mail links. for interaction among groups of NIDRR Online Foundations and Corporate Grant grantees, NIDRR staff, and NCDDR staff. Programs An on-line survey will be designed to In addition, NCDDR staff are investigat- A list is provided, with links, of 24 foun- obtain feedback on the usefulness ing the feasibility of conducting chat dations and corporate grant programs and presentation of information on sessions in which NIDRR grantees can that have Internet sites giving informa- the Web site. interact with each other and with tion about grants in areas that may be of Technical assistance resources will be NCDDR staff in real time to explore interest to many NIDRR grantees. An made available through the NCDDR's issues related to the utilization of electronic mail option allows users to Web site. Examples of some of these outcomes in specific areas of NIDRR- suggest other sites to add to the listing. technical assistance materials, in addition funded research. Dissemination, Utilization, and the NCDDR to the newsletter and calendar of This section contains articles focusing on events, include: Current Items on the dissemination and utilization (D & U). Dissemination guides, such as how to NCDDR Site The first article gives a overview of the improve dissemination and utilization, When a user accesses the NCDDR Web history, theoretical frameworks, prac- and how to identify and involve tar- site, the home page gives a brief listing tices, evaluation activities, and implica- get audiences; of the items currently available on the tions; references are provided. Other Review of the key literature on topics site as well as sections that are in devel- articles posted focus on D & U charac- such as dissemination and utilization opment. Interested individuals may con- teristics and approaches. and the impact of ailture and minori- tact the NCDDR to request alternate for- Calendar of NIDRR Project Events ty status on D & U a ctiv i ti e s ; mat versions of any of the sections of The calendar of events highlights confer- Findings from NCDDR's research the site described below. Following is a ences, workshops and other events efforts'including surveys of NIDRR- brief overview of the items now avail- sponsored or co-sponsored by NIDRR- funded and other researchers, and able at the NCDDR site: funded projects. Users can view the potential users; and What is NCDDR? entries for any month and are invited to An online form to request technical This section provides an abstract about add new entries to the Calendar by assistance. the NCDDR, including its purpose, choosing the 'Add an event' option. goals, and objectives. Instructions are Grantees are encouraged to add new given on how to obtain additional events or to fax, mail, or call in the Visit http://www.ncddr.org/ information and how to contact information. You are encouraged to visit the NCDDR NCDDR staff. NIDRR Projects on the Internet site, and to provide feedback and sug- NCDDR has developed a listing of gestions via the Guestbook, through Nomination of Useful Outcomes electronic mail or any other medium you The NCDDR is soliciting nominations NIDRR funded projects with World Wide may prefer. People who are new to the of results produced through NIDRR Web sites on the Internet. The list is Internet and unsure of how to locate the grants and contracts. Outcomes that are divided into NIDRR funding areas and NCDDR site may call toll-free at nominated will be reviewed, and those the URL addresses link directly to the 1-800-266-1832 for assistance from selected will be disseminated more sites. A total of 74 sites were listed as of NCDDR staff. NIDRR grantees are espe- widely. This section describes the nomi- May 1, 1996. cially encouraged to share and review nation process and includes a form for Guestbook and Suggestions information about your project's activi- making nominations. The Guestbook allows users to give ties via the NCDDR site. It is your The Research Exchange Quarterly feedback and suggestions about items resource to shape and use in ways that An Internet version of the NCDDR's they would like to see on the NCDDR are most beneficial to you. The NCDDR quarterly newsletter is posted, in some site, and ways in which the site could vision includes constant expansion cases before a print version may have be improved. and use of the World Wide Web site to been delivered. Volume 1, Number 1 communicate in innovative ways with and Number 2 (this issue) are currently Items under Development those who can utilize the findings from available on the Web site. The electronic A number of items are in preparation disability research. 1 25 The Research Exchange

on patient education at the Consortium University of Wisconsin in Madison. N1DRR of Multiple Sclerosis Centers. For further Dr. Syzmanski received the American information call Dr. Rosalind C. Kalb at Psychological Association Research Grantees 914-328-6416, ext. 233. Award for high quality research in areas of concern and interest to the counseling Receive profession. Dr. Syzmanski was one of five national recipients of the award Dr. Edna Mora Syzmanski is the Recognition presented by the American Counseling Principal Investigator of the Association. For further information Rehabilitation Research and Training Duringrecent telephone interviews call 608-265-5048 or e-mail: Center on Career Development and [email protected] with the NIDRR grantees, the NCDDR Advancement of People at the asked if the project had been given an award, citation, or other special recogni- tion during the past twelve months. The NCDDR selected representatives from How To Contact The The Research Exchange, a newsletter to the Rehabilitation Research and Training National Center For promote the effective dissemination and uti- Centers (RRTCs) for special recognition lization of disability research outcomes, is The Dissemination Of published quarterly by the National Center in this issue of The Research Exchange. Disability Research for the Dissemination of Disability Research We congratulate each of the grantees, (NCDDR) which is operated by the South- and encourage all NIDRR grantees to west Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL). Neither SEDL nor the NCDDR dis- contact the NCDDR with information criminate on the basis of age, sex, race, to share in future issues. Call us color, creed, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, marital or veteran status, or the 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-.6861 presence of a disability. SEDL is an Equal Voice/Text Telephone from Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Dr. Tom Seekins is the Principal 8A.M.-NOONand1-5 P.M.Central Time, Employer and is committed to affording Investigator of the Rehabilitation MondayFriday (except holidays) equal employment opportunities for all indi- viduals in all employment matters. The con- Research and Training Center on tents of this newsletter were developed Rural Rehabilitation Services at the under a grant (#H133D50016) from the University of Montana in Missoula. National Institute on Disability and Use a computer modem Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. The project was invited to participate in to contact us through the Internet Department of Education (ED). However, the National Rural Conference (NRC) in at our e-mail address: these contents do not necessarily represent April, 1995. The Conference was mod- jwestbro@sedLorg the policy of SEDL, NIDRR, or the ED; do or use our URL: not assume endorsement by the Federal erated by President Clinton and Vice Government. For questions, comments, or President Gore, and culminated six rural http://www.ncddr.org/ to request this newsletter in alternate for- forums held by the White House and mats, contact: the Department of Agriculture to pre- National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR) cede congressional hearings on the Write to NCDDR Southwest Educational reauthorization of the Agriculture Act. NCDDR Development Laboratory The RRTC was recognized as a national Southwest Educational 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 Development Laboratory Austin, Texas 78701-3281 expert representing regional perspec- 1-800-266-1832 (V/TT) tives on rural America. Call 406-243- 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 Austin, Texas 78701-3281 512-476-6861 (N./T.1T) 5467 to request the article "President FAX: 512-476-2286 e-mail: [email protected] Clinton Moderates National Rural Internet URL: http://www.ncddr.org/ Conference" by Tom Seekins, The John Westbrook Rural Exchange, Special Issue-July, Visit us in downtown Austin, Texas Director 1995, or for further information e-mail: at the Southwest Tower Mary Kay Sanders [email protected] 7th and Brazos Editor one block east of Congress Avenue Lin Harris Assistant Editor Dr. Charles R. Smith is the Principal Joann Starks fica Contributing Editor Investigator of the Medical Rehabili- Fax your request to us tation Research and Training Center at 512-476-2286 for Multiple Sclerosis of New York Southwest Educational National Institute on Disability Medical College at the St. Agnes Development Laboratoryft-vk I NIDRRand Rehabilitation Research Hospital in White Plains, New York. The project received the Best Presenta- An electronic version ofThe Research The Research Exchange isavailable in tion Award sponsored by Berlex ExchangeVolume 1, Number 2 is available alternate formats upon request. Pharmaceuticals, in September, 1995. on the Internet at URL http://www.ncddr.org/ The award was given for a presentation 12 BEST COPY AVAILABLE 26 THE Research Exchange

VOLUME 1, NUMBER 3 SPRING 1 9 9 6

At a Glance Dissenlination Indicators Dissemination Dissemiliation Patterns of NIDRR Grantees Characteristics of Current NIDRR Grantees: Initial Findings 5 Patterns of NIDRR Grantees Receive Recognition 10

A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR NIDIN Grantees NIDRR grantees were asked to report products of their Dissemination grant-related work in fiscal years (FYs) 1993 and 1994. Indicators Information reported was gathered by the National Dissemination is frequently discussed in very broad and Rehabilitation Information Center (NARIC) and general terms. In addition, dissemination is a term that is often documented in the Compendium of Products by described and defined in different ways. These characteristics NIDRR Grantees & Contractors (NARIC, 1994, 1995). leave many listeners in dissemination-related discussions wondering how to apply what they hear. Analyses of these reported data suggest patterns of Regardless of these problems, it is clear that dissemination dissemination that are important "markers" in noting is a process that has measurable "markers" or indicators asso- ciated with it. Sadly, however, the evaluation of dissemination changes in dissemination strategies and in describing efforts is usually treated as if it is an impossible task or so difficult and time consuming that it can't be done by mere the most common formats and modes used for mortals. While it is true that collecting some detailed dissemination by NIDRR projects. information about specific ways in which individual users have benefited from the application of disseminated It should be noted that the data used in these analyses were gathered from NIDRR grantees beginning in FY 1993. information can be a long-term and human-intensive effort, it is not the case that meaningful dissemination-related This initial effort may have caused some confusion among evaluation information cannot be reasonably collected. grantees regarding what to report and when to report. This Projects interested in strengthening their impact must evaluate could have caused irregularities in the patterns established the effectiveness of their dissemination strategies. Without an by these data. It seems reasonable, however, that the data effective evaluation and feedback process that involves the from these analyses can be viewed as a beginning point potential users of your information, you lack sufficient in describing NIDRR grantee dissemination patterns. These data will be updated as new information is information to know if dissemination achieves its intended purposeuse of the information. gathered and reported. There is no denying that the way in which research is conducted affects utilization. If research results are only Reporting Data meaningful within the context of their development, the Of the 294 NIDRR projects funded in FY 1993, 130 (44%) research and development community must improve the reported one or more products. In FY 1994, 114 (38%) of the understanding of original research contexts and support 300 NIDRR-funded projects reported a product. Only 13% of the replication of research studies to enhance the ability the FY 1993 respondents also reported a product in the FY to generalize results. By expanding the replication of 2 7 1994 period. continued on page 2 continued on page 2 The Research Exchange

A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR

Dissemination Indicators,continued from page 1 research studies, strength of the research results increase, if corroborated. Additionally, if research is conducted in a collaborative manner with the intended user groups, utilization occurs even more readily because it addresses needs of real people. The more reliable the research result and the stronger the potential user group involvement, generally, the easier utilization becomes.

Dissemination Patterns,continued from page 1 Differences in reporting by NIDRR program areas were also Reported data indicate that for the two year period, only analyzed. Figure 1 shows the percentage of total grantees per three program areas had a 50% or greater response-rate for program area reporting one or more products during FY 1993 both years. These program areas were Rehabilitation Research or FY 1994. and Training Centers, Innovative Research Projects, and Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers. Eight program Figure 1 areas showed an increase in the number of projects reporting Percentage of Grantees Reporting in FY 1994, while four showed a decrease. One program area, By Program Area Innovative Research Projects, reported 100% for both years. In considering whether this pattern of response-rates FY93 FY94 affected the overall number of products reported, the NCDDR Program Area analyzed the number of products reported by each program Research & Demonstration Projects 20 26 area for FYs 1993 and 1994. This information is presented in Figure 2. Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers 57 71 Figure 2 Innovative Research Projects 100 100 Number of Products by Program Area Utilization Projects 53 46 Program Area FY93 FY94 Rehabilitation Engineering Research & Demonstration Projects Research Centers 60 75 23 32 Rehabilitation Research & Fellowships 50 11 Training Centers 327 411 Field-Initiated Research Projects 29 30 Innovative Research Projects 13 5 Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects 46 83 Utilization Projects 50 33 Research Training Grants 7 42 Rehabilitation Engineering State Technology Assistance Projects 32 20 Research Centers 54 170

Technology-Related Projects of Fellowships 4 1 National Significance 10 75 Field-Initiated Research Projects 43 91 ADA Technical Assistance Programs 33 17 Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects 49 90

Research Training Grants 1 12

State Technology Assistance Projects 101 115 Technology-Related Projects of National Significance 2 13

ADA Technical Assistance Programs 46 37 28 Total Products Reported 745 1,010 2 The Research Exchange

Analyzing the patterns of past dissemination strategies, both grantees in recent fiscal years and the capabilities and current individually and collectively, can assist in appraising the extent dissemination trends among grantees. These measures may be of change reflected in dissemination strategies over time, the helpful in serving as a "baseline" for comparing your dissemina- degree of change promoted by the use of new technologies, tion experiences. Also in this issue, the award-winning efforts and the nature of changes made to reach new audiences. This of several NIDRR-funded projects are recognized. issue of The Research Exchange provides a snapshot of data John D. Westbrook concerning dissemination patterns demonstrated by National Director Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR)

The number of products reported in FY 1994 was greater ADA Technical Assistance Programs submitted the most than the number reported in FY 1993. This is true despite the products per reporting project for FY 1993 and FY 1994. fact that fewer projects actually reported a product for FY 1994 Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers followed with 14.2 than for FY 1993. Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers products in FY 1994 and Rehabilitation Research and Training had by far the greatest total number of products reported with Centers were next with 11.7 for FY 1994. In addition, nine 411 in FY 1994 and 327 for FY 1993. Rehabilitation Engineering program areas increased their number of products per Research Centers reported the second highest number (170 reporting project from FY 1993 to FY 1994, while two areas for FY 1994, 54 for FY 1993) followed by State Technology showed a decrease, and one remained the same. There were Assistance Projects (115 for FY 1994, 101 for FY 1993). sharp increases in the average product per project between FY Because the number of projects for each program area 1993 and FY 1994 for the Rehabilitation Research and Training varies considerably, a more telling statistic may be the number Centers, the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers, the of products per reporting project. The average number of State Technology Assistance projects, the Technology-Related products per reporting project is reported by year in Figure 3. Projects of National Significance, and the ADA Technical Assistance Programs. Figure 3 Average Number of Products per Nature of Products Reporting Project, by Program Area In addition to evaluating data on the reporting of products, the NCDDR analyzed the variety of products reported by grantees. Program Area FY93 FY94 A classification system of eight broad categories was developed to sort the products. Research & Demonstration Projects 4.6 4.6 Journals-jOurnal articles and special issues of journals Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers 8.4 11.7 General Awareness Materials-abstracts, book reviews, Innovative Research Projects 6.5 5.0 brochures, fact sheets, newsletters, and others Utilization Projects 6.3 6.6 Books, Chapters, Papers-books, chapters in books, Rehabilitation Engineering concept papers, paper presentations, conference proceedings, working papers, and others Research Centers 6.0 14.2 Training Materials-curricula, handbooks, guidelines, Fellowships 2.0 1.0 training modules, workbooks, design booklets, and others Field-Initiated Research Projects 2.4 4.3 Aids/Devices-technological aids, assistive/adaptive Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects 8.2 9.0 devices, and others Research Training Grants 1.0 2.4 Mediated Materials-audio tape, CD-ROM, database, online Internet pages, software, videotape, electronic State Technology Assistance Projects 5.9 10.5 library, and others Technology-Related Projects of Reports-annual reports, final reports, and others National Significance 1.0 4.3 Miscellaneous or Unclassified Materialsradio ADA Technical Assistance Programs 9.2 18.5 interview, test materials, survey, discussion groups, and others The Research Exchange

The number of products reported by grantees for FY Observations 1993 and FY 1994 are presented by category in Figure 4. The data from FY 1993 and FY 1994 establish a beginning In addition, the percentage of product type compared to point in describing NIDRR grantees' patterns of dissemination. the total number of products is reported for each fiscal year. Data from subsequent years will provide a broader picture Finally, the change in number of products between years of how NIDRR grantees disseminate the outcomes of their and the magnitude of that change (displayed as a multiplier) research. From the FY 1993 and FY 1994 data several are also shown. observations can be made. Figure 4 Less than half of all grantees reported a product. The majority of reporting grantees provided information for only Amounts and Percentages of Product one of the two years studied, with 13% reporting products Types for FY 1993 and FY 1994 and the in both years. This could be due to a wide variety of Change Between Both Year reasons ranging from the timing of the original request for information to the lack of reportable products. Magnitude of The majority of reported products were produced by Product 1993 % 1994 % Change Change projects in the Rehabilitation Research and Training Center and Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center Journals 149 20.0 311 30.8+162 2.09 program areas. General Awareness 18925.4 265 26.2+ 761.40 Variations in the rate of reporting existed across program areas, with the rates of participation ranging from highs of Books, Chapters, 100% for Innovative Research Projects and 83% for Model Papers 156 20.9 219 21.7 +63 1.40 Spinal Cord Injury Projects to lows of 17% for ADA Training Materials 35 4.7 64 6.3 +29 1.83 Technical Assistance Programs and 11% for Fellowships.

Aids/Devices 0 0.0 4 0.4 +4 Overall, of the 12 program areas, 67% reported more products in FY 1994. Mediated Materials63 8.5 51 5.0 -12 0.81 Journal publications was the fastest growing product type Reports 54 7.2 37 3.7 -170.69 and in FY 1994 was most frequently reported as a product of NIDRR grantees. Increases in this area mark the increase Miscellaneous 99 13.3 59 5.8 -400.60 in scientific effort across all NIDRR projects. Total 745 1010 265 1.36 Conclusion This analysis of products reported by NIDRR-funded In FY 1993 the three most reported categories (General grantees suggests tentative patterns that will be monitored over Awareness Materials; Books, Chapters, Papers; and Journals) time. Shifts in these patterns are expected to occur, reflecting accounted for approximately 66% of all product types the use of new approaches and technologies to support and reported. In FY 1994, these same three categories comprised enhance the process of dissemination. approximately 79% of all product types reported. Overall, the number of products reported increased by a factor of 1.36 across the two-year period. Comparing the number of products reported by product type for FY 1993 to the number reported in FY 1994 reveals increases and decrease. The greatest increase between FY 1993 and FY 1994 was in the category of Journals, which more than doubled across the two years. Three other areas increased in magnitude: Training Materials, General Awareness Materials, and Books, Chapters, and Papers. Three types of productsMediated Materials, Reports, and Miscellaneousdecreased in magnitude.

30

4 The Research Exchange Characteristics of Current NIDRR Grantees: Initial Findings

One of the primary objectives of the NCDDR is to gather the ability to .contract for needed services. When the answer information from a wide range of users and potential users was "yes," respondents were asked to indicate whether or not of disability research. NCDDR staff contacted the Principal the format was frequently used. Formats were: Investigators (PIs) of current NIDRR-funded projects to collect basic information about their general dissemination practices. Regular print Since no data on NIDRR project dissemination were found in Large print the literature, the purpose of this first effort was to establish a baseline of data with which future data can be compared to Braille determine if changes in dissemination practices occur over the Audio/oral NCDDR pilot project period. Future research will compare these responses with those of consumers to see if researchers' Visual/graphic (non-print) dissemination activities reflect the needs of consumers. Opened-caption video (spoken dialogue is displayed on-screen as printed words, along with the visual image, Instrument Development and can be viewed without a decoder) The NCDDR's data collection efforts were initially intended to Closed-caption video (spoken dialogue is displayed on-screen focus on the nature of NIDRR-funded disability research pro- as printed words, along with the visual image, when a grams and their results, general awareness of NIDRR activities, decoder is used) target audiences that could benefit from research outcomes, Descriptive video (provides narrated descnption of key visual and NIDRR grantees' perceptions about the use of research elements, along with the original audio) results or outcomes. Other issues to be examined included the specific impact of disability research in the lives of persons Electronic/computer file with disabilities; the effectiveness of current dissemination activ- Other language ities; future dissemination plans; barriers to the dissemination and accessibility of research results, particularly to audiences Contacts were asked to report which modes were used to from multicultural backgrounds; and dissemination assistance disseminate information, and for those not used, which were needs. NCDDR staff and outside research experts designed and projected to be used in the future. This did not require a reviewed an instrument to collect this information. NCDDR staff definite plan or timeline, but included modes which had been then conducted a pilot test and determined that the instrument discussed as possible targets for development in the future. was lengthy and time consuming, and decided to refine Distribution modes included in the interview were: the focus for the first phase of information collection. The U.S. Mail revised information-gathering instrument was designed to be administered in a short telephone interview. Text Telephone (771' or 1.DD, used by people who The instrument protocol included updating information are deaf or hard of hearing, and othels) reported in the F iscal Year 1994 NIDRR Program Directory Fax (NARIC, 1995). The name of the PI, the contact person (the PI or another designated person to be contacted about NCDDR Audio tape activities), addresses, telephone and fax *numbers, electronic Video tape mail addresses, and Internet access information were all updated. Each NCDDR contact person was asked to identify Electronic mail the preferred format and mode for receiving information from Internet the NCDDR, including general day-to-day correspondence as well as newsletters and other materials and products. Computer disk NCDDR contacts were also asked about each project's capa- CD-ROM bility to disseminate information to its target audiences through various formats and modes. The list of format and mode Information was also requested about events that options was developed by NCDDR staff. The NCDDR contacts grantees were sponsoring to include in the Calendar of were asked if their projects had the capability to provide NIDRR Grantee Events, special recognition received by information in these formats, even if this had never been NIDRR projects during the past 12 months, and the requested. This was not restricted to having the skills and willingness of contact persons to work with NCDDR staff resources onsite to produce alternate formats but included in future information-gathering activities. 31 5 The Research Exchange

The revised instrument was pilot-tested with four PIs from Figure 5 different NIDRR program areas who determined it to be easily administered in a telephone interview of approximately ten Current NIDRR-Funded Projects minutes. Several changes were made to further refine the by Program Area telephone interview protocol. Funded in or Interview Procedure Current before Funded Program Area Total '94 '95 Initial telephone interviews were conducted with the PIs 17 2 and/or contact persons for 203 projects identified as ongoing Research & Demonstration Projects 19 in FY 1995 from the Fiscal Year 1994 NIDRR Program Rehabilitation Research & Directory (NARIC, 1995). Calls were made by trained telephone Training Centers 46 43 3 interviewers during January and February, 1996. Seven new Innovative Research Projects 4 0 4 projects funded by NIDRR in 1995 were identified through the interview process, for a total of 210 projects. Utilization Projects 6 4 2 When the Fiscal Year 1995 NIDRR Program Directory Rehabilitation Engineering (NARIC, 1996) was made available via NARIC's World Wide Research Centers 16 13 3 Web site, an additional 68 projects were identified as funded in 1995, as well as two more from 1994. Calls were made in April Fellowships 15 0 15 and May to the PIs and/or contact persons of those projects. Field-Initiated Research Projects 55 38 17 This brought the total to 280 identified projects. One, an international project with the government of India, was not Interagency Agreements 1 1 0 interviewed, leaving 279 projects that were interviewed. A total International Projects of 998 telephone calls, 40 fax transmissions, and 52 electronic (not included in data collection) 1 0 1 mail posts were made to gather informatidn from the current 18 0 18 NIDRR grantees. Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects Research Training Grants 14 12 2 Results Small Business Innovative Research/I 1 0 1 The NCDDR verified existing information for each project and Small Business Innovative Research/II5 4 1 updated its database records for 279 current NIDRR-funded projects. Some comparisons among the different program State Technology Assistance Projects59 57 2 areas are presented in the following sections. ADA Technical Assistance Programs 18 15 3 Project Characteristics Contracts 2 1 1 A total of 280 current projects were identified. Of these, 75 Totals 280 205 75 were new awards in FY 1995, while 205 were funded during or before 1994. The 280 current NIDRR projects were funded Three of the sixteen program areasState Technology under 16 program areas as shown in Figure 5. Assistance Projects (59), Field-Initiated Research Projects (55), and Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers (46)comprise 57% of the total number of current NIDRR-funded projects. Seven program areas make up only seven percent of the projects: Utilization Projects (6), Small Business Innovative Research/II (5), Innovative Research (4), Contracts (2), Interagency Agreements (1), International Projects (1) and Small Business Innovative Research/I (1). The 279 NIDRR projects interviewed are directed by 253 PIs. A total of 231 (83%) of the projects are directed by a PI responsible for only one NIDRR-funded project. Nineteen PIs direct two projects, two PIs direct three projects, and one directs four projects. In addition, 11 PIs served as Co-Principal Investigators (Co-PIs) and two served as NCDDR contacts on other NIDRR- funded projects. One individual served as a PI on one project, a Co-PI on another, and as contact person on a third. Nearly two thirds of the current projects reported no Co-PIs 6 32 The Research Exchange

Coming up in the next issue of (177, or 63%). Another 87 (31%) reported having one Co-PI, while 15 (5%) indicated having more than one Co-PI. Five Co-PIs served T H E in that role for two projects, and one was Co-PI for three projects. A total of 132 PIs (47%) identified themselves as the contact person for NCDDR activities. Another 17 PIs (6%) identified a Co-PI to serve as the contact person. Designated contact persons Research Exchange who were neither PI nor Co-PI were identified by 134 or 47% of the projects. Volume 1, Number 4 Internet Access A total of 243 respondents (87%) indicated they have access to Internet services (which includes electronic mail). In addition, Literature Can Advise Practice 88 projects (32%) have established sites on the World Wide Web (WWW), meaning that these projects have made information Literature Review on Dissemination available to anyone who has access to the WWW. Another 65 projects (23%) are in the process of developing sites that should and Utilization of Research Results be ready by the end of 1996. This information, along with the projected total for the end of 1996, is presented by program Guides to Improving Practice area in Figure 6. The total number of projects for each program area is presented in parentheses. NIDRR Grantees Receive Recognition Figure 6 Present, Future, and Projected Total Sites on the WWW Projected PresentFuture Total Program Area (No. of Projects) Sites Sites Sites

Research & Demonstration Projects (19) 8 0 8 Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers (46) 19 13 32

Innovative Research Projects (4) 1 1

Utilization Projects (6) 3 3 6 Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers had the Rehabilitation Engineering highest number of present sites with 19. A total of 32 sites Research Centers (16) 10 2 12 are anticipated by the end of 1996, representing 70% of all the projects in that program area. Seventeen State Technology Fellowships (15) 0 1 1 Assistance Projects currently have WWW sites with a total of 35 Field-Initiated Research Projects (55) 12 15 27 anticipated by the end of 1996, accounting for 59% of all State Technology Assistance Projects. Field-Initiated Research Projects Interagency Agreements (1) 0 1 1 have 12 WWW sites; with a total of 27 expected by the end of the year, 49% of that program area will have WWW sites. Ten Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects (18) 3 7 10 Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers have sites with Research Training Grants (14) 4 2 6 two more anticipated by the end of 1996, comprising 75% of the total for that area. Ten of the ADA Technical Assistance Small Business Innovative Research/l (1) 1 1 Programs presently have WWW sites and 12 of the 18 (67%) Small Business Innovative Research/II (5)0 1 1 expect to have a site by the end of 1996. State Technology Assistance Projects (59)17 18 35

ADA Technical Assistance Programs (18)10 2 12 Contracts (2) 0 0 BEST COPY AVAILABLE Totals (279) 88 65 153 3 7 The Research Exchange

Preferred Formats and Modes for Seven of the ten formats reportedly can be produced by Communication with NCDDR 67% or more of projects. The fewest grantees reported having A total of 274 (98%) of NCDDR contacts indicated that Regular the capability to produce the three video formats. Print was their preferred format for receiving day-to-day In contrast to projects' perceived capability to produce these communication from the NCDDR. One hundred and ninety- formats, substantially fewer projects report using these formats four contacts (69%) preferred to receive such correspondence frequently. Other than Regular Print, which is frequently by U.S. Mail, 56 (20%) by Fax, and 81 (29%) by Electronic used by 100% of respondents, and Electronic File, repottedly Mail (E-mail). A total of 47 respondents (18%) indicated that a frequently used by 49%, all other formats are reported to be combination of U.S. Mail, Fax, or E-mail would be appropriate, frequently used by 28% or less of projects. depending on the length and format of the communication. Grantees were asked to report which modes they used to Similar figures were reported for preferred formats and disseminate information, and for those not used, which were modes for materials and products such as this quarterly tentatively projected to be used in the future. This information is reported in Figure 8. newsletter. Regular Print was preferred by 262 contacts (94%), Large Print by five, and Electronic/Computer File by 12. U.S. Mail was the preferred mode for 267 contacts (96%), while Figure 8 E-mail was preferred by 12 (4%). Current and Projected Future Use Format and Mode Capabilities of Modes of Information Dissemination Grantees were asked to report which formats they had the Projected Currently Used Not Used Future Use # % capability to produce, if requested, and which of those formats Mode # % # % they believed they used frequently. Responses are presented in Figure 7. U.S. Mail 279 100

Figure 7 Voice Telephone 279 100 Fax Projects Reporting Capability 276 99 3 1 to Produce Formats and Computer Disk259 93 14 5 4 1 Formats Frequently Used Electronic Mail 253 91 10 4 18 5 Capability Frequently Used Audio Tape 236 86 38 13 4 1 Format Video Tape 207 74 62 22 9 3 Regular Print 279 100 279 100 Text Telephone206 74 68 24 5 2 Electronic File 256 92 137 49 Internet 143 51 45 16 106 33 Large Print 249 89 77 28 CD-ROM 83 30 158 56 46 14 Audio/Oral 246 88 68 24

Visual/Graphic(non-print) 229 82 77 28 All projects reported that U.S. Mail and Voice Telephone Braille 206 74 46 16 are modes that are currently used. Eight of the ten modes of information dissemination are reportedly being presently used Other Language 187 67 51 18 by at least 74% of projects. The two modes reported to be least Opened-caption Video 149 53 32 11 used, Internet and CD-ROM, are also the two most expected to be used in the future by projects that are not presently using Closed-caption Video 135 48 23 8 them. Thirty-three percent of projects reported they anticipated Descriptive Video 96 34 6 2 using the Internet as a mode of information dissemination in the future, while 14% reported the same for CD-ROM.

34

8 The Research Exchange

Related Information A number of projects report not being able to produce information using certain formats, even though contracting Respondents were asked if they would like to include any to produce these formats was considered the same as events in the new NCDDR Calendar of NIDRR Grantee Events. having the capability to produce them. This result may Over half (150 or 54%) responded yes. However, just more reflect that limited numbers of NIDRR proposals call for than half of those responding affirmatively (54%) have actually the frequent production of multiple alternate formats. submitted events. Approximately 80 events were entered into the Calendar, which is located on the NCDDR's World Wide Only half of the NIDRR-funded projects that indicated they Web site. The URL address is http://www.ncddr.org/ would submit information for the Calendar of NIDRR Thirty-four NIDRR-funded projects reported an award or Grantee Events have done so. NCDDR staff will continue special recognition during the past 12 months. This reflects 12% to follow up on these contacts and investigate ways in of the total number of NIDRR-funded projects, or 17% of the which this reporting can be made more convenient. projects funded prior to 1995. These included professional Grantees dre encouraged to write, call, or fax the NCDDR group recognition, Telly Awards for video productions, with information they would like to submit for the individual research awards, and exemplary service awards, Calendar, or to enter this information directly at the among others. Several award-winning NIDRR-funded projects NCDDR's Web site. are recognized in this issue of The Research Exchange. Grantees' overwhelming willingness to participate in further Respondents were asked if they would be willing to information-gathering activities of the NCDDR reflects a participate in future information-gathering activities of the strong commitment to the dissemination and utilization NCDDR, such as telephone interviews, questionnaires, focus of disability research information. groups, teleconferences, etc. Of the 279 projects, 274 (98%) responded "Yes." The five "No" responses included two Field-Initiated Research projects, two State Technology Conclusion Assistance projects, and one Model Spinal Cord Injury Project. The purpose of this information-gathering activity was to establish a baseline with which to compare future data to determine if changes in the dissemination practices of NIDRR Observations grantees occur over the NCDDR pilot project period. The The following observations about the data reflect initial NCDDR will continue to trace the use of different formats and characteristics of NIDRR grantees as a whole. modes of information dissemination and compare new data to the data reported here and to consumer data gathered at a The Internet is viewed by NIDRR grantees as an important later time. Additionally, the NCDDR will conduct further vehicle for disseminating information. As more and more research on the frequency of use of alternate formats, ways in people gain access to and learn how to negotiate the which mediated materials enhance accessibility to information, Information Superhighway, the Internet becomes a mode and implications for NIDRR grantees and the users of their of information dissemination that has the potential to reach research results of selecting various alternate formats for countless individuals who have interest in the research information dissemination. outcomes of NIDRR-funded grantees. One of the purposes of the NCDDR is to increase the The data suggest a gap between projects' capability to capacity of researchers to identify and use development and produce alternate formats and the frequency with which dissemination strategies that meet the needs of their target they produce those formats. This finding could reflect a audience(s). We welcome your ideas for future research limited number of .accesses/requests by people needing efforts that will help you meet your dissemination and such formats, a grantee's limitationeither through utilization responsibilities. project design or budgetto provide such formats, and/or confusion concerning survey terminology such as "frequently."

3 5

9 The Research Exchange NIDDR Grantees The NCDDR would like to congratulate each of video for people with disabilities. This video was a finalist in the following grantees and recognize their award the 1992 International Health and Medical Film Festival. The UATP earned the Regional Recognition Award from the or citation. All NIDRR grantees are encouraged to Mountain Plains Information Exchange for outstanding service contact the NCDDR with information to share in in the area of rehabilitation technology in 1993. Staff member Marilyn Hammond received the 1994 Media/Public Awareness future issues ofThe Research Exchange.For each Golden Key Award from the Governor's Committee on item, we have identified the NIDRR-funded project Employment of People with Disabilities for effective profes- name; the award, citation, or recognition; and the sional and personal dedication to increase positive understand- ing and public awareness about people with disabilities. She name of the Principal Investigator or contact for has also served as a judge in the International Health and further information, with telephone number and Medical Film Festivals since 1993. For further information on the project and its awards, contact Dr. Marvin G. Fifield, e-mail addresses. Principal Investigator, through the Utah State University, Center for Persons with Disabilities at (801) 797-1981, or via e-mail: [email protected] Two NIDRR-funded Projects have received Telly A copy of "The Tech Act" video and list or copies of Awards for their work in video production. The other videos can be obtained by calling Marilyn Hammond at Telly Awards, founded in 1980, were established 801-797-3811 (e-mail: [email protected]). Or call Martell Menlove at 801-797-3824 (e-mail: [email protected]). to showcase and recognize outstanding non- Most videos cost $15-35 plus shipping and handling. network and cable TV commercials. The highly respected international competition was recently TheAlaska Assistive Technology Projectreceived a expanded to include non-broadcast video and film 1995 Telly Award for the eight-minute video "Tools for Life" productions, and non-network programming. Over at the 16th Annual Telly Awards. Staff member Sharon White prepared the script and Tim Anderson of Lead Dog the years, the Telly Awards have gained respect Production Company produced the video and entered it in in both the news and advertising industries, as the competition. The video is a demonstration of the assistive technology equipment in the project's assistive technology well as in higher education as a mark of excel- lending library. The video has been disseminated to lence and innovation. A distinguished panel of independent living centers, other assistive technology projects, health care providers, as well as at conferences. more than 20 highly qualified television produc- Ms. Kathe Matrone is the Principal Investigator. For further tion professionals judged the more than 9,000 information or to order a copy of the video ($20 copy fee), entries in the 1996 16th Annual Telly Awards. The contact Rose Foster on the Information Referral Line at 1-800-770-0138 or Mike Shiffer, Project Coordinator, panel included a cross section of producers from via e-mail: [email protected] agencies, TV stations, production houses, and corporate video departments. ASystem of Technology to Achieve Results (STAR)was cited and Ms. Rachel Wobschall, Principal Investigator, was quoted in the "Technology: Special Needs" section in the Monday, November 13, 1995 issue of the Wall TheUtah Assistive Technology Program(UATP) was Street Journal. The article on assistive technology was entitled awarded a 1996 Telly Award for the video "The Tech Act: "Free to learn: Computers designed for the disabled are Dramatic Gains for People with Disabilities." This video was reshaping the field of special education." Those interested may developed in cooperation with the Rehabilitation Engineering contact the NCDDR for information on how to obtain a copy and Assistive Technology Society of North America (RESNA). of this article. For further information, Ms. Wobschall can be The UATP received Telly Awards in 1993 and 1994 as well as contacted through the Minnesota Governor's Advisory Council honorable mention in the 1993 American Film and Video on Technology for People with Disabilities, Department of Festival. In addition to the Telly Awards, this project won first Administration at (612) 297-1554, or via e-mail: place in the 1993 National Council on Family Relations Media [email protected] Awards Competition for "The Sky is the Limit," a recreational ONO 10 36 The Research Exchange Receive Recognition Ms. Joy Kniskern, Principal Investigator forTools for Life TheColorado Assistive Technology.Project: Georgia Assistive Technology Program,received Developing Colorado's Consumer Responsive the Delano Award from Roosevelt Warm Springs Institute for Systemreceived the Excellence in Advocacy award from providing technology assistance to the institute. Ami Abshire, the Colorado Protection and Advocacy (P & A) System in secretary for Tools for Life, served on one of the thirty teams November, 1994. It was the first time such an award was made of the Torch Bearers Nomination Committee which selected to a program in assistive technology by the P & A, which is individuals to carry the torch at Olympic activities nationwide. housed at the Legal Center. Located at the Rocky Mountain Approximately 90,000 applications were reviewed by this Resource and Training Institute, Colorado's ATP was the first committee sponsored by the Atlanta Committee on Olympic Tech Act project in the country to voluntarily develop a Games and the United Way. Ms. Kniskern can be contacted contract with the state P & A System. The success of the through the Georgia Department of Human Resources Division Colorado ATP/P & A contract served as a model for other of Rehabilitation Services at 404-657-3082, or via e-mail: states and provided leadership in developing the mandate 102476.1737@.com for such contracts. For more information about the award or the working relationship between the Colorado ATP and 40084.0 P & A System, please contact Cathy Bodine, Project Director, RESNA has presented a Certificate of Appreciation for at 303-534-1027 or e-mail: [email protected] national leadership in policy development to benefit all 01.1 persons with disabilities to Judy Brewer, Project Director of the Massachusetts Assistive Technology Partnership TheIllinois Assistive Technology Project (IATP) Center,for working on assistive technology and durable received the Award for Participation from the Illinois medical equipment coverage in national health care reform. Department of Public Aid in December 1995, for contributing She also received the 1996 Access Award from the American to writing a policy and offering training on augmentative Foundation for the Blind to honor individuals and organizations communication. Ms. Wilhelmina Gunther, Principal Investigator, who have made a significant contribution to ensuring.equality can be contacted through the Illinois Assistive Technology of access and opportunity for people who are blind or visually Project at (217) 522-7985 or e-mail: [email protected] impaired. The award was for working as a member of a group 0%0 of five individuals whose efforts have succeeded in making the Microsoft Corporation aware of the problems persons who Dr. Cameron Riviere of theAssistive Computer are blind or visually impaired have accessing their products, Interfaces for Persons with Movement Disorders and in producing a commitment from Microsoft to improve Projectreceived "Best Student Research Paper" from the access. Marylyn Howe, Coordinator of Policy and Evaluation IEEE (Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineering) received a Certificate of Appreciation from the American International Conference on Engineering Medicine and Biology Speech-Language-Hearing Association for acknowledgment of in Montreal, Canada, in October 1995. The paper, entitled participation on their consumer task force, which was charged "Modeling and canceling tremor in human-machine interfaces," with developing consumer-friendly- policies and practices was later published by Dr. Riviere and Dr. Nitish V. Thakor in among professionals serving people with speech and hearing IEEE Engineering Medical Biology, Vol. 15, 29-36. The article loss. She also received the I. King Jordan Distinguished describes a method the authors have developed to measure Achievement Award, from the Association of Late-Deafened and "cancel" tremor for persons with conditions such as Adults, which is presented to a person who is late-deafened Parkinson's disease and cerebral palsy. This work will help and is a role model for other adults who are late-deafened persons with tremor disabilities in using computer interfaces and who has made exceptional contributions in a career or such as the mouse. Their present research focuses on how other long-term endeavor. She was recognized for her work their methodology can help this population with handwriting. with CART (Computer-Aided Realtime Translation) support, Drs. Riviere and Thakor are Co-Principal Investigators for advocacy in the field of disability policy, and work on the project, which is part of the Biomedical Engineering national health care reform as it relates to hearing loss. Department at Johns Hopkins Medical School in Baltimore, Ms. Nan Robbins is the Principal Investigator for this project. MD. For further information contact Dr. Thakor through For further information please contact Jan Stankus, Coordinator the Johns Hopkins Medical School Biomedical of Public Awareness, at 617-355-7537 (V), 617-355-7301 (TT) Engineering Department at 410-955-7093, or via or via e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] "41.0

37

11 The Research Exchange

The Research Exchange, a newsletter to promote the effective dissemination and utilization of disability research How To Contact outcomes, is published quarterly by the National Center for The National Center For the Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR) which The Dissemination Of is operated by the South-west Educational Development Disability Research Laboratory (SEDL). Neither SEDL nor the NCDDR discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, marital or veteran status, or the presence of a disability. SEDL is Call us an Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 Employer and is committed to affording equal employment Voice/Text Telephone from opportunities for all individuals in all employment matters. 8 A.M.NOON and 1-5 P.M. Central Time, The contents of this newsletter were developed under MondayFriday (except holidays) a grant (#H133D50016) from the National Institute on or record a message 24 hr./day Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of Education (ED). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of SEDL, NIDRR, or the ED; do not assume endorsement by Use a computer modem to contact us through the Internet the Federal Government. at our e-mail address: jwestbro@sedLorg @ Copyright 1996 by the or use our URL: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory http://www.ncddr.org/

An electronic version of The Research Exchange Volume 1, Number 3 is available on the Internet at URL http://www.ncddr.org/ Write to NCDDR National Center for the The Research Exchange is available in Dissemination of Disability Research alternate formats upon request. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory John Westbrook 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 Director Austin, Texas 78701-3281

Mary Kay Sanders Editor Visit us in downtown Lin Harris Austin, Texas Assistant Editor at the Southwest Tower 7th and Brazos St. Steve Chamberlain one block east of Congress Avenue 8 A.M.NOON and 1-5 P.M. Central Time, Joann Starks MondayFriday (except holidays) Contributing Editors

Jane Thurmond Graphic Design Fax your request to us at 512-476-2286

Southwest Educational National Institute on Disability Development LaboratorySeKINIDRRand Rehabilitation Research BEST COPYAVAILABLE 38 THE Research IExchange

VOLUME 1, NUMBER 4 S U M M E R 1 9 9 6

At a Glance Literature Remew on

Literature Can Advise Practice . . . .1 Literature Review on Dissemination Dissemination and Utilization and Utilization of Research Results1 Guides to Improving Practice 6 NIDRR Grantees of Research Results Receive Recognition 8 This article highlights important aspects of the NCDDR's new publication, A Review of the Literature on Dissemination and Knowledge Utilization. The review is intended A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR to provide a knowledge base for strengthening the ways in which disability research results can be accessed and used by those who need them.

Literature Ultimately, for research to be relevant it and promotion of knowledge utilization. must be linked to practice. If research The first wave, he notes, spanned the Can Advise results are not easily accessible and years from 1920 through 1960. The usable by those who need them most second wave took place during the Practice (i.e., persons with disabilities, their period from 1960 through 1980, families, service providers, advocates, when a number of large-scale, federally The field of dissemination and and other researchers, among others), sponsored dissemination and implemen- knowledge utilization has a substantial they are of limited practical use. Overall, tation studies were conducted. Most of literature base. The bulk of the the literature on dissemination and the current literature consists primarily literature is fairly recent ranging over utilization spans diverse fields including of new analysis and refinements of the past 30 to 35 years. Interestingly, education, rehabilitation, sociology, understandings from the work of the some of the literature developed in the psychology, and marketing. 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s. As Paisley 1970s (DAG, 1977) concerning new The literature is filled with differing (1993) notes, "Many of the problems that major conceptual dissemination definitions and uses of dissemination, challenge knowledge utilization have components such as: spread, choice, knowledge utilization, diffusion, and changed little since the 1960s and 1970s. exchange, and implementation, remains technology transfer, among other terms. However, the communications environ- appropriate and useful today and serves These terms are sometimes used ment of knowledge utilization has as the "foundation" for further develop- interchangeably, sometimes carefully changed dramatically" (p. 222). The ment (Klein and Gwaltney, 1991). distinguished from one another. The proliferation of electronic communica- Literature addressing such things as new different uses and definitions reflect tions--in particular, the widespread use constructs about how people process varying assumptions and interests, rang- of personal computershas given rise to information in learning activities and ing from a limited focus on "getting the a number of new questions and issues the impact of new technologies on the word out" to an all-encompdssing focus about equity, access, and effectiveness. access to relevant information, suggests on seeing new knowledge or products Past examples of the dissemination of the need for new considerations in from creation all the way through research results in the has planning effective dissemination and implementation by intended users. primarily followed the agricultural exten- knowledge utilization processes. sion model. The primary focus of this The National Center for the model is on distributiongetting the Dissemination of Disability Research Historical Perspective word out (Rogers, 1988). For example, (NCDDR) feels that an awareness of the Backer (1991) describes the current in this model it would follow that if major literature on dissemination and focus on dissemination as a "third wave" farmers know about better ways to utilization can be helpful to many of activities related to the understanding irrigate crops, they will implement those . continued on page 2 continued on page 2 3 9 The Research Exchange Literature Review Literature Can Advise Practice,continued from page 1 ways. This approach makes the assump- grantees interested in: In an effort to be as user-friendly as tion that knowledge is generally defined developing a broader understanding possible, the NCDDR has also developed objectively, and that everyone will agree of the field of dissemination and two other related resources: with what constitutes knowledge and knowledge utilization, will use it once they have it (Louis, 1992). This is a top-down approach to learning more about elements of Improving the Links between knowledge dissemination that devel- dissemination and knowledge Research and Practice: Approaches to the Effective oped as a result of uncoordinated and utilization that have been shown to sometimes competitive activities. be linked to effectiveness, and/or Dissemination of Disability Research facilitating efforts in planning or Knowledge as a evaluating dissemination and Improving the Usefulness utilization activities. Learning Process of Disability Research: Another model of how people acquire A Toolbox of Dissemination The NCDDR is proud to have produced and integrate knowledge is construc- several new resources for your use. Strategies tivism. It provides a new framework for The first is A Review viewing the dissemination and utiliza- of the Literature on tion efforts of disability researchers. The Dissemination and These publications are the first two constructivist model is based on the Knowledge Utilization. This issues of a four-part NCDDR series called understanding that knowledge is con- review is designed to high- Guides for Improving Practice. These structed by each individual and group, light major areas from the guides present selected information from and this construction of knowledge is literature that are related to the literature review and other sources in dependent upon the user's pre-existing effectiveness in achieving a practical application framework. Each of knowledge, beliefs, and experiences utilization of disseminated information. these guides is about eight to ten pages (Hutchinson, 1995; Backman, 1982). Frequently, information related to dissem-in length and they are available to any Beliefs about how learning takes ination and utilization is abstract and NIDRR grantee on a free-of-charge basis. place are often articulated as metaphors. lengthy, making its application to your This issue of The Research Exchange The tabula rasa, the image of the mind day-to-day work difficult. This new 38- highlights some of the information that is as a blank slate, was once the most page review developed by the NCDDR contained in these new publications. I common metaphor. Shapiro (1994) is designed to be as specific as possible encourage you to ask for your free copy notes that "despite the fact that the and promote the generation of ideas that of these publications as soon as you can. 'blank slate' view of the learner is not can be applied within your NIDRR grant In addition, I welcome your feedback well regarded, it is still the view under- efforts. NIDRR grantees may receive a about the usefulness of the publications lying the practice seen most often in free copy of this publication by request- in your day-to-day work. The NCDDR will school settings" (p. 8). Another common ing it from the NCDDR. References used be developing additional resources for image is that of the learner as sponge, in this issue of The Research Exchange NIDRR grantees and your feedback "soaking up" knowledgea role that is are included in the larger reference list would be very helpful in making each somewhat more active than that of of the literature review and are also publication as practical and useful empty vessel, although what a learner available upon request. as possible. absorbs is taken wholesale, without fil- John D. Westbrook tering or processing. A metaphor often Director used today in this era of technology is that of the brain as computer, which The Research Exchange, a newsletter to promote the effective dissemination and utilization of dis- processes in an orderly, systematic ability research outcomes, is published quarterly by the National Center for the Dissemination of the information that is received Disability Research (NCDDR) which is operated by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL). Neither SEDL nor the NCDDR discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, from outside sources. In this analogy color, creed, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, marital or veteran status, or the presence the learner actively does something to of a disability. SEDL is an Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer and is or with the information, which can be committed to affording equal employment opportunities for all individuals in all employment matters. The contents of this newsletter were developed under a grant (#H133D50016) from presumed to be altered in appearance, the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of if not in substance, from the form in Education (ED). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of SEDL, which it was originally received. NIDRR, or the ED; do not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. According to constructivist principles, © Copyright 1996 by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory none of these metaphors adequately An electronic version of The Research Exchange, Volume 1, Number 4 describes the ways in which we as is available on the Internet at URL http://www.ncddrorg/ learners process information. Learners, The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request. from the youngest children to the oldest John Westbrook Mary Kay Sanders Lin Harris adults, are constantly seeking to make Director Dissemination Specialist Information Services Technician sense of the environment; to do So, Joann Starks Steve Chamberlain Jane Thurmond we "construct" explanations that Research Specialist Contributor Graphic Design make sense based on our personal 2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE 4 0 The Research Exchange

on Dissemination and Utilization of Research Results,continued from page 1 experiences (Ackerman, 1995; Driver, faced with real pain.... whether new knowledge in the context of their 1995; von Glasersfeld, 1995). the nature of change is personal daily activities.... It is research on Knowing, then, is an adaptive activity (psychotherapy) or work-related learning that is the foundation of under- in which the learner seeks "not.... to (organizational change, implementation standing knowledge utilization" (p. 138). arrive at truth about something already of an innovation)" (p. 7). Fuhrman sees the promotion of utiliza- made but.... tomake something Finally, Fuhrman (1994), among tion as much more than distribution and rightto construct something that others, sees constructivist perspectives offering access. She calls for two major works cognitively, that fits together and as directly applicable to the enterprise changes in current utilization practices handles new cases, that may implement of dissemination: "The research on in the field of education: "First, we further inquiry and invention" utilization is quite clear: the meaning of should focus more on the context of (Bauersfeld, 1995, p. 163). As Driver research is conducted by the user..... knowledge users, and second, we (1995) explains, "Human beings Individuals translate research findings should strengthen the integration construct models of their environment, through the lens of prior knowledge between research and dissemination" and new experiences [and information] and understanding, making sense of (p. 138). are interpreted and understood in rela- tion to existing mental models or schemes" (p. 386). The metaphors that Four Dimensions of Knowledge Utilization suggest constructivist perspectives, then, Four major dimensions of knowledge utilization are suggested by the literature. First are those of building and shaping new is the dissemination sourcethe agency, organization, or individual responsible for knowledge structures. Constructivism is creating the new knowledge or product, and/or for conducting dissemination activi- not concerned with right or wrong; it ties. Second is the content or message that is disseminatedthe new knowledgeor is concerned with individuals making product itself, as well as any supporting information or materials. Third is the dissemi- sense out of their environment. nation mediumthe ways in which the knowledge or product is described, "pack- In addition to describing the learning aged," and transmitted. Fourth is the user or intended user of the informationor process, constructivist viewpoints have product to be disseminated. Figure 1: Dimensions of the Dissemination Utilization relevance for research. Huberman Process illustrates the interaction of these elements. (1987) states that "individualsalone or in organizationstransform and use Figure 1: research in highly selective and strategic ways" (p. 589). What is an "adequate" solution for one individual (or organiza- tion) may vary as well. The user's self-interest and self-image sometimes Dissemination and include considerations that conflict with Knowledge Utilization what may appear, in terms of efficiency, cost benefits, or effectiveness of - tion, to be the "best" solution. Merely telling people that their ideas or practices are wrong, or ineffective, or outdated, or that a better mousetrap is available to replace the one they SOURCE are using, is generally an ineffective Source.The literature reflects several researchers and potential users of their way to encourage change. important factors related to the dissemi- research results. One way to bridge the Before people consider change, nation source, including the source's gap between researcher and user is for they must be dissatisfied with current relationship with potential users, the researchers to be aware of the values practice or outcomes. As Shapiro (1994) source's credibility, and specific strate- and assumptions they bring to their points out, "In order to take on a new gies involving the source to help research (Buchman, 1982). Like knowl- viewpoint, one must decide to let go of improve dissemination and utilization of edge acquisition, the processes of con- an old one. There must be a reason to research results. Indyk and Rier (1993) ducting research and disseminating decide to make a shift in thinking" point out that dissemination of disability results to potential users are influenced (p. 7). Sechrest, Backer, and Rogers research involves more than researchers by individuals' personal experience and (1994) in applying this understanding and decisionmakers. The increasing prior knowledge. Researchers, in the to the task of dissemination, note that if activism of persons with disabilities has process of disseminating their results, practitioners "are not in a state of uncer- prompted a new view of dissemination will operate within the guidelines of tainty about a problem" (p. 187), the as a three-way model, with researchers, their values and assumptions, which may mere provision of information is not decisionmakers, and people with disabil- differ from the values and assumptions likely to lead to changes in behavior. ities all functioning as both knowledge of their potential users. By explicitly stat- Backer (1994) makes the point even producers and knowledge consumers. ing how their values and assumptions more bluntly: "People and organizations A major criticism of disability research potentially influence their results, develop the energy to change when is the often distant relationship of researchers provide the opportunity to 34 1 continued on page 4 The Research Exchange interpret and use results in ways that in improving dissemination effectiveness. Disseminated research results make the most sense to users. Dentler (1984) notes that when dissemi- must be comprehensible, capable of Researchers who are not aware of nation specialists in organizations work being interpreted and used, if they their biases or who do not make their directly with policy planning, research are to be worthwhile (Majumder, Walls, potential users aware of them, risk bias- and development, and evaluation, Fullmer, & Dowler, 1994). A frequent ing their results. Research bias can affect dissemination can have a greater impact. complaint of potential users is that the the credibility of research outcomes for language of disseminated research results populations from diverse racial, ethnic, CON TEN T is too technical (West & Rhoton, 1992). and/or cultural backgrounds (Duarte Content.Research results can include Some suggestions for "transforming" & Rice, 1992). Inconsistencies in racial "theories, models, paradigms, postulates, research outcomes into usable, classification and population sampling, generalizations, or findings .... validated comprehensible messages are to overemphasis of between-group tests, curricula, techniques, programs, or provide simple and clear messages, differences, and underemphasis of systems," while technological advances to keep the messages brief and at a within-group differences can all affect can include "software products, devices, low level of abstraction, and to repeat the credibility of research results. equipment, or machinery" (Edwards, and reinforce messages (Backer, 1988; The perceived expertise and trust- 1991, p. 54). Content attributes that Glaser, Abelson, & Garrison, 1983; worthiness of researchers can also affect influence adoption of the use of results Soumerai & Avorn, 1987). In addition, the credibility of research outcomes. include: the quality of the content of analogies are particularly useful to Expertise refers to the perceived results, the compatibility of users' needs convey messages about research results and beliefs with the content (Shapiro, 1986). of results, specific kinds of An effective strategy disseminators information that promote MEDIUM can implement to dramatically improve utilization of research results, Medium.The medium by which and the comprehensibility research results are distributed to users dissemination and utilization of research of results. can enhance or detract from utilization results is to integrally involve targeted poten- The assumption that the (Klein & Gwaltney, 1991). Selection of quality of research results the dissemination media most appropri- tial users in the planning, implementing, influences utilization is ate for a particular content and audience and evaluating of the research design. called into question by some is a complex and challenging task. For researchers. Edwards (1991) persons with disabilities, physical access reports that empirical studies to information is an essential concern for knowledge and/or competence of have "found no relationship between disseminators when choosing appropriate researchers, whereas trustworthiness research quality and use" (p. 61). media (Leung, 1992). Digital technology refers to the perceived honesty and sin- Huberman (1990), reporting on a and related equity concerns, the primacy cerity of researchers (Marquart, O'Keefe, series of utilization studies conducted of personal interaction, the use of multi- & Gunther, 1995). Findings of some in Switzerland, concurs: "The poorly ple media formats, and targeting media studies suggest that trustworthiness is conceived and executed studies in for persons with disabilities are topics more important than expertise in obtain- the sample appear to do as well as addressed in the literature. ing user support. The literature also indi- others, or perhaps even slightly better, The widespread use of "small media" cates that users tend to accept assistance, because research staff in the especially such as personal computers, and a prolif- information, and ideas from sources they weIl-designed studies underinvest in eration in use of the Internet and other know and trust (Carrillo, Lumbley, & dissemination work" (p. 606). electronic networks, have brought new, Westbrook, 1990; Fullan, 1985) and that A barrier to the utilization of research cost-effective dissemination channels to the source of disseminated information results is the non-practical focus of an ever-broadening audience. However, generally is more important to users research (West & Rhoton, 1992). Dentler little is known about the use of these than the content of the information (1984) stresses that "the property of media in disseminating research results (Hutchinson & Huberman, 1993). knowledge that is essential for fusel is (Paisley, 1993). In addition, there are An effective, strategy disseminators its congruence with the real world of equity concerns such as access to this can implement to dramatically improve practice" (p. 6). media by persons with disabilities, dissemination and utilization of research Some kinds of information have as well as by individuals with lower results is to integrally involve targeted proved to be especially important in incomes, with lower educational potential users in the planning, imple- promoting utilization of research results. attainment, and/or of different races menting, and evaluating of the research For example, emphasizing positive (Anderson, Bikson, Law, & Mitchell, design. Fuhrman (1994) discusses the behaviors and current rewards rather 1995; NIDRR, 1994). need for "building a client-based than negative consequences of current The literature indicates that direct research agenda .... and developing behavior promotes use. Kennedy (1989) personal interaction is the most important forms for research that bring producers stresses that utilization is a process that aspect of an effective medium for and users closer together" (p. 133). takes time. The research content should disseminating information (Paisley, 1993). Organizational structures and reward take the user from awareness to under- To enhance utilization, direct personal systems can also play an important role standing to commitment. contact should occur between

4 2 The Research Exchange researchers and users before, during, and question the practical worth of disability and race, ethnicity, income, after studies. Much of this contact should some research. and educational attainment. Some be face-to-face (Huberman, 1990). The Effective dissemination rests upon ethnic and racial minorities are over- frequency and duration of this interper- how much the disseminator knows about represented in certain disability cate- sonal contact is also important. Peterson the intended recipient audience. Selected gories. The implications of this for and Emrick (1983) suggest that in most important, need-to-know characteristics disseminators are great. There is also cases direct intervention should be of intended users include: evidence that members of minority pop- carried out over a period of at least ulations with disabilities are not obtain- two years. Huberman (1990) concludes, dissemination media preferred, ing the rehabilitation services they need from a survey of the utilization literature, level of contextual information (Duarte & Rice, 1992). Strategies to help that projects need to allocate twelve needed, researchers avoid bias include ensuring percent of project time and resources capacity to use information that members of minority communities to dissemination activities. or product, who are participants in studies are rep- Using multiple or merged media perceived relevance of information resented on research teams, and getting feedback about results from those group formats and targeting media to persons to user's needs, with disabilities are other strategies advo- members, to help identify inaccuracies cated in the literature. A combination of readiness for change, in interpretations (Davis, 1992). media and interpersonal strategies is an information sources trusted, and Cultural differences affect the ways in important consideration in rneeting the format and level of information which potential users .interact with and needs of a diverse audience (Crandall, needed. 1989; Edwards, 1991). A number of information channels exist for people An important task for dis- A combination of media and with disabilities, including the Internet, seminators is to understand electronic bulletin boards, special topic the incentives that influence intetpersonal strategies is an listservs and newsgroups (Fullmer & potential users to change. Majumder, 1991). Newman and Vash These incentives can be important consideration in (1994) believe that those persons with internal or external. Some meeting the needs of a disabilities who receive services are research suggests that exter- likely to receive new information about nal mandates for change are diverse audience. research through their service contacts. important but that personal But for those who do not, they suggest incentives are more potent the mass media will be the primary (Hutchinson & Huberman, 1993). perceive the work and communications means for disseminating information. Involving potential user audiences in of disability researchers and practition- Some of these channels, such as setting research agendas and conducting ers. These differences, according to. television networks and mainstream research and development activities can Duarte and Rice (1992), may include magazines, are more expensive help to address issues related to readi- "world view, family boundaries, quality to target. ness for change. Seeking input from of life, importance of religion, meaning users at all stages of the research of work, meaning of education, process, structuring activities around decision-making style, belief in change, users. The understanding that individ- issues identified as important by users and reSponse to change" (p. 17). Duarte uals and groups are active participants in themselves, and helping users to reflect and Rice note that experts in "the the construction of knowledge is a vital on their own preconceived ideas and field of intercultural communication aspect of disseminatidg research results concerns are important elements in emphasize cultural differences related to to users. This understanding has two actively engaging users in dissemination context (the information that surrounds principal implications. One is that the efforts (Brown-McGowan & events), space, time, speed (with which materials to be disseminated must Eichelberger, 1993). relationships are developed), information address the concerns of a potential user's The size of the user audience is also , and rules (and rituals)" (p. 17). daily life. This can be done by involving an important consideration (Dent ler, Whether a particular culture places potential users in the research process 1984). Selecting a target audience that more emphasis on the individual or the from the beginning, with ongoing is too large can dissipate the impact of collective group plays a major role in and substantial interactions between dissemination efforts. Conversely, a how groups interact (Gudykunst & researchers and users. The second impli- target audience that is too small limits Ting-Toomey, 1988). eation involves the user's readiness for how far results will be disseminated. It appears further research to explore- change. Researchers cannot overestimate Very few empirical studies have how particular cultural groups, access the importance of this element. Even the been conducted to explore differences information may be needed. Researchers clearest results will not be utilized if the in dissemination issues related to specific must be aware that between-group potential user is not ready to incorporate racial or ethnic groups or among persons differences are often overemphasized them into their personal existing schema- with disabilities. However, there are while within-group differences are ta. This lack of readiness is not necessar- demographic data that need attention. underemphasized in research (Duarte ily negative, however; it may serve to An example is the association between & Rice, 1992). To suggest, for example, 543 continued on page 6 The Research Exchange Guides to Improving Practice

TheNCDDR has developed two guides dissemina- opener. Many research outcomes have to assist grantees interested in improving tion, or implications for how programs are run, their dissemination practices. Each guide knowledge services are provided, money is allocat- is brief and focused on specific aspects utilization, ed, information is interpreted, or materi- Improving the Links of the dissemination and utilization between Research has pro- als are used. Application of research process. A brief description of material and Practice duced a results frequently requires personal included in each of the two guides is wealth of and/or organizational change. To be provided below. information successful, the change process must be about what carefully planned and implemented. Improving the Links does and A major focus of current research is does not to confirm practice or to change it. The between Research and work. outcome of such research is usually Practice: Approaches But those expressed as exemplary programs, best to the Effective understandings, for the most part, have practices, or other types of effective Dissemination of not moved from the research communi- models. The literature supports the view Disability Research tythose who study the process of that changeneeded for the application knowledge useto the practice commu- of such modelsis difficult to bring The first guide in the NCDDR series nitythose actually responsible for about. People cling tenaciously to their bridges the gap between the disability disseminating research outcomes for use. beliefs and ideas. A classic experiment in research community and the world of A number of experts have pointed constructivism involves learners (includ- practice. Frequently dissemination has out that research results require special ing adult learners) who observe two fallen prey to the yery dilemma it attention if they are to be appliedthey objects falling from some height to the seeks to address. That is, research on are, in short, not used like a can ground. The laws of physics tell us that,

Literature Review, products or knowledge, and the Effective dissemination is critically continued from page 5 context of that creation, (b) the linked to its timeliness and that all African Americans prefer to needs, contexts, prior experiences, comprehensiveness. access information from friends and the values, and beliefs of target audi- Effective dissemination of disability local media, ignores the population of ences, and (c) the content, media, research requires careful planning African Americans who prefer to access formats, and language used in and effort throughout the life of a it from journals and the Internet. In fact, getting the outcomes into the research project. some research suggests that members of hands, minds, and activities of Dissemination requires ongoing racial and ethnic minority groups clearly those target audiences. have varied means of obtaining informa- personal support and intervention in tion and varied sources that they trust The goal of all dissemination should order to achieve utilization. (Edwards, 1991). be utilization. Utilization may mean All NIDRR grantees share in the Finally, O'Connor (1993) points out different things to different members responsibility to disseminate their the importance of understanding indi- of a target audience; in some cases, it project results to all appropriate target viduals with disabilities in the light of all may mean rejection of a product or audiences, and in accessible formats. their characteristics. These include char- research finding. The critical element acteristics of culture, gender., ethnicity, of utilization is that the research Conclusion sexual preference, income level, and outcome must be critically and thor- individual preferences about how oughly digested, and the individual Many improvements have been made in people choose to live their lives. (or organization) must fit the new the dissemination of disability research Individuals' identities are limited by information with her or his prior (Blasiotti, 1992). NIDRR and other branch- looking only at a disability. understandings and experience. es of the federal government are working to establish common perspectives as well Major Implications One of the most effective ways to as coordinated approaches to dissemina- increase utilizationand to improve tion, and to encourage the incorporation Dissemination and knowledge utilization the quality and relevance of of appropriate dissemination into all literature tend to suggest the following researchis to involve potential stages of the research, development, points: users in planning and implementation and utilization process. Dissemination is far more than the of the research design itself. simple distribution of paper or prod- Effective dissemination requires an Note: A list of references is available ucts; it is a process requiring a care- understanding of knowledge use as a upon request and is included in the ful match among (a) the creation of process of learning, and of change. NCDDR review of literature. 6 4 4 The Research Exchange no matter what an object weighs, it will build relationships with users and available to those who diligently seek fall at the same speed, so that a rock intermediaries; and them, they are usually not widely and a paper clip, for example, when be aware of the impact the size accessible to several critical audiences: dropped at the same time will land at of a target audience has on your persons with disabilities, their families, the same time. But most non-physicists dissemination activities. advocates, and/or direct service believe, based on extrapolations from providers. There is a difference between other experience with heavy and light availabilitywhich may mean, for objects, that the rock will fall faster than Improving the Usefulness example, that a scholarly article may be the paper clipand experiments show of Disability Research: found in a professional journal, or that a that, in observing the two objects fall, A Toolbox of final report will be sent upon request people often "see" the rock hit the Dissemination Strategies and accessibility, which implies ease of ground before the paper clip. Our access and simplicity of comprehension and use. expectations can shape not only what The second we believe but what we actually There are several reasons for this guide in gap between research and use. One experience. For change to take place, the series users must first recognize and be is a lack of communication between focuses on researchers and their intended audi- bothered by discrepancies. When old the effec- ways don't work, people are more ences. In addition, dissemination is tiveness of often not a high-status activity among open to change. dissemina- Some findings from the research researchers; it must compete with more tion strate- apparently rewarding activities for on knowledge use suggest a few of gies by the complexities of the dissemination limited project resources. A third reason analyzing for a gap is that those involved in process: the compo- The actual quality of research is less dissemination tend to underestimate nents of: the complexities of the dissemination important, in terms of the likelihood source, process and rely on less-than-effective of its getting adopted and used, than content, medium, and intended user. general strategies. the extent to which it fits with users' Although research results are often established beliefs and experiences. The source of information about To be effective, dissemination efforts must address research outcomes is also more important than the quality of the a range of factors related to basic components of research. People tend to trust sources dissemination mentioned previously. These include with whom they have established such things as: relationships. When research does get used, the Source Perceived competence resulting practices, programs, or Credibility of Experience products are often quite different Credibility of Motive from the researcher's original Relationship to Other Sources Trusted by User conception. ContentCredibility of Research and Development Methodology Implications for researchers interested Credibility of Outcomes in analyzing/improving practice include Cost Effectiveness the following principles: Relationship between Outcomes and Existing Knowledge or Products understand that dissemination is not synonymous with publication; Medium Timeliness of Accessibility to Needed Information Reliability know your audience and make Capacity to Reach Intended Users sure your audience knows you; Clarity and Attractiveness of the Information "Package" carefully plan in advance for dissemination; User Perceived Relevance to Own Needs User's Readiness to Change assess your knowledge about Level of Contextual Information Provided intended user groups and supple- Dissemination Media Preferred/Used ment your knowledge by soliciting informationperhaps through needs-sensing activitiesabout them; More information about each of these components and other related aspects involve users in research and of information dissemination and knowledge utilbation are available to you development activities, seeking input from the NCDDR. A free copy of these guides is available to each NlDRR and feedback; grantee upon request. 7,15 The Research Exchange

NIDRR Mr. Langton was honored for his long- visionary advocate, with compassion and term commitment to RESNA, his active commitment toward promoting positive Grantees service on program committees and change in the lives of people challenged within the special interest group on by significant disabilities. Dr. Stuart worksite accommodations, and for his Schleien, the project director, has Receive extensive work in the field of assistive received the Theodore and Franklin technology applications. For further Roosevelt Award for Excellence in Recognition information, call Neil Lown at Recreation and Park Research, given for 803-822-5362, or e-mail: an individual whose contributions to Mr. J. Howard Green, Training [email protected] recreation and park research has signifi- Associate with theRehabilitation "00 cantly advanced the cause of the recre- Research and 'Damning Center on Dr. Charlie Lakin, Principal Investigator ation movement. For further information, Supported Employmentat Virginia for theRehabilitation Research and call the Research and Training Center Comnionwealth University in Richmond, Damning Center on Improving at The University of Minnesota Virginia, has received the National Community Integration for Persons (Institute on Community Integration) Association Mid-Atlantic Region with Mental Retardation,has received at 612-624-6328 or e-mail: Rehabilitation Manpower Award at its the Antoinette (Toni) Lippert Award [email protected] annual conference held in Baltimore, which is given to a person who is a 010 Maryland. The Manpower Award is given to an individual for significant How To Contact contributions in the professional preparation and upgrading of rehabilita- The National Center For The Dissemination Of tion manpower. The award signifies Disability Research dedication and leadership in the pursuit of quality services for individuals with disabilities. For further information, call Mr. Green at 804-828-1851 or e-mail: Call us [email protected] 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 Voice/Text Telephone from 8 A.M.NOON and 1-5 P.M. Central Time, MondayFriday (except holidays) Dr. Susanne Bruyere, Principal or record a message 24 hr./day Investigator forADA Materials Development Project Relating to Employment,has been awarded the 1996 Karl F. Heiser Award for advocacy Use a computer modem by the American Psychological to contact us through the Internet at our e-mail address: [email protected] Association (APA), which will be or use our URL:http://www.ncddr.org/ presented at the 1996 Annual APA Conference in Toronto. This is a special award created to honor individu- als who have been in the forefront of Write to NCDDR advocacy and who have helped to National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research create and shape psychology. For Southwest Educational Development Laboratory further information, call Dr. Bruyere 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400, Austin, Texas 78701-3281 at 607-255-7727 or e-mail: smb23@cornelLedu

Mr. Anthony Langton, Project Director Visit us in downtown of theCenter for Rehabilitation Austin, Texas Technology Services,was named a at the Southwest Tower, 7th and Brazos St. RESNA (Rehabilitation Engineering and one block east of Congress Avenue Assistive Technology Society of North 8 A.M.NOON and 1-5 P.M. Central Time, MondayFriday (except holidays) America) fellow at its 1996 conference. In order to be honored as a RESNA fellow, an individual must be a RESNA member for at least ten years demon- Fax your request to us strate substantial contribution to the field at 512-476-2286 of assistive technology, and participate within RESNA as an officer, board of directors member, in special interest Southwest Educational National Institute on Disability Development LaboratoryMD& I NIDRRand Rehabilitation Research groups, and on committees.

4 6 VOLUME 2, NUMBER 1

The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request. At a Glance Accessible Informationonthe Accessible Information on the WWW .1 Accessibility Design Considerations and Examples 8 Annotated WWW Resource List 12 orld ide eb IVIDRR Project and Special Olympics International Enter into Collaborative The accessibility of informationon as CERN (formerly Centre European pour Research Relationship 16 the Internet and the World Wide Web la Recherche Nucleaire). The use of a (WWW) is a topic that is complex and common code (called Hyper Text Markup often misunderstood. For many, even Language, or HTML), allows information A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR the terms "Internet" and "World Wide on a host computer, or server, to be Web" are confusing. The Internet is accessed by any other computer that often referred to as the "information has appropriate hardware and browser The Internet superhighway." Not truly a network software (such as Netscape Navigator, The Internetrepresents a mind-boggling itself, it is the growing linkage of , Lynx, etc.) to link to array of informational and entertainment networks of computers, .across the the Internet (Gromov, 1996). sites. Many people have expressed the country and around the world, that The concept of accessibility encom- feeling that the Internet and its ever- facilitates the transmission of information passes both technical and content changing World Wide Web (WWW) to many places. The Internet grew from aspects. Some of the newer developments of resources, is THE way in which all the ARPANET, originally funded by in hardware and software capabilities may people of the future will communicate, the United States government to help actually have the effect of slowing down buy groceries, pay bills, and publish facilitate military computer communica- or impeding access for many people. For their new novels. tion. In 1969, the first four sites were example, personal computers with screen If the present is of any assistance connected at the Stanford Research readers enable blind individuals to have in predicting the future, however, we Institute, University of California at Los equal access to a world of information should be cautious in reaching such Angeles, University of California at Santa and communication. The expanded use sweeping conclusions. Periodical pub- Barbara, and the University of Utah. of graphics, , tables, and split lishers, such as Newsweek for example, These networks grew as researchers at windows or frames with the latest have learned that its readers do not universities and other research centers browsers have served to limit Web expect or want a VCIWW reproduction of around the country became involved. access for people using screen readers, a readily-available paper version of their Communication by computer increased, as well as those who have older text- periodicals. Instead, readers expect and using the protocols developed through based browser software. want Internet sites to contain new and government contracts which allowed The development of the Internet is different information that is considered transmitting informatiOn without a often identified as a great opportunity to be more timely, more focused, and direct connection to the host computer. for people with disabilities to have access more relevant to personal interests. Federal funding for the ARPANET to information and communication on a The Internet should not be viewed ceased in 1990 (Gromov, 1996). more 'level playing field.' Limited physical as an electronic form of what has already The WWW (or Web) was developed access to facilities and format obstacles been produced on paper. If this is the to make information available regardless can be overcome through computer net- scenario under which your WWW site of the location and the differences in working. In order for this opportunity to is developed, you will miss the richness computer platform, hardware, and be fulfilled, information providers must of the Internet. Internet sites are fellow software being used. Tim Berners-Lee attend to the varied needs of consumers members of an astounding network developed the first protocols for the and keep in mind that not all users will of related resources. Information you WWW in 1989 at the European have access to electronic media, or have include in your Internet site should Laboratory for Plicy Physics, known the same type of access (Hagins, 1995). continued on page 2 continued on page 2 The Research Exchange

The Internet,continued from page 1 benefit from these resources by building Accessible Informationonthe links or connections with relevant infor- mation that is located elsewhere. Your continued from page 1 Who Uses the site should not reproduce information It is not easy to ensure that the that is available elsewhere but rather link content of a Web site is truly appropri- Internet? to it within the context of your unique ate. The versatility of the Web allows Recent studies vary greatly in their information. These types of connections information to be made available at reports regarding who makes up the expand the value of your information different levels, in effect, satisfying Internet audience. The New Networks rather than detract from it. the needs of multiple audiences. The Institute (NM) reviewed a number of The richness of your Internet site can findings of a research study may be studies from 1994-1996 and found vari- also be expanded through the use of presented in summary form for a ances due to definitions and what was graphics and related illustrative material. non-scientific user, while more detailed actually studied, in addition to methods The inclusion of this material may, how- interpretations and even access to data used for collecting data. For example, ever, cause accessibility problems for may be available for other researchers. people that have programmed their households, adults over 16, families, The WWW provides creative opportuni- browsers to orally read HTML text, for computers, and subscriptions were all ties within a structure that is an evolving example. No readers available today counted in different surveys. 'Access' can "read" a photograph, an animated medium, but those providing informa- included electronic mail, bulletin boards, illustration, or even, many times, an tion should keep in mind that all users the Internet, WWW, as well as commer- ordinary-looking table of data. are different, with unique needs. cial accounts. Methods included random Special care is required to make sure Researchers are embracing the Web telephone surveys, self-selecting online that everything included in your site has as an alternate format for communica- surveys, and estimates based on other something to communicate. Once this is tion and information dissemination. As figures (NM, 1996). Totals from 5.8 . accomplished, your site should be able this multi-medium can employ graphics, million 'adults connected to the Internet' to communicate its information in several animation, and sound in addition to text, to 50 million 'adults over 16 with access ways at the same timefor example, you it is often tempting to use these features to the Net' were reported (NM, 1996). should offer a text description of a pie to make a Web site exciting, attractive, Surveys conducted by Louis Harris chart of data. Accessibility of your site's and flashy, but it may not enhance the (11/96) and IntelliQuest (7/96) both information does not automatically occur content presented and, in fact, may reported 35 million U.S. adult Internet when using the Internet. Your site must prevent many users from reaching the users (CyberAtlas, 1996; NM, 1996). be constructed to afford maximal accessi- content. On the other hand, always Some surveys indicated users are bility to all "viewers" including those using straight text does not take advan- more likely to be males in their early with disabilities that may use special tage of the capabilities of the medium. 30's, better educated, and employed in equipment or computer configurations Information to be shared on the WWW computer and technology fields. English to assist them in achieving access. should be considered from different is the primary language found on over Lastly, I must say that ways to viewpoints so that its expression is the 90% of the Internet (GVU, 1996). Over maximize the "communication power" of most effective if can be. The interactive time,.these numbers have changed to your Internet site and maintain maximum and linking capabilities of the Internet reflect more variety and diversity among accessibility for all viewers is, at best, and Web can be exploited to make the fuzzy. For example, the NCDDR was Internet users. (GVU, 1996; NM, 1996). content different from that of a static recently contacted by an Intemet site Disability data were not reported in developer that wanted to make his site paper text document. any of the studies reviewed. easier to read by people with low vision The Research Exchange, a newsletter to promote the effective dissemination and utilization of by creating the site's information in large, disability research outcomes, is published quarterly by the National Center for the Dissemination capital print in bold type. This design of Disability Research (NCDDR) which is operated by the Southwest Educational Development actually complicated the ability of people Laboratory (SEDL). Neither SEDL nor the NCDDR discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, with low vision and those using special creed, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, marital or veteran status, or the presence of a disability. SEDL is an Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer and is committed to browser and reader configurations to affording equal employment opportunities forallindividuals inall employment matters. The access his site's information. contents of this newsletter were developed under a grant (#H133D50016) of $500,000 per project year Almost half of the current NIDRR from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of Education (ED). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of SEDL, NIDRR, or grantees have sites on the WWW. If you the ED; do not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. maintain such a site, you should assume CD Copyright 1997 by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory that it serves as a model to others inter- ested in learning about and/or creating An electronic version of The Research Exchange, Volume 2, Number 1 an accessible Internet site. This issue of is available on the Internet at URL httpWwww.ncddr.org/ The Research Exchange is designed to The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request. help you in meeting this accessibility challenge. John D. Westbrook John Westbrook Lin Harris Joann Starks Jane Thurmond Director Director Information Services Technician Research Specialist Graphic Design 2

r".. The Research Exchange World Wide Web Estimates of the numbers of Americans I with disabilities vary depending on the criteria used and the extent of limitations Number Percent due to disabling conditions. The Disability Response Both Admin.Cons. Both Admin.Cons. Statistics Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (a NIDRR grantee located Very often 5 2 3 6 17 4 at the University of California, San Often 13 5 8 16 41 12 Francisco) proposed a figure of 36.1 million, or 14.5 percent of the total Only once or twice 11 3 8 14 25 12 population, based on data from the 1990 50 2 48 62 17 70 National Health Interview Survey and Never additional sources (LaPlante, 1992). Don't Know 1 1 1 1 Numbers in the range of 50 million peo- ple have also been cited (Hagins, 1995). No answer 1 1 1 1 One source (unverified) suggested that TOTALS 81 12 69 100 100 100 only five percent of people with disabili- ties have computers, compared with 30 percent of the general population Anyone with access to a computer "Universal design is the design of (Hagins, 1995). If correct, this would with the minimum technical require- products and environments to be still yield from 1.8 to 2.5 million people ments can find information on the Web. usable by all people, to the greatest with disabilities who have computers. In order for it to be useful, the develop- extent possible, without the need On A Roll, a live weekly syndicated ers of Web sites must consider who for adaptation or specialized radio talk show on life and disability their audiences may be, and prepare design. The intent of the universal issues, is trying to identify at least one Web pages with attention to both tech- design concept is to simplify life million regular users of the Internet who nology and content.' Many organizations, for everyone by making products, have a disability or chronic health condi- including several grantees funded communications, and the built tion, or a direct and personal interest through NIDRR, are focusing on ways to environment more usable by more in disability issues. The purpose of the help increase accessibility of information people at little or no extra cost. research being Carried out in February on the Internet. This newsletter will pro- The universal design concept and March, 1997 is to "justify to the major vide NIDRR grantees with some general targets all people of all ages, media, advertisers, content developers, conceptual guidelines for designing sizes, and abilities" (CUD, 1996). hardware and software manufacturers, World Wide Web sites with accessibility legislators and others that people in mind, as well as some specific exam- Another NIDRR grantee, The Trace with disabilities are a viable consumer ples of modifications that can be made Center (1995) at the University of market and political force that cannot to increase accessibility for visitors with Wisconsin, states: be ignored" (Smith & Kimball, 1997). disabilities. A listing of resources avail- "It must be acknowledged that the The NCDDR carried out field tests with able on the WWW is also included. principles of universal design in no consumers_ and administrators affiliated way comprise all criteria for good with 12 Centers for Independent Living Universal Design and design, only universally usable (CILs) to learn more about how con- design. Certainly, other factors are sumers with disabilities receive and like Universal Access important, such as aesthetics, cost, to receive information. Only four percent The concepts of Universal Design and safety, gender and cultural appro- of consumers reported using the Internet Universal Access focus on making mate- priateness, and these aspects 'Very Often' to get information. About rials/space available to and usable by as should be taken into consideration 12% reported using the Internet 'Often,' many people as possible. This perspec- as well when designing." with another 12% using it only 'Once or tive looks at trying to accommodate the Twice' to get information. Fully 70% of greatest number of people in a cost- The WWW is not just a tool for consumers reported 'Never' getting infor- effective way so that it is not necessary researchers, academics, and more mation from the Internet, with 2% report- to develop special, alternative technolo- recently, the business world. It is poten- ing 'Don't Know' or no answer. This gies for a few. This may be expressed tially available to anyone, and those contrasted with CIL administrators, who in areas such as housing, transportation, making information available on the reported 17% use the Internet 'Very and communication. This is a definition Web should strive to make it accessible Often,' 41% 'Often,' 25% 'Once or Twice,' used by a NIDRR grantee at the Center as well. Increasing accessibility does and 17% 'Never' (NCDDR, 1997). Follow- for Universal Design (CUD) at North not mean the site will be less useful for ing are these results in a graphical format: Carolina State University: non-disabled viewers. New advances in 441 The Research Exchange technology should not leave Web users Web Access Symbol (for people with disabilities) with disabilities behind. Using universal design as a guiding principle, Web NCAM sponsored a contest to develop the Web Access designers can provide sites with high symbol. The winning image, selected from a field of 17 quality content that also provide a entries, was created by Stormship Studios of Boston, similar informational experience as Massachusetts. When used, the Web Access Symbol possible for all users. should always be accompanied by its description and alternate text tag, which displays when the image is Web Access Symbol not loaded. A Web Access Symbol has been Description: developed by the CPB/WGBH A globe, marked with a grid, tilts at an angle. A keyhole is cut into its surface. National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM), a NIDRR grantee, to denote ALT="Web Access Symbol (for people with disabilities)" that a site reflects accessibility features For more information contact: to accommodate the needs of users with disabilities. At this time, there CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media are no specific eligibility criteria WGBH Educational Foundation for displaying the symbol. A site 125 Western Avenue displaying the Web Access Symbol Boston, MA 02134 has not been verified as accessible, http://www.boston.com/wgbh/pages/ncam/ncamhome.html but demonstrates intent to make the site accessible. As of December 1996, over 87 sites had reported to NCAM Speech Friendly Ribbon Award that they are displaying the symbol. NIDRR grantee sites listed in addition The Speech Friendly Ribbon Award was developed by to NCAM include the ADA Technical Magical Mist Creations to recognize those sites that are Assistance Coordinator (KRA completely accessible to users of non-graphical browsers Corporation) and the Trace Center. and screen reading software. Over 190 sites have received The NCDDR is currently working the Speech Friendly Ribbon Award, including two NIDRR- toward development of criteria for funded projects, the RERC on Technology Evaluation accessibility of its WWW site, and and Transfer/AZ tech (SUNY, Buffalo) and the RRTC on intends to use the Web Access Symbol Blindness and Low Vision (Mississippi State University). after that accomplishment. We would like to encourage all grantees with Web developers may request that their site be reviewed for accessibility. Magical Web sites, as well as those in the Mist also offers a guide to creating speech friendly sites. If you would like to sub- process of planning and developing mit a site for consideration, be sure to review the guide first to ensure that you sites, to consider the needs of have implemented all appropriate alternatives to make it accessible. Following are consumers with disabilities and the criteria that must be met in order for a site to be deemed "speech friendly:" make appropriate changes or Links which are embedded in paragraphs are placed one to a line and modifications to allow all potential clearly labeled. users to access and use the Links are placed on individual lines for ease of navigation, or a text information provided. index is offered. All images and image links are ALT-tagged. Forms are formatted for ease of navigation and an e-mail alternative is offered. If a site is extremely graphical in nature a "text-only" alternative is offered that meets these criteria. If frames are used, the no frames option is available, and individual pages are offered so that blind individuals whb access via graphical browsers can choose the individual pages. For more information contact: Magical Mist Creations 2400 E. Lincoln #150 Anaheim, CA 92806 BEST COPY ANAIIABLE (714) 490-1011 http://www.wwwebiLcom/magical-mist/

4 oIj The Research Exchange

users locate relevant information they a variety of hardware are able to access General may need, and encourage them to return information that is provided by different because of the content they fmd. When platforms (such as UNIX, DOS, or you design your site, make allowances Macintosh). The platform used for the Guidelines for it to grow. You must keep it updated, server has certain capabilities that define so changes should be planned for and how and how much information will be not viewed as disruptive. `uploaded' to the Internet. Machines for Improving A clear, well-defined purpose will with smaller capacity or slower capabili- serve to guide site development. As ties may affect the time it takes a user to ideas for content or specific pages are access or download information. Server Accessibility proposed, checking to ensure they capability also determines how many further or fit in with the stated purpose visitors can access the site at one time. will make the site cohesive and focused. It would not be prudent to design a site of World Wide with extensive use of graphics, audio, Audience and video if the capacity of the server will impede users' access to information. Web Pages The audience of your site will also be Differences in users' equipment determined in part by its design and and software will also affect how they content. Asking for input from potential receive information. Although develop- Good Web page design responds to users in the planning stages will assist in ers have no control over how users will the needs of viewers with disabili- ensuring your site achieves its purpose. access their site, you can make an effort If you have information to offer people to accommodate those with different ties. A commitment to making with disabilities, your site must be a site accessible requires some needs. Users with disabilities may avoid accessible for those members of your your site if the initial pages are too additional planning and testing, audience. You do not want to prevent difficult to navigate. People with older, in addition to specific changes to potential users from navigating your site, slower equipment will become frustrat- or to 'alienate them by ignoring their documents or files. Most changes ed waiting for long files or large graph- needs. A site with numerous graphic or additions to increase accessibili- ics to load. This is the origin of the images may be confusing for people term 'World Wide Wait.' ty are small, and can be easily who are using a screen reader, as well The way a user accesses the Internet implemented. Making a Web page as others who use text-based browsers affects his or her ability to view docu- or who (due to the download time accessible should be routinely ments. People who use commercial involved) turn graphics loading off. services such as America OnLine, incorporated as a normal part of Numerous audio and video clips may Compuserve, or will have design and development rather not be accessible to users who are deaf different capabilities from those who than viewed as an afterthought. or hard of hearing, or to people lacking reach the Internet from universities, software or hardware to access or play business or technical sites, or others sounds and movies. These features may with independent Internet Service be attractive or useful additions for some Purpose of Your Providers (ISPs). users, but alternatives such as text files Web Site Browser software determines how and transcripts should also be made The purpose and content of your site Web pages appear to each user. The available in order to welcome all pages at your site will present some will help determine its design. You may potential viewers and users of the want your site to heighten awareness of variations depending on the browser information at your site. your NIDRR project or institution, and used by the viewer. A text-based brows- It may be helpful to add features to er such as Lynx will show phrases such explain your goals, activities, and how help identify your audience, those who to contact the staff. Its purpose may be as [IMAGO, [INLINE], or [LINK] when actually visit your site. Software is avail- graphics are not able to load. This lets to demonstrate or share information able to count the number and origin of gathered from your research, or to pro- the user know something is there, but users and the pages most often viewed. vide free access to products developed it does not identify the item in a way A feedback form, survey, or guestbook through your project's work. Full-text that informs the user. Modifications are will also help you learn more about documents can be made available, as needed to identify graphics. Different your audience. well as product catalogs and ordering versions of browsers like Netscape information. You may decide that your Navigator, Microsoft Internet Explorer, Web site will be interactive and invite Hardware/Software and Mosaic also have different capabili- input from users. As technology continues to advance, ties. It is helpful to review your pages Design your site to be inviting and to many access problems may be solved, with several different browsers to take advantage of the capabilities of the and new ones may appear. One of the ensure that all users can view what WWW. Your site must help potential advantages of the Web is that users with you intended to produce. 5 The Research Exchange

Some Web sites inform visitors `This tree structure allows the site to grow complete plain-text (ASCII) version of site is best viewed with "XXX Browser, as things are added following a logical the document. This file would be more Version 1.x." Others even include format rather than random expansion. accessible for screen readers, and an information about fonts, colors, and The layout should not be too crowded, end-user could easily download it resolution in order to view the site at or include pages with little content or for printing. its best. Instead of informing users how nothing but links. Pages with only they should change their settings to graphics should also be avoided. Color/Text meet a site's development standards, a The proper size of a Web page more universal design approach is to document is difficult to determine. Colors should contrast well with the make the site compatible with a variety Downloading time is one way to judge lettering to maintain readability. Select of browsers. The 'Best Viewed With Any the size of a document, although this colors that will make your pages easy Browser' (developed by Cari D. Burstein, will also vary depending on the capabil- to read by people with color blindness. http://server.berkeley.edu/-cdaveb/ ities of the server and user. A download One good test is to see if your pages anybrowser.html) campaign supports time of more than 30 seconds may are readable in black and white. In using standard HTML notation that is cause some users to stop a download. most cases, it is advisable to avoid properly interpreted by all browsers. More than ten screens of information background (wallpaper) patterns as Viewers with disabilities will also benefit (again, this will vary!) can also turn the images and/or colors can impede from this approach. many users off. If it is necessary to save accessibility for people with limited many separate parts and then integrate vision or who use screen readers. Vest Mimed With them to be able to print a complete Text should be clear and uniform for Any ,Oroweer product, the individual parts may be easiest reading. Using a large font is not considered "too short." On the other necessary, because most viewers will Special software has been developed hand, one large document may be too adjust the fonts on their browsers and for users with disabilities, including slow in loading, or may cause readers a large font might then be too large to browsers. For example, The Productivity to scroll through, looking for what is provide continuity if only a few words Works, Inc. has developed pwWebSpeak, important to them. One option is to are visible at a time. a non-visual browser with a built-in provide a link to a file containing a speech processor and enlarging format that interprets from the HTML code rather than what appears on the screen (Lazarro, 1996; Sreenivasan, 1996). Checkyour Pages Microsoft Internet Explorer Version 3.0 It is easy to test your WWW pages using a variety of text browsers and uses the Active Accessibili4) program, platforms (PC, MAC, UNDO. Even if you use a graphical browser, you can see also developed by Microsoft, to facilitate how a page will look to others by de-selecting image loading under 'Preferences,' use of screen reader software, synthesiz- and viewing your pages again. There are a number of sites on the Web that ers, Braille displays and large print pro- convert a document to show how it will appear using the text-based Lynx grams (Lazzaro, 1996). Netscape is also browser. Other validation sites available can assist you in assessing the working to increase the capabilities of "correctness" of HTML code and its accessibility. its Navigator browser to meet the needs Bobby is an example of new technology that is available to you. of users with disabilities (Sreenivasan, 1996). The goal of the Mosaic Access Project is to identify some of the major barriers people with disabilities encounter on the Web, and where feasi- ble, design and implement solutions. Bobby is a graphical web-based program designed to help make Web pages accessible by the largest number of people. A free service, it was developed by Layout the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) Universal Design Lab staff An organized layout is critical for a well- and Josh Krieger. Founded in 1984, CAST is a not-for-profit organization whose planned site. The layout should serve to mission is to expand opportunities for individuals with disabilities through orient the user to where information is innovative computer technology. likely to be found, and to facilitate Bobby performs a series of tests to determine the ways in which a Webpage is moving through the site. Keeping simi- inaccessible to people with blindness, deafness or physical disabilities. It identifies lar features (including navigation aids problems and gives Warnings and Suggestions to correct them. In addition, Bobby such as Back, Forward, Previous, Next, will help find design problems which prevent a Web page from being displayed Home, etc.) in the same place on all correctly on different Web browsers (America On-Line, Netscape Navigator, pages helps all users, and especially Mosaic, Microsoft Explorer, Lynx) without having to individually test the page those with disabilities. A branching with each browser.

6 52 The Research Exchange

Interactivity One problem with links relates to the they must be made aware of the new or evolving nature of the Internet and the updated items they can find. If informa- The ability to get input from users is Web. As newer hardware is installed or tion is loaded onto the server and then an important aspect of the World Wide sites are reorganized, the Web address never modified or updated, in a short Web. The purpose and layout of the site (Uniform Resource Locator, or URL) of a time, it will not attract new or repeat will help determine if input from users document or an entire site may change. visitors. To be useful, the site must have is encouraged or discouraged. One way Without follow-up, the links you interesting, up-to-date information. It to ask for input is to provide links for provide in your site may not stay active. is important that the date of the most electronic mail ("mailto"). Using an recent revision is aVailable on each animated graphic for that purpose Maintenance document. As technology advances, may not allow users who are blind to you should plan to make improvements find and use the e-mail link unless a A site should continually evolve; it at your site to enhance accessibility standard mailto link is also available. should not be a static product. In order for users with disabilities. The use of forms is another way for visitors to want to return to the site, Web sites invite input from users. Some text-based browsers cannot use forms, although more recent versions of Lynx have resolved that issue. A separate References text-based form that can be completed Center for Universal Design (CUD). (1996.) Universal design. Raleigh, NC: NC State and sent by electronic mail, or printed University. [Online]. Available: http://www2.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/ud/ud.html and faxed or sent by surface mail, gives an opportunity for users without forms CyberAdas. (1996). Market size. New York: Author. [Online]. Available: capability to respond. http://www.cyberatlas.com/market.html Providing no avenue for feedback by users indicates that the opinions of the Graphics, Visualization, & Usability Center (GVU). (1996). GVU's 6th WWW viewers are not valued. It is important user survey. Atlanta, GA: Georgia Tech University. [Online]. Available: to facilitate feedback from users with http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/user_surveys/survey-10-1996/ disabilities, including feedback on the accessibility your site. Gromov, G.R. (1996, September). History of the Internet and WWW [Online]. Available: http://www.internetvalley.com/intvall.html

Linking to other sites Hagins, J. (1995, July). Benefits and barriers: People with disabilities and the One of the powerful tools of the Web national information infrastructure. Austin, TX: The University of Texas at Austin, is the ability to link to other documents Center for Research on Communication Technology and Society and sites through 'hyperlinks' that allow users to move rapidly to sites all around. LaPlante, M. (1992, December). How many Americans have a disability? the globe. It is not necessary to repro- Disability Statistics Abstract No. 5. San Francisco: Disability Statistics Program, duce information at your site that is University of California. [Online]. Available: http://dsc.ucsf.edu/abs/ab5.html available elsewherejust provide a link. In thinking of accessibility, though, it is Lazarro, J.J. (1996, December). Browse the Web with your eyes closed. important to consider the accessibility Information Technology and Disabilities (ITD-JNL) 3(4). Available from the of those sites to which you may want listserv [email protected] (12-21-96). to link. In some cases, you might decide not to link to a site where people NCDDR. (1997). Survey of consumers with disabilities: Report of field test with disabilities may have difficulty results. Austin, 'DC: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. navigating. It would also be helpful to New Networks Institute. (1996). Executive summary: Online and alert users that some linked sites may Internet statistics reality check, '96 [Online]. Available: not be accessible. http://www.newnetworks.comistatsexecsum.htm Too many links throughout your doc- uments may encourage visitors to ' ' Smith, G. & Kimball, T. (1997). Are there one million disabled Internet and not return to your pages. Within users? Personal communication by electronic mail, February 26, 1997. your site, be sure to give users a way to return to the place they were before Sreenivasan, S. (1996, December). New software improves Web access for leaving by providing a return link. Many the blind. New York Times News Service. December 2, 1996. lists of links are not recommended. Content is an important reason for Trace Center. (1995, December). Tbe principles of universal design. hosting a site, and the links should Version 1.1. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. [Online]. Available: enhance the content you present. http://trace.wisc.edu/text/univdesn/ud_princ/ud_princ.html

7 53- The Research Exchange Information for Web Page Developers Accessibility Design Considerations and Examples

The major areas to be discussed Most browsers have the capability of alternate text references (ALT tags) to identify are graphics, image maps, text graphics that are not visible. This text only appears when the image is not shown. links, audio, video, frames and The ALT= tag should be used to simulate the function of the image it replaces rather than to provide a description of the icon, except in the case of a unique or large tables, and forms. image [3]. Descriptions should be short and functional [1]. Many of the following examples are drawn from: Examples of the ALT= tag: [1] Vanderheiden, G.C., Chisholm, W.A., The HTML code to place the NCDDR's logo on a page is NCDDR Logo would reveal the words "NCDDR Logo" http://trace.wisc.edu/text/guidelns/ for users who cannot see the graphic. The words are read by screen readers. htmlgide/htmlgide.pos/quickref.html Following are some specific examples of use of graphics and ALT tags to [2] Starling Access Services. (1997). describe them. Accessible Web page design: General design tips. [Online] Available: 1. If a graphic icon is a bullet: http://www.igs.net/-starling/acc/ acgen.htm [3] Gieszczykiewic, F.M. (1996, The bullet icon will appear as an asterisk in the first example [3]; November). A plea for Lynx as a small letter o in the second [1]. Both are useable with screen readers. friendliness, V1.09, (Personal communication by electronic mail). 2. If it's a line: Note: the numbers [1], [2], and (31 identify horizontal line the source of various suggestions for adaptations. A line of dashes will appear in the first example [3], the words "horizontal line" in the second 111.

Graphics 3. For a unique picture or large image: Graphics include icons (small represen- [Description-type-size in KB] tative pictures) as well as pictures, For example. ALT="monalisa GIF-128 KB" would describe a 128 KB GIF image drawings, and charts. The addition of of the Mona Lisa. A descnption should also be made available [3]. graphics to a Web page can increase interest, attractiveness, and should 4. If it's a logo: enhance the understanding of content. Graphics with no real purpose should be avoided. They add to the time need- There is no real benefit in describing the logo here [3]. ed to load and view a document, and in some cases, may cause the document to 5. if it's a capital letter in a word: be inaccessible to many computer users. W These can include people without graphics-capable browsers, as well as Identifying the letter will be more helpful than just letting users know it is a users who may be blind and use a GIF image [3]. screen reader to access information. 6. If you're using a counter that outputs the number as an image: Others in this group include persons who have the graphics capabilities of [counter number] their browsers turned off to gain speed This lets the viewer know that a number is there, and why [31 on the Web (estimated at 30%) [3]. 8 5 The Research Exchange

7. If an image is used as a link: Movies/Video Clips Send us E-Mail nate sound track is available, an audio gives "Send us E-Mail" as the link. description can be added to the regular Users without graphics capabilities will see only [LINK if there is no ALT text audio track for users with visual disabili- explanation. The words between the quotation marks in the ALT text will appear ties. Or, a second copy of the movie as the link 131. with descriptive video can be prepared. Again, be sure to identify the type of 8. If you don't want to show anything: movie format and the size of the file so that users may determine if they have If there is nothing between the quotation marks, nothing will be shown 131. the capability to access the movie. An alternate text file with a description of A separate page may be added to provide a description of some graphic the movie as well as a transcript should images. Include a text anchor to a page describing the graphic (use a capital also be provided [1]. "D" or a short phrase located next to the picture such as 'description of graphic name') which takes the user to a page with a full description of significant Frames, Tables, graphic elements [1]. Another alternative is to develop a text-only page which translates all graphics and Graphs and information into text. This can provide a fast access method for all users. HTML allows a developer to include an You may have text-only pages for a few specific pages or all pages at your site. alternate set of HTML instructions to be Users should be able to switch back and forth between text-only and graphic executed or displayed if the end-user's versions of the page. This is the most complex adaptation, and is not needed browser does not support FRAMES. in many cases [1]. Frames are really separate pages, each with its own URL, that appear together. Including an effective alternative to the Use of HTML FRAME page is equivalent to including Avoid non-standard HTML formats and special tags. They often cause problems for ALT="text" with a graphic image it Braille translation, screen readers and some browsers [1]. Don't use the tag: makes your critical information available some screen-readers lock up when they encounter blinking text. Beyond concerns to everyone. Using TABLES as an alter- about accessibility, most HTML style guides warn designers again8t using the native to FRAMES is not a good idea, tag. The consensus is that it is more annoying than eye-catching [2]. since tables are also inaccessible to Always provide HTML, or at least ASCII forms, of all documents presented in many users [2]. PDF, PS, WORD or other formats to allow users without that software to access It is very difficult to make informa- the information [1]. tion in columns in a table accessible End all sentences, headers and items within a list with a period or other suitable to a screen reader, which reads across punctuation. Screen-readers interpret punctuation for the listener. To a sighted user, the page. It is best to avoid the use of headers are separated and emphasized to stand out. Lists, headings or titles without tables with columns, or, provide a page punctuation may be run together by a screen-reader, making it difficult for the with lists to make the same information listener to understand. available in an alternate format [2]. The following suggestions make information accessible for all users, not If a graph does not make all of its only those with disabilities. It is helpful to have a standard footer on all elements and relationships of those pages, describing: elements clear, you should provide a link for appropriate corresponding 1. Information on who wrote it and when it was last updated. descriptive text. In a case where the 2. A link to the home page (in case someone arrives by way of a search engine, ALT="text" that accompanies the graph by a direct link from another site, or a newsgroup.) does not give enough useful informa- tion to the viewer, provide alternate 3. A link to Disclaimer and Copyright pages (which all sites should have.) text to describe your chart or graph [2]. 4. The URL of the page (especially helpful if you print a document and your browser does not print the URL, when you find you need to revisit a site.) The Research Exchange

Image Maps Example of Image Map with Links An image map is a graphic image that provides a direct link to another page when it, or a specific part of it, is selected. Unless a text alternative is provided for the image map, some people will not be able to navigate your site. A simple list of links at the bottom of the screen will avoid blocking off access [3]. Deleting the image map is not necessary, as the graphic aid of an image map may be especially useful for some viewers with learning or cognitive disabilities. This will be most useful if the same pattern is followed throughout the site [2]. Providing both graphic and text options is best for enhancing accessibility. I I I In some cases, offering a separate text-only page of the links would 116111111 111 1 I11 11 II11 1 11'111 be most appropriate. Again, viewers What's New I What is MARRTC I Arthritis NewsBreak I Regional Arthritis Centers I should be able to easily switch Fibromyalgia Resources I Educational Resources I Text only between graphics and text-only pages [1]. Text Anchors Anchor Links in a horizontal list are separated by vertical bars (I) (Links) [11 What's New I What is MARRTC I Arthritis NewsBreak I Regional Arthritis Centers I Text anchors are words or phrases Fibromyalgia Resources I Educational Resources I Text only within a document that link the user to another location. It may be a part Anchor Links in a vertical, rather than horizontal, list of the original document, a new document within the original site, [2] or may be at a different site. A text What's New phrase that is used as a link to another What is MARRTC document should make sense if it Arthritis NewsBreak stands alone or is read out of context. Regional Arthritis Centers Just using one word to identify a link Fibromyalgia Resources may not help the user know if the link Educational Resources is important to their understanding of Text only information at the site. A series of links on one line should be separated by a vertical bar ( I ) to ensure that screen readers can Forms Audio differentiate between links [1]. A list For users who cannot readily access Audio clips can be used to provide of links that is vertical rather than forms where blanks are to be filled in, descriptive information as an accessible horizontal may be more accessible provide a form which can be down- alternative for persons who are blind [2]. for persons using screen readers, loaded and then mailed, faxed, or Audio clips will not be accessible to which read from right to left on electronically mailed. This may be people who are deaf of hard of hearing. one line at a time [2]. the same form or an alternate version, A page should be made available with depending on the type and quantity of a description or transcript of the audio information requested. Or, give a phone file. This is also useful to viewers who number someone can call to provide do not have access to necessary hard- the requested information. [1]. ware or helper software to listen to audio materials [1]. To improve accessi- bility, be sure to identify the audio 3EST COPYAVAILABLE format (WANT, .AU, .SND, etc.) and the size of the file [2]. 10 The Research Exchange

Search engines Open Text: Offers many search Placing a search engine at your site The Web is huge, and growing. In early options, and allows users to weigh the can also make it easier for users to 1996, it was estimated that some 19 mil- relevancy of terms to refine the search. find information they are looking for. lion pages were available through the 1.5 million full-text pages (to expand in A number of free and shareware WWW, with an expected doubling in 1997 to 10 million pages). engines are available. size every four months. This would yield over 150 million pages at the WebCrawler: Quick searches; gives beginning of 1997 (Venditto, 1996). URI. addresses and page tides only. Search engines are automated tools Data base is updated regularly; 500,000 that sift through the seemingly limitless of the 'most popular' pages. contents of the Web for specific information. In addition, sites are registered with WWW directories References / Resources such as Yahoo and Magellan. Search engines are a type of auto- Adaptive Computer Technology Software is available to help you maintain and fine-tune your site. mated software (called spiders) that Resource Centre. (1996). Accessible Web cover URLs across the Web in search Page DesignGeneral Deszgn Tips. [Online} Available: Wusage of terms specified by the user. Some of http://www.boutelLcom/wusage/ the spiders visit every site and record http://www.igs.net/-starling/acc/ provides usage statistics for Web servers, the URL and text of all pages, others acgen.htm including the number and origin of check to see which sites are most Center for Universal Design accesses (hits) to the site, which pages popular and log only information (CUD). (1996.) Universal design. were accessed most, and graphs of such as the URL address or title. Raleigh, NC: NC State University. some of the statistics gathered. Using slightly different approaches [Online] Available: Copyright 1996, by Boutell.Com, Inc. and search criteria, search engines http://www2.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design- yield different information. P.O. Box 20837 cud/ud/ud.htm1 In May 1996, Internet World Seattle, WA 98102 Phone/Fax +1 206.325.3009 reviewed a number of free search Gieszczykiewicz, F.M. (1996, [email protected] engines available on the Web. November). A plea for Lynx friendliness, Following is a brief summary of V1.09. (Personal communication by those results. MOMspider electronic mail). http://www.ics.ucLedu/pub/web- Alta Vista: With 21 million fully Starling Access Services. (1997). soft/MOMspider/ indexed pages, Alta Vista claims to be Accessible Web page design: General Multi-owned Maintenance (MOM) the largest of the databases for search- design tips. [Online] Available: Spider is a Web-roaming robot that ing the Web, however, many of the ref- http://www.igs.net/-starling/acc/ specializes in the maintenance of erences returned were irrelevant or had acgen.htm distributed hypertext infostructures (i.e. expired links. Most comprehensive wide-area webs). It lists any links that results. Trace Center. (1995, December). were broken, moved, or exhibited any The principles of universal design. other access problems. Excite: Excite provides both a search Version 1.1. Madison, WI: University Roy Fielding (Last modified: 24 Jul 1996.) engine and a Web directory. Found to of Wisconsin. [Online] Available: Department of Information and be one of the best databases at staying http://trace.wisc.edu/text/univdesn- Computer Science current; does not display URIs in its ud_princ/ud_princ.html University of CaliforniaIrvine results. 1.5 million full-text pages. Irvine, CA 92717-3425 Vanderheiden, G.C., Chisholm, [email protected] InfoSeek Guide: Has the 'smartest' W. A., & Ewers, N. (1966, April). IIIML search tools which find more relevant Quick Reference Page. Madison, WI: sites. Provides 'Similar Pages' links. Tace Center. [Online] Available: 1 million full-text pages. Most http://trace.wisc.edu/text/guidelns/ relevant results. htmlgide/htmlgide.PCs/quickref.html

Lycos: One of the first search tools Venditto, G. (1996, May). on the Web. It continues to add to Search engine showdown. Internet its database and reports results in URLs World, 7(5), 79-86. [Online] Available: and abstracts (of 19 million pages). http:www.iw.com/1996/05/showdown. Not the fastest or most extensive, html but serviceable. 11 57 The Research Exchange Annotated WWW Resourceist This is a small sampling of the resources available on Internet World the World Wide Web (WWW). Each listing is accompa- http://www.internetworld.com/ nied by a brief description. These sites provide useful Internet World, published monthly by Mecklermedia in Westport, Conn. began as a newsletter and became a information that supports the development of effective, full-color newsstand magazine in September 1993. accessible WWW pages. Good, Bad, and Ugly Pages http://www.1w.com/1996/04/bottom.html Internet/WWWGeneral This article from Internet World 7 (4) April, 1996, by Joel Introduction to the Internet Snyder looks at planning before launching a web site, http://www.acc.org/am/acc96/itc/bas1c/ and errors to avoid. These pages are intended to be a basic overview of Serving Government the communication and information services available http://wwvv.iw.com11996/01/joeuser.html to novice users of the Internet. Andrew L. Jaffee describes the Florida state legislature's David A. Tong, Ph.D. Copyright 0 1995-1996. process to designits Web site to give residents online access All Rights Reserved. University of Oklahoma to all state documents. Internet World 7 (1) January, 1996. Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK 73104 Web Design Group Universal Design http://www.htmlhelp.com/ The Web Design Group was founded to promote the develop- The Benton Foundation ment of non-browser-specific, non-resolution-specific, creative http://www.benton.org/ and informative sites that are accessible to all users worldwide. The Benton Foundation promotes public interest values and non-commercial services for the National Information World Wide Web Primer Infrastructure through research and policy analysis, http://www.vuw.ac.nz/-gnat/ideas/www-prhner.html outreach to nonprofits and foundations, and print, video, Written in 1994 by Nathan Torkington, this primer still and online publishing. provides a good general overview of the Web. Universal Service and the Information Superhighway WWW & HTML Developer's Jump Station http://www.benton.org/Library/Universal/briefl.html http://oneworld.wa.com/htmldev/devpage/dev-page.html (briefing paper) This resource page is maintained by Sing Net and hosted by The Benton Foundation's Universal Service and One World Information Services. Universal Access Virtual library WWW Tools and Places http://www.benton.org/Policy/Uniserv/ http://mambo.ucsc.edu/psl/wwwtp.html (extensive listing of publications) A fisting of links about the WWW, search engines, interesting Universal AccessibilityA Matter of Design sites, government sites, etc. http://www.prodworks.com/ua_9606.htm Copy of presentation materials by Ray Ingram, June, 1996. HTML Information Copyright 0 1996, The Productivity Works, Inc. A Beginner's Guide to HTML Universal Design http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/General/Internet/WWW/ http://www2.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/ud/ud.html HTMLPrimer.html The Center for Universal Design, part of the School of The NCSA Beginner's Guide is still the most frequently Design at North Carolina State University, is a national research, requested file on NCSA's Web information, and technical assistance center that evaluates, HTML Overview develops, and promotes accessible and universal design http://www.ora.com/oracom/inet/html.html in housing, buildings, and related products. by Russ Jones from Managing Internet Information Services, O'Reilly http://www.ora.com/catalog/miis/ Accessibility. Accessible Web Page Design General Design and http://www.eskimo.com/-pubin/disabled/web-desi.htm Copyright (c) 1994-1996 by Jim Lubin. Links to information Related Issues on accessible Web page design, testing your Web page for Computers and the Disabled accessibility, graphics, and on-line design discussions; also http://www.pctv.com/pctv/shows/chronicles/ links to other disABILITY information and resources. 96-97/1424/1424.html This issue of Computer Chronicles highlights various perspectives from different authors on computers and people with disabilities. 12 The Research Exchange

Accessible Web Page Design WebABLE! http://www.igs.net/-starling/acc/ http://www.yuri.org/webable/ Copyright © 1997, Starling Access Services. Links to Now located at the Yuri Rubinsky Insight Foundation Web site, guidelines for making Web page components accessible; WebABLE! is a Web directory for disability-related Internet links to other resources. resources. General Design Tips People with Disabilities Can't Access the Web by http://www.igs.net/-starling/acc/acgen.htm Mike Pack llo http://www.yuri.org/webable/mp-pwdca.html Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (background paper, resource links) http://www.utoronto.ca/atrc/ The University of Toronto's ATRC promotes the integration Web Access '97 of alternative access systems throughout the information http://access.vvww6conf.org/ technology infrastructure. The theme of the Sixth International World Wide Web Web Access Conference, to be held April 7-11, 1997 in Santa Clara, http://www.utoronto.ca/atrc/rd/access/accesssr.html California is accessibility: Everyone-Everything-Connected. HTML Commandments Co-hosted by Stanford University and the Stanford Linear http://www.utoronto.ca/atrc/rd/html/ Accelerator Center (SLAG) commandments.html WWW Consortium Guidelines for writing accessible HTML. http://www.w3.org/ Alliance for Technology Access (ATA) The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) was founded in http://www.ataccess.org/ 1994 to develop common standards for the evolution of the The ATA is a network of community-based resource centers World Wide Web. dedicated to providing information .and support services to W3C Disabilities Developments children and adults with disabilities, and increasing their use http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Disabilities/ of standard, assistive, and information technologies. (links to many resources) Designing Access To WWW Pages Web Accessibility http://www.ataccess.org/design.html http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Disabilities/Activity.html Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) (W3C position statement .on disabilities) http://www.cast.org/ World Wide Web Journal Founded in 1984, CAST is a not-for-profit organization. http://www.ora.com/info/wj/ whose mission is to expand opportunities for individuals (W3J, the quarterly journal of the W3C) with disabilities through innovative computer technology. WWW Accessibility to People with Disabilities Issues of Web Design A Usability Perspective http://www.enetdigest.comidesign/design.html http://www.staff.uiue.edu/-jongund/access-overview.html Copyright Kathy E. Gill. Created 27 April 1996 An overview of Web accessibility needs by Jon Gunderson of Last Updated 3 November 1996. the Mosaic/Web Access Project. Background and procedures on multiple browser WWW Browser Accessibility Recommendations compatibility and resource links. http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/-jongund/ National Center to Improve Practice access-browsers.html Another paper by Jon Gunderson on browser http://www.edc.org/FSC/NCIPI accessibility guidelines. The National Center to Improve Practice in Special Education Through Technology, Media, and Materials (NCIP) promotes the effective use of technology to enhance educational Hardware/Software Developers outcomes for students with sensory, cognitive, physical, Accessibility Support from Microsoft and social/emotional disabilities. http://wwvv.microsoft.com/windows/enable/ Accessibility of this Site How the industry giant works with people with disabilities http://www.edc.org/FSC/NCIP/Accessibility.html to make its products more useful. Describes NCIP's design strategies to make their Web site accessible for all users. Disability Connection from Apple Computer http://www2.apple.com/disab1lity/ NCSA Mosaic Access Page The goal of Apple's Worldwide Disability Solutions Group is http://bucky.aa.uic.edu/ to change the experience of disability in positive, constructive, Mosaic is one of the first Internet information browsers and andwhere appropriatedramatic ways. World Wide Web clients, developed at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois in IBM Special Needs Systems UrbanaChampaign. This page presents Mosaic's disability http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/ access efforts. IBM technology can open doors for achievement and independence and enhance the employability, education, and quality of life of people who have disabilities. 13 The Research Exchange

Government Policies WEBTechs HTML Validation Service Center for Information Technology Accommodation http://www.webtechs.com/html-val-svc/ http://www.gsa.gov/coca/ An online validator that checks documents against various CITA (formerly the Clearinghouse on Computer levels of HTML. AccommodationCOCA) is located in the General Services Administration. Links are provided to policies and guidelines. Browser Software Writing Accessible HTML Documents Browserwatch http://www.gsa.gov/coca/WWWcode.htm http://browserwatchiworld.com/ Guidelines written by Paul Fontaine. Internet World maintains a list of browser software. Policy Statement on Making Materials and Information Available and Accessible to Individuals with Disabilities http://www.cyberdog.apple.com/ http://www.ed.gov/pubs/Sec504/append-d.html Apple's browser for the Macintosh. This policy clarifies the obligations of the United States Department of Education under Section 504 of the Can I run Lynx on my OS? Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, to make its http://www.crLcom/-subielynx/platforms.html materials accessible and available to its disabled customers. A text-based browser, Lynx is one of the early products still in use today. World Wide Web (WWW) Server Standards and Guidelines http://www.ed.gov/internal/wwwstds/ Microsoft Internet Explorer This document defmes the specific standards and general http://www.microsoft.com/ie/defaultasp guidelines which the United States Department of Education The popularity of Explorer, the browser developed by (ED) uses to make information available on the WWW. Microsoft, is growing. World Wide Webserver of the City of San Jose Mosaic http://www.ipac.net/csj/ http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/SDG/Software/Mosaic/ The Web site of San Jose, California, was selected as a Mosaic is one of the fust Internet information browsers and model City link by the federal CITA. WWW clients, and it continues to be used and updated. Disability Access Design Standards Netscape Navigator http://www.ipac.neticsj/oaacc/disacces.html http://home.netscape.com/ Standards are presented and serve as a model for other Netscape is currently the most popular browser although it site developers. is losing ground to Microsoft's Internet Explorer. Assessing Web Pages pwWebSpeak Project http://www.prodworks.com/pwwebspk.htm. A Kinder, Gentler HTML Validator pwWebSpeak was designed and developed by The http://ugweb.cs.ualberta.ca/-gerald/validate/ Productivity Works, Inc. in conjunction with De Witt and This is a friendly, easy-to-use HTML validation service Associates, who act as accessibility consultants to the based on a real SGML parser. It is similar in function to the project, and Thomas Edison State College. pwWebSpeak WebTechs validator, but the returned errors are (hopefully) is a trademark of The Productivity Works, Inc. easier to figure out. Copyright CD 1996, 1997 The Productivity Works, Inc. Bobby http://www.cast.org/bobbyl Search Engines Bobby is a graphical Web-based program designed by Add an Engine the Center for Applied Special Technology to help web http://www.iw.com/1996/05/engine.html site designers and graphic artists make their web pages Eric Richardson describes how to add a search engine to a accessible by the largest number of people. site and provides links to a number of free and commercial Validators and Document Checkers search engines, Internet World (1996, May). http://www.htmlhelp.com/links/validators.htm This list of links to sites that check for HTML syntax errors Alta Vista http://altavista.digital.com/ is maintained by the Web Design Group. CNET Search.Comhttp://www.search.com/ What does your HTML look like in Lynx? Excite http://www.excite.com/ http://www.miranova.com/-steve/Lynx-View.html HotBot http://www.hotbot.com/ Enter the URL of a page at this site and you will see how Infoseek http://guide.infoseek.com/ the page appears to those using the Lynx browser. Lycos http://www.lycos.comJ Web Page Accessibility Self-Evaluation Test http://www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/dmd/access/testverl.htm Magellan (directory) http://www.mckinley.com/ Developed by the Diversity Management Directorate, Public Open Text Index http://index.opentext.net/ Service Commission of Canada. You should be able to "score" Webcrawler http://webcrawler.com/ a Web page's Accessibility Quotient and make the necessary corrections, using this simple self-evaluation test. Yahoo (directory) http://www.yahoo.com/ 14 GD The Research Exchange

Search Engine Showdown ADA Technical Assistance Coordinator (ADA-TAC) http://www.1w.com/1996/05/showdown.htm1 http://www.icdi.wvu.edu/tech/ada.htm Gus Venditto's article from Internet World tests This contract addresses the needs of businesses, the disability (1996, May) seven Internet search tools. community, and state and local governments in implementing the ADA by utilizing state-of-the-art electronic communication Increasing Awareness media as well as traditional media outreach. of Web Sites Center for Universal Design http://www2.ncgu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/ Found It On the Net The Center for Universal Design, part of the School of http://www.iw.com/1996/01/found.htm1 Design at North Carolina State University, is a national Linda Engleman's column in the Internet World (1996, January) research, information, and technical assistance center that discusses how to attract visitors to your Web site. Make your evaluates, develops, and promotes accessible and universal presence known; promote without offending. design in housing, buildings, and related products. How works (FAQ) http://boutell.com/%7Egrant/charter.html CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM) The purpose of this moderated newsgroup is to announce http://www.boston.com/wgbh/pages/ncam/ncamhome. events specifically related to the WWW, such as new Web html resources and sites. NCAM develops strategies and technologies to make media accessible to millions of Americans, including people with Promote Assist disabilities, minority language users, and those with low http://online-biz.com/promote/assist.shtml literacy skills. An aid to submitting your Web site to some of the more popular indices, catalogs, spiders and "What's New" lists Trace Center, University of Wisconsin on the WWW. http://trace.wisc.edu/ The Trace Center is an interdisciplinary research, development Submit It! and resource center on technology and disability. It is part http://www.submit-it.com/ of the Waisman Center and the Department of Industrial A popular free or paid service for sending URLs to search - Engineering at the University of WisconsinMadison. engines and directories. Designing an Accessible World http://trace.wisc.edu/world/world.html NIDRR Grantee Resources The Trace Center has developed a number of papers, This section highlights a sampling of NIDRR grantees with guidelines, and resources in the broad area of accessibility. information available on the WWW focusing on aspects of HTML Quick Reference Page computer communication accessibility. http://trace.wisc.edu/text/guidelns/htmlgide/ htmlgide.pcs/quickref.html Access to Disability Data (InfoUse) A quick reference of the ideas you should consider while http://www.infouse.com/disabilitydata/ designing HTML pages to maximize the number of users InfoUse specializes in the development of health, disability that can view them. April 1996Gregg C Vanderheiden and rehabilitation information using computer technology. Ph.D., Wendy A. Chisholm, Neal Ewers Accessibility Issues, Access to Disability Data http://www.infouse.com/disabilitydata/addaccess.html Transforming Inventions Into Products for Persons InfoUse and other key national sources have developed with Disabilities materials on principles of accessible design, along with http://cosmos.ot.buffalo.edu/aztech.html some specific guidelines. AZtech is operated by the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Technology Evaluation and.Transfer (RERC-TET). RESNA Technical Assistance (TA) Project and Three organizations direct the RERC-TET: The Center for Assurance of Quality in Assistive Technology Delivery Assistive Technology (CAT) at the University.at Buffalo, The http://www.resna.org/resna/hometal.htm Independent Living Center (ILC) of Western New York, Inc., RESNA Technical Assistance Project activities are aimed at and The Western New York Technology Development Center facilitating efforts of the nationwide assistive technology (TDC), Inc. programs to reduce barriers to the acquisition of assistive technology devices and services by individuals with disabilities. West Virginia RRTC: Management of Information The Assurance of Quality Project develops guidelines of and Information Systems in State Vocational measurement and standards to determine the most appropriate Rehabilitation Agencies technology for an individual user and to evaluate the http://www.icdi.wvu.edu/ effectiveness of specific applications of technology. WVRRTC activities are seen as a set of challenges to improve rehabilitation services by improving the management of rehabilitation and disability information.

BEST COPYAVAILABLE 1 The Research Exchange NIDRR Project Results Used by Special Olympics International to Evaluate Impact of Sports Program

Special Olympics International (SOI) largest volunteer organization on mental has begun an extensive research effort retardation with more than 1,000 affiliat- Dykens, E. M. & Cohen, D. that uses an assessment of adult self- ed chapters and 140,000 members (1996, February). Effects of Special determination developed by The Arc nationwide. Since 1990, The Arc has Olympics International on social of the United States with funding from conducted research and developed competence in persons with mental the National Institute on Disability and materials to promote self-determination retardation. Journal of the American Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). SOI by youth and adults with mental Academy of Child and Adolescent will examine the impact of integrated retardation. These efforts resulted in Psychiatg 35(2), 223-229. recreation on the social competence the publication of "The Arc's Self- and self-determination of people with Determination Scale," an inventory of How To Contact mental retardation. self-determination skills and behaviors SOI, founded in 1968 by Eunice of students with cognitive disabilities, The National Kennedy Shriver, has a mission to pro- developed to facilitate student involve- Center For The vide children and adults with mental ment in educational planning related Dissemination Of retardation with year-round sports train- to self-determination and to be used Disability Research ing and athletic, Olympic-type sports as a research tool in the promotion competition. SOI feels involvement in of this outcome. sports training and competition benefits The Arc's NIDRR-funded project has a Call Us people with mental retardation physical- developed an adult version of the Scale 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 V/17 ly, mentally, socially and spiritually. In as part of the project's emphasis on pro- 8 A.M.NOON and 1 P.m.-5 P.M. C.T. addition, it strengthens families and the moting self-determination and increasing Mon.-Fri. (except holidays) community at large, both through partici- the participation of adults with mental or record a message 24 hr./day pation and observation, by uniting all in retardation in their individual planning better understanding people with mental meetings. SOI's Baker particularly likes El retardation in an environment of equali- this research instrument "because it Explore Our Web Site ty, respect and acceptance. The positive focuses on independent adjustment in http://www.ncddr.org/ effects of Special Olympics have often the community rather than on behaviors E-mail Us been the subject of research; the latest to be 'managed,' and because it is jwestbro@sedLorg example of this is recent research designed to be used directly by persons conducted by Yale researchers Dykens with mental retardation rather than and Cohen on the "Effects of Special by third-parties such as caregivers." Write Us Olympics International on Social Working with Dr. Michael Wehmeyer, National Center for the Competence in Persons with Mental an Assistant Director in The Arc's Dissemination of Disability Research Southwest Educational Retardation." Department of Research and Program Development Laboratory SOI recently added a new Department Services, and Principal Investigator 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 of Policy and Research to its organization of the NIDRR research project, SOI Austin, Texas 78701-3281 with the primary purpose of conducting will conduct research using The Arc's and funding research to promote the Self-Determination Scale to evaluate physical and mental health of persons the impact of participation in integrated VisitUs with mental retardation through develop- recreation activities on social compe- In downtown Austin, Texas ing strategies such as community inclu- tence and individual self-determination. 4th floor, Southwest Tower, sion. Dr. Timothy Baker, SOI's Senior This research will provide an opportuni- Brazos at 7th St. 8 A.M.NOON and 1 Rm.-5 P.M. C.T. Research Manager and member of ty to further evaluate and expand the Mon.-Fri. (except holidays) the NCDDR Multicultural Research Scale's utility for adolescents and adults. and Dissemination Task Force, recently SOI is currently translating the Scale into learned about The Arc's NIDRR- the Russian, Czech, Arabic and Spanish funded Field Initiated Research Fax Us languages in order to conduct research 512-476-2286 project, "Promoting Choice and in seven countries. Further work may Self-Determination in Adults with also be on the horizon as The Arc and

Cognitive Disabilities" (CDFA 84.133, SOI discuss the viability of creating a Southwest Educational Development Laboratory PR #H133G50178). The project is being version of the Scale for elementary- 9CMINIDRR conducted by The Arc, the nation's age students. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research 82 V O L U M E 2 , N U M B E R 2 1 9 9 7

The Research Exchange isavailable in alternate formats upon request.

At a Glance Dissemination Evaluation You Can Evaluate Your Dissemination Efforts 1 Strategies and Options44 Dissemination Evaluation Strategies and Options 1 The evaluation ofyour NIDRR grant's dissemination activities can help you in: New NCDDR Product Dissemination Self Inventory 6 establishing credibility of your project's unique approaches and outcomes, Learning from Business and Industry demonstrating the effectiveness of your project's strategies, and Thinking about Ybur WWW Site: Can It be Evaluated? 7 learning more about what does and does not work, as well as allowing your efforts to be continually refined. NIDRI? Grantees Receive Recognition ..16 Bean Counting A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR You Can Evaluate Your Dissemination Efforts A good project design shouldaddress Unfortunately, many times grant projects only collect "tracking" information. the way in which the dissemination Sometimes this type of data collection is referred to as "bean counting." activities of your project will be Examples of this type of tracking data include such things as: evaluated. Evaluation is an important aspect of dissemination planning number of telephone contacts received per day; and implementation. Dissemination time of telephone contacts made per day; planning promotes your ability to telephone caller descriptive information; describe the impact and/or the changes that may have occurred number of items sent out by U.S. Mail or electronic mail; through the use of your project's number of items received by U.S. Mail, electronic mail, or fax; results. Many times, unfortunately, grantees do not conduct dissemination number of products ordered or purchased; evaluation activities, feeling they are how those making contact learned about your project; and too costly or take too much staff time. Not conducting evaluation of your how much time was spent in responding to each contact. dissemination, however, means that continued on page 2 63 continued on page 2 The Research Exchange

You Can Evaluate Your Dissemination Evaluation Strategies and Options Dissemination Efforts continued from page 1 continued from page 1 you will not know or be able to report Such tracking data are Developing an Effective with confidence your success in this limited in their ability important area. Many times grantees to assist in describing Evaluation Form state that "informally" they know the level of impact your their project is successful or that the dissemination efforts have Many times forms are used to collectinformation intended audience(s) received and had. These data can be relevant to evaluation questions. Forms canbe very useful, however, in regaled the project's disseminated used to collect information from projectstaff, establishing the level of information. Such informal assessment user groups, or thegeneral public. There are a interaction your project lacks the power to assist you in few things to consider when developingsuch staff members are deciding how you can improve your forms that can make their intendedresult more having with your target good success and it lacks credibility predictable. Briefly, these include: with many listeners since most audience(s). Very few grantees say it! contacts coming in or 1. Tailor your form to the specificdata'measures It is possible for you to do going out can reflect that are appropriate. dissemination evaluation that is not the basis of a potential 2.Design your form for specific data sources, overly burdensome. In fact, evaluation dissemination limitation. recognizing a need for special adaptation Extensive contacts in of your dissemination activities can or alternatives in formatsuch as audio or help you answer the question that is and out may indicate an Braille versions and the possible need for active information-sharing frequently asked of a growing number non-English versions. of publicly-funded projects: What exchange that tends difference have you made? In a very to support information 3.Consolidate items as much as possible. significant way, your project's ability dissemination. 4.Pre-test (and/or field test) yourform with a to answer this question rests in its Tracking information is sample of your target audience prior tofull ability to present information that typically collected through implementation. Make changes that seem shows beneficial impact within the use of forms. These warranted, and consider the benefit of a forms can be paper or your identified target audience(s). second field test. Because dissemination is the process electronic. The develop- by which you facilitate use of your ment and use of electronic 5.Configure your form and possible responses shared information, any measurable forms can be very benefi- in such a way that allows results tobe easily impact on users significantly cial in promoting easier entered into a computer database, aggregated reflects on the effectiveness of aggregation of data. and compared. your dissemination strategies. This issue of The Research Exchange provides information on assessment techniques that can help in collecting dissemination-related The Research Exchange, a newsletter to promote the effective dissemination and utilization of evaluation data. In addition, this disability research outcomes, is published quarterly by the National Center for the Dissemination issue comes along with a recent of Disability Research (NCDDR) which is operated by the Southwest Educational Development NCDDR publication, Dissemination Laboratory (SEDL). Neither SEDL nor the NCDDR discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, marital or veteran status, or the presence of a Self-Inventory. This newsletter disability. SEDL is an Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer and is committed to and the accompanying material, affording equal employment opportunities forallindividuals inall employment matters. The hopefully, provide information contents of this newsletter were developed under a grant (#H133D50016) of $500,000 per project year you can use in structuring from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of and implementing an effective Education (ED). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of SEDL, NIDRR, or the ED; do not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. dissemination evaluation strategy. © Copyright 1997 by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory John D. Westbrook An electronic version of The Research Exchange, Volume 2, Number 2 Director is available on the Internet at URL http://www.ncddr.org/ The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request.

John Westbrook Lin Harris Joann Starks Jane Thurmond BEST COPY AVAILABLE Director Information Services Technician Research Associate Graphic Design

2 The Research Exchange

Dissemination- Outcome Evaluationisdesigned quently possible in ongoing projects Related Evaluation to measure the effects of project to make adjustments so that the activities upon identified target audi- impact of dissemination is more There are four main types of ences. Outcomes can be measured clearly understood. in terms of changes/increases in evaluation activities that seem to As stated previously, your project's awareness, shifts in attitudes, be of general use in measuring ability to clearly identify and demon- changes in behaviors, and increases dissemination-related grantee efforts. strate its effect on people (other in knowledge, among others. A brief description of these follows. researchers, journalists, consumers, Outcome evaluation is helpful in consumers' family members, or others) Formative Evaluationoccurs identifying and measuring how your will increase the credibility and per- during the design period of project activities affected various seg- ceptions of effectiveness about the materials development or activity ments of your audience. This type strategies, interventions, and/or materi- implementation. These types of measurement usually establishes als that you have used or developed. of evaluation data address the baseline data before project activities It is important to be able to answer effectiveness and usefulness of are initiated, and then periodically as many of the following dissemina- approaches. It is applied to assesses for changes over time in tion-related evaluation questions materials or activities before they these same data areas. as possible: are considered to be "completed." Process Evaluationusually Formative evaluation data can help takes Were the project's materials deliv- place during the time new activities re-direct or refine activity strategies ered in the quantities and in the for- are being implemented. Process and/or material development efforts. mats desired by the target audience? evaluation is designed to help in The data source for formative evalu- determining changes in the efficien- Do members of your target ation efforts is frequently an appro- cy and effectiveness of the imple- audience report using your priate sub-sample of the intended materials or information? user audience that is not involved mentation process. This type of in the project's development evaluation analyzes the extent to Did your project receive and which planned activities occur, activity. To be most effective, respond to requests from the target formative evaluation requires clear their timeliness, their cost, and audience in a timely manner? the extent to which they reach alternatives with "potential users" intended audiences. How much did the dissemination commenting on what works best. efforts cost and was that adequate Impact Evaluationisintended to achieve the planned-for outcome? to provide information concerning Which of several options or the long-term result or impact of a Plan to Evaluate alternatives is most effective in project or activity. This type of eval- meeting the expressed needs of uation measures actual changes All too frequently, proposals do not specific target audiences? for example, the number of spinal include information about specific cord injuries in an annual period dissemination goals, goal-related Did the project make a difference rather than more subtle attitude dissemination activities, dissemination and, if so, what are the dimensions or behavior changes that may or budget, clearly defined dissemination of that difference? may not be linked to cause and target audiences, or dissemination- What changes in knowledge, atti- effect relationships with results. related evaluation activities. Without tude, behavior, or condition have Depending upon the nature of the this framework, dissemination efforts occurred in the target audience(s) result, impact evaluation can be become nothing more than distribution as a result of project activity? complex. It is often avoided plans. Evaluation of a project's dissem- because of the frequent difficulty ination process and outcomes is To what extent has each objective in many human-intensive, time- not possible unless goals, strategies, of the project's dissemination plan limited efforts to separate the effects and expected outcomes have been been accomplished? of project activities from the effects conceptualized. While this list is by no means of "outside" variables in producing Despite the lack of proposal plans comprehensive, it does indicate areas measured impact. regarding dissemination, it is possible in which evaluation of your project's to devise an effective dissemination efforts should be considered. plan as soon as funding decisions are made and initial implementation is occurring. In addition, it is also fre-

3 6`,) The Research Exchange

Using Focus Planning Details Collecting Groups in Your evaluation planning should involve Dissemination- Evaluation identifying specific evaluation questions Related to answer. After this has been done, however, you will need to clarify several Evaluation Data Focus groups can be extremely other "pieces" of the evaluation activity helpful in gaining perspectives that must be considered. These details There are many alternatives in both from your target audience. Basic of the evaluation planning process what and how evaluation activities will tips on planning and implementing apply to each evaluation question you be focused. Data collection strategies focus groups include: plan to answer. These include such will be influenced by the type of evaluation you are attempting to 1. Carefully select 8 to 10 individu- things as: conduct. Many of your dissemination- als that reflect the characteristics data sourcesidentify as clearly related evaluation efforts will necessarily of your designated target and precisely as possible where the involve sampling your designated audiences and have not been information relevant to answering the target audience(s). involved in your project's plan- evaluation question is located. Examples of strategies for collecting ning or implementation efforts. evaluation data should be individually If your audiences are very data measuresspecify the items considered for each evaluation question. diverse you may need multiple (data) that will be collected in the Some alternatives may be more time- focus groups. evaluation effort to answer the consuming, costly, difficult, or desirable evaluation questions. 2. Carefully detail the information than others. Tailor your collection you wish to learn from the timing of data collection strategies to that which you can do. focus group members. determine if sorne items may require Examples of such collection activities weekly or monthly collection while 3. Do not tell potential focus that you might consider include: others may be collected initially and Follow-uptelephone calls, group members about the topic annually thereafter. or the identity of other group Project tracking records of members in advance of the use of the informationconsider materials distribution, meeting. Tell contacts if you are how the answers to each of the paying a nominal fee for their evaluation questions will be used User-completed feedback cards participation in the focus group. by project staff, funding agency staff, included within materials, persons in the community, or others. 4. To increase the validity of your Survey of segments of your focus group results, conduct reporting timelinessusually, designated target audience(s), multiple focus groups aimed at the results of dissemination-related Focusgroups, the same information collection. evaluation efforts are reported. It is helpful to establish the extent and Project tracking of requests for 5. Present material or other the frequency of such reporting materials or services from the information in the same way in advance. designated target audience to each focus group. (including format, as appropriate), 6. Consider recording the audio Audit of materials and associated and/or video portions of the alternate formats developed by group discussion. the project, Project tracking of budget expendi- tures in dissemination activities, 1111% User-related data collected as a part m of field test or pilot test procedures, Newspaper clippings or other popular press documentation of target audience changes, and Number of "hits" or contacts made to your project's World Wide Web site.

4 The Research Exchange

Field Testing Your Sharing Your Summary Materials Evaluation Results The evaluation of your dissemination MDRR grantees that have produced It is important to document your evalu- activities and Outcomes is an impor- informational materials for others should ation efforts and results. Many times tant part of your NIDRR project effort. use some form of field testing to deter- this is done in the form of a report. It is through such evaluation that you mine how the materials meet the needs Such reporting provides an opportunity and NIDRR management can learn of the intended user/target groups. Data to disclose not only your dissemination more about the best strategies to from field testing can be collected in a planning, methods, and evaluation accomplish specific outcomes. The variety of ways such as those highlight- results, but also what the project did process of dissemination is so varied ed in the previous section, Collecting with the information. Any ways in and complex that evaluation on an Dissemination-Related Evaluation Data. which evaluation data were helpful in ongoing basis is needed to help in You should outline questions that you making modifications enhancing effec- determining the level and nature of want answered as a function of the tiveness, or utility of your results should your progress in achieving outreach field test activity. Questions should be be reported. to various potential user groups. specific enough to provide information Consider the following as points to Without good evaluation of your you can use to make modifications to include in reporting your dissemination dissemination efforts, you will never the materials. activity evaluation effort: really know the extent of your impact. Your field testing should also capture information about the medium you have Describe both the strengths and the weaknesses that you discovered selected to communicate. Provide the Each grantee must be prepared information in several formatsfor through the evaluation; to respond to the often-asked example, print, electronic disk, and Identify any specific outcomes World Wide Web page. Have your field that were a result of your project question, test participants comment on which for- activities; mat they used to receive the information and what they thought about the func- Recommend changes or modifica- tional capacity of the other formats. All tions, or further data collection that may be appropriate; formats are not equal in their power to communicate. You should be aware of Address the extent to which funding What the difference these formats can make and staff time commitment affected with your intended user groups. the activities and/or results of the This is also important if you are project; doing outreach to new user groups or you are using general media to create a Identify specific ways in which your designated target audience was ddference broad-based awareness of the availabili- ty of your information. Awareness of impacted by your project's dissemi- nation efforts; your project as an informational source and awareness of specific information Identify the extent to which your topics that can be shared through con- projects' dissemination results varied tacting your project, can be considered according to the variables of: user didyour for wider public campaigns. If this is a group, content, context, medium, part of your dissemination plan, it and information source; and should be subject to field testing and Describe any "next steps" that seem further evaluation after it is conducted. to be appropriate, based upon your evaluation. project make?

6 5 The Research Exchange New NCDDR Product Disseini"" Dissemination self-wow" sloPO4

Self-Inventory The thp Oleemonmilon Os DIN toccop "...... "':"...*:"...1."": ,.....w."...... ,,,,...... :,...... "'""."'...."'"'..'..-- '''''...... The NCDDR has Self Inventory Form: LITILII=11M la ...... *.._,,.....,,.r...... -- Relative Dissemination Strengths and Weaknesses ...am-...... 1. Oces roar naes. Ors. 0....*"._,...,,...... ""...... " produced a new OM, of cacao. al .",...... "--....,,,....*,...... l'erslors One ;-,...... "'",,,...... ""_,...... " eavemb resource for NIDRR aleraaa Yea P.M aloe aaaa Instructions rata la la mar ea= for completing your SetHerentory grantees that are tar Rap ael by nada Raab la betean Pa Nif ...... "%,...... 0...... voa peal ei paal am a/ a rdarcam be e a.* lantaa *Gala yap oterne. ..." __.... el eaba. cr pate gob dam* ...... saa .".." interested in assess- apae Noah ea a ao ale pahla be...... "'"...-- : ...... al .....a...'-...... qaa.. Inlerralan lave la ay ea te that In tam el ya abet. alaavesea os on Wawa arte. oro Pa acy. alma e. alba pea. olisembetlee *bah Or a ay ael ing dissemination nava ler area a balea a. aca. the ...... 7pgabta."'" .....".1 Ya..."...... - ona. iv mean. *ea Rae. Po aos ealbeembatlen *Pee at yea a tab be as. a at masa neebs. Ofthe activities and identi- aware ef la" own...... P...."..j...... * rdeaa..". ear Rea ehe eaca ech I. =eatable. al an Pea be aeletal b ..... 3"IrbOrLee,...... P.a. a a booaer poa al. a a Waal* When yam bola an Oa Roane...... a. Pa la . fying a starting point yams nava or raga ea* Po a a.. dace* at ae al el ..e. Oa. eledea et the Pease a ea et eta a latedye ata ace detaa. Mee wade la. am era in improving overall dcala mast a bo alrobad te the aph pable en MP "T" Rencaal Ceralereas m envie nem mar* ono. ICY fajta, 014211.1 pupa alcaped b er,a, anew. me *mem mom o non a a your area anal mama, Rae/ dissemination strate- am Iv uma of ye tuna a le ea earerca paa cee *mom me...en in* mime gies. The current taw ihe *or pact mane mane mr neene ha. ra me a ea Rasa eza Scaoteg losabl . ease. be ha ebei Ma nava wet bongo balsenellen bodesese inventory represents ONWVeern 42_ hena ea *aeon a arade .60 tam boa, Raab sea ea a* w2n16.] me, Ylloym ame. the first in a series of a bac apaes 6° et*tha apsp.2 a near abb aarbeese I Hao aeotace mead el ar babe a Rea eachee ape, a ...a _rne av on ea. an artegruny eided pace cam* a m.emy three. The ftrst self- WNW ible away b lat.Inaba It hes lea aeretabe te aboamal vela . inventory is based Sae Raba aka Yew It* a age 3 = ler as Ma be Pa*. dbealesta tea on the scholarly liter- pat. Weed *0N.0 a Mad Se to Yea awe earta coolaea NONOO dt* atIce end yea orb Pa Maw ature concerning dis- a a* *to aif the loae ad a away boa R. ay.. Rae sea* ad semination, knowl- aetlenb a ape b etbeate Pada edge utilization, and abed Isealnalan eat. the change process. The second version of this self-inventory (scheduled for inventory in identifying clear areas in Medium of the message completion in 1998) will include best which actions may be appropriate the ways in which the information practice examples taken from business and beneficially undertaken. The self- is described, "packaged," and and industry public relations and mar- inventory is designed to allow the transmitted; and keting efforts. The third version of this respondent to chart results and as a Contextual consideration self-inventory will combine the two consequence, identify the relative previous areas with best practices strengths and weaknesses of your for implementationthe taken from public relations and mar- project's efforts in dissemination. environmental, personal, financial, keting firms specializing in outreach to The 54-item self-inventory uses the and other supports needed to minority Americans. The combination areas shown to be critically linked to use the information. of these three major dissemination the effectiveness of dissemination References and other resources tracks in one instrument should create activities. The major categories of to assist grantees in addressing or a helpful tool for NIDRR grantees. dissemination-related inventory understanding categories of the The NCDDR staff believe that no items are: self-inventory are included. A total matter how good a dissemination User group (or target of 78 citations are included in the effort may be, it can always be references section of the self-inventory. audience)actualand potential improved. This is the spirit with users of the information that is These are divided into the major which the self-inventory was devel- disseminated; categories identified above and, oped. It is designed to provide in addition, a general references assistance in analyzing relative Information sourcethe section is included. strengths and weaknesses of developer and disseminator of A copy of the NCDDR Dissemination current, actual dissemination efforts. the information; Self-Inventory is included with this issue As a self-inventory, the instrument Content of messagenew of The Research Exchange. Alternate can be used by the Principal formats and additional copies may information along with any Investigator alone or by all staff be requested from the NCDDR. supporting information or resources; working on a project. This flexibility adds to the potential power of the BEST COPYAVAILABLE 6 The Research Exchange Learning from Business and Industry Thinking about Your WWW Site: Can It be Evaluated? Asurvey of 1,000 commercial World Approximately 95 percent of the Fitzelle and Trochim (1996) have Wide Web (WWW) sites was conducted 1,000 commercial sites studied studied factors related to university by the University of Illinois at Chicago included elements oflogistical student's perceptions of useful, helpful in May 1996. The survey attempted to promotion.This is the most frequent websites. Characteristics identified by categorize how the commercial sites use of commercial sites. these users include such things as: were classified. Basic categories While this type of evaluation seems the extent to which the site improves describing sites were: perhaps simplistic, Trochim (1996) has generic computing skills through the promotionof products or services, pointed out: incorporation of such things as useful, related links to other websites; and provisionof data and information; It is surprising given the importance involvement of users in contributing and/or of this technology and the resources to a knowledge base. that are being committed to imple- processingof business transactions. menting it [the World Wide Web], whether or not the is updated These functional categories of sites that there has been so little effort to regularly and is accessible (considered were further described in terms of the date to evaluate it. There is a to be responsive to user's needs); "values" reflected in the creation of the remarkable absence of studies that the perception of information site. These included such things as: examine how websites are concep- included on the website as being tualized, developed, and imple- timelinesswithin the context of a comprehensive; mented, or that look at the effects special sale, special offers, or product of their use. In the haste to con- the ability of the website to link users announcements; struct the World Wide Web we have with "experts" in the topical area(s) customizationof database to items simply not had the time to evaluate addressed by the website; and and reflect on how this technology of interest; the extent to which the website is is being accomplished and the logisticsincluding price lists, online adaptable to different learning styles effects it is having on the way catalogs, and online access (ordering of the users. we live, perform in our jobs, and system); and interact with our environment. NIDRR grantees should be aware of sensationalpurposes such as the different ways in which the utility of Many challenges exist in trying to contests, sweepstakes, or giveaways. websites can be ,described and evaluat- describe why websites are developed ed. Over half of all NTDRR grantees now The study conducted by James K. Ho and in trying to determine if usage of maintain a website. All grantees should revealed several interesting findings the website is producing measurable incorporate evaluation of their website about how business is now using the and intended results. Generally, there is activities and its impact in their overall WWW technology: agreement that websites are developed dissemination evaluation. to address one or more of the following: To users, most of the sites are consid- ered to be in thepromotioncatego- information dissemination, ry. Most of the strategies taken are education and training, References traditionalin the logistics area Ho, J. K. (1996). Evaluating the World using product news, catalogs, and commerce and advertising, Wide Web: A study of 1000 commercial portfolios as the basic approach. entertainment, and/or sites [Online]. Available: http:// www.uic.edu/-jimho/www1000.html The major difference, however, with -communications. the WWW marketing approach and Fitzelle, G. & Trochim, W.K. (1996) that used in the mass media is that Specific ways in which websites can be Survey evaluation of web site instruction- the user has better control over what evaluated for effectiveness depend on al technology: Does it increase he or she views. the: original design or concept for the student learning? [Online]. Available: site; the way in which the site's content http://trochim.human.cornell.edu/ Commercial sites are usingprovision information was developed; the manner, webeval/webeval.htm functions of sites much less than the through which the site was implemented promotionfunctions. Surprisingly, Trochim, W.K. (1996). Evaluating using text, graphics, and other compo- use of the WWW inprocessing websites [Online]. Available: nents; and the extent to which a site is http://trochim.human.cornell.edu/ business transactions is largely appraised for effectiveness by its users. webeval/webeval.htm undeveloped.

7 bii The Research Exchange NIDRR Grantees Receive Recognition

The NCDDR would liketo congratulate Dr. Diana D. Cardenas, Project Director each of the following grantees for the of the Northwest Regional Spinal Cord recognition of their efforts. For each item, Injury System, University of Washington, How To Contact we have identified the NIDRR-funded has been appointed to a three-year term The National project name; the award, citation, or on the National Institute of Child Health recognition; and the name of the and Human Development (NICHD) Center For The Principal Investigator or contact for Initial Review Group's new Medical Dissemination Of further information, with telephone Rehabilitation Research Subcommittee. number and e-mail addresses. All NIDRR The committee will advise the directors of Disability Research grantees are encouraged to contact the the National Institutes of Health and the NCDDR with information to share in NICHD on rehabilitation-related research, future issues of The Research Exchange. and will review applications for awards and grants relating to research and Michelle Averbuch and Jim Hibler, research training in rehabilitation medi- Physical Therapists with the RRTC on cine. Dr. Cardenas also received the New Call Us Enhancing Qnality of Life of Stroke Jersey Medical School's 1996 National 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 V/TF Survivors of the Rehabilitation Institute Teaching Award in Physical Medicine 8 A.M.-NOON and 1 P.M.-5 P.M. C.T. Research Corporation/Rehabilitation and Rehabilitation, and was named to Mon.Fri. (except holidays) or record a message 24 hr./day Institute of Chicago were recently the Institute of Medicine's Committee honored. They won the Sarah Basquin on Assessing Rehabilitation Science and Award in June, 1996, in the Allied Health Engineering, which advises the Federal Group area of a Northwest University government on public health policy medical competition. Mr. and Mrs. Sol matters. For more information contact Explore Our Web Site Rosen, parents of Sarah Basquin, a former Dr.. Cardenas at 206-543-8171 or e-mail: http://www.ncddr.org/ E-mail Us patient at the center, donated the funds [email protected] [email protected] for the award in her memory. The "NO winning paper, "Effects of Aerobic Dr. Catherine A. Marshall, Director Conditioning on Young Persons Post- of Research for the American Indian Stroke," is being published. Please contactRehabilitation Research and Training Write Us Linda Lovell, Project Coordinator, at Center (MRRTC) at Northern Arizona National Center for the 312-908-6197 for additional information. University, has been selected for a Dissemination of Disability Research "Id Fulbright Scholar award beginning Southwest Educational Dr. Laura Blankertz, Director of in January 1997. Administered by the Development Laboratory 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 Research of the RRTC on Vocational U. S. Information Agency, the principal Austin, Texas 78701-3281 Rehabilitation and Mental Illness, purpose of the Fulbright program is to University of Pennsylvania, received the increase mutual understanding between Armin Loeb Award in June, 1996. The the people of the United States and award, named after an early psychosocial the people of other countries through VisitUs researcher, is given annually by the educational and cultural exchanges. In downtown Austin, Texas International Association of Psychosocial Dr. Marshall will continue her work 4th floor, Southwest Tower, Rehabilitation Services to a researcher in Oaxaca, Mexico which has been Brazos at 7th St. who has made outstanding contributions 8 A.M.-NOON and 1 P.M .-5 P.M. C.T. sponsored for three years by the U. S. Mon.Fri. (except holidays) to the field and to the development of its Department of Education as supplemental research capacity. Dr. Blankertz has been funding to the MRRTC. Over a nine instrumental in developing a set of out- month period, she will research the come measures, the Toolkit for Measuring effectiveness of consumer participation Fax Us Psychosocial Rehabilitation Outcomes, in conducting community-based rehabili- 512-476-2286 that can be used by all psychosocial tation research and will teach an interdis- providers to report on program effective- ciplinary graduate course on world views ness and to structure research efforts. of disability. For further information,

For information about the availability contact the AIRRTC (Project Director, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory of the Toolkit, contact the IAPRS at Dr. Priscilla Sanderson) at 520-523-4791. SenINIDRR 410-730-7190. Dr. Blankertz can be Dr. Marshall's e-mail through September, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research reached at 215-438-8200. 1997: [email protected] Researc Excliange

VOLUME 2, NUMBER 3 1 9 9 7

The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request.

At a Glance Model Spinal Cord Injury A Word from the Director Model Spinal Cord Injury System WWW Gateway System WWW Gateway NIDRR's Online Grantees URL Directory 3 NIDRR currently funds eighteen Phase One: National Association of Rehabilitation projects that constitute its Model MSCIS Program Information Research and Training Centers Spinal Cord Injury Model System Plan WWW Gateway 4 (MSCIS) Program. MSCIS project History of NIDRR's MSCIS MDRR Disability Research Gateways4 . directors meet twice a year to discuss Research Program their individual and overall progress MSCIS Project National Assessing the Connnunication and challenges. The NCDDR director Power of Your WWW Site 6 Electronic Map was invited to discuss the subject of MSCIS Program Search Engine NIDRR Grantees and Staff dissemination with this group at its 7 WWW Links to MSCIS Receive Recognition December 1996 meeting. MSCIS Projects Online projects have organized themselves around committees that address Special MSCIS Information Resources A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR specific types of issues. The MSCIS (Such as the Intervention Database, Dissemination Committee addresses Bibliography, and the National Gateways to ways in which spinal cord injury Spinal Cord Injury Statistics Center) NIDRR's Disability information and related data can Information about NIDRR be usefully made available to those Research who can use it. Discussions between Phase Two: When the National Center for the the NCDDR and the Dissemination MSCIS Project Resources and Dissemination of Disability Research Committee began an effort to build (NCDDR) began its work in the summer a gateway on the WWW that would Services of 1995, approximately twenty percent of display the nature and scope of MSCIS Project News NIDRR's grantees had World Wide Web NIDRR's MSCIS and also would begin Highlights of MSCIS Project Findings (WWW) sites. Today, in the summer of to establish a common outlet that Commentary from People 1997, over half of all NIDRR grantees could be used by MSCIS projects Involved/Treated by an MSCIS have active WWW sites. Approximately to disseminate information they felt Project 20 percent (25 out of 130 grantees) of was relevant. the remaining grantees indicate that they Working cooperatively with the Commentary from the Leadership have plans to establish a WWW site in MSCIS Dissemination Committee, of the MSCIS Program Association the next 12-month period. initial "drafts" of the informational Text and Graphic Illustrations First of all, one has to be struck with components were developed. These Representing Consumer Information the rate of growth of WWW sites among were categorized into three phases (such as Skin Care, Bowel NIDRR grantees. With the majority of for development purposes. Management, etc.) grantees "up" on the WWW, a new set of opportunities for the dissemination of continued on page 2 continued on page 2 The Research Exchange continued from page 1 Model Spinal Cord Injury System WWW Gateway disability research information present themselves. Second, the rate of growth is continued from page 1 phenomenal when considering that, for the most part, this growth has been at the option of the grantee. In other Phase Three: words, few NIDRR funding priorities MSCIS Information About Spinal Cord Injury have required the applicant to develop a WWW site. Rather, it is the case that Spinal Cord 3-D Imaging applicants have viewed a presence Spinal Cord Injury Fact Sheets on the WWW to have its own benefits Excerpts from Relevant Spinal Cord Injury Training/Information Video Productions and it has often become an applicant's option in developing a more competitive proposal. It is also the case that many At the Summer 1997 meeting of the MSCIS, the full membership was oriented to current NIDRR grantees have developed the current status of the gateway. Most parts associated with phases one and two WWW sites without mention of such have been initiated. The orientation provided an opportunity to show this type of sites in their original proposal. gateway system as a way in which MSCIS projects can show their unique contribu- The proliferation of the WWW and tions to the accepted treatment and management of spinal cord injury. The Chair grantees' sites on the WWW brings of the Dissemination Committee is Bruce Becker, M.D., Principal Investigator of challenges in effectively organizing the Model Spinal Cord Injury System at the Rehabilitation Institute of Michigan. NIDRR-funded disability research informa- Dr. Becker made these comments about the effort to date: tion. The NCDDRwith its mandate to increase dissemination of NIDRR grantee We are exciied about the opportunities that the web research resultsis in the process of gateway offers to the members of the model systems developing NIDRR Disability Research Topics Gateways. While the pioneering in communication. More importantly, the site offers an efforts of this work are using the WWW as opportunity for the external world to understand the the primary medium, the accumulated dis- ongoing efforts of the model systems to improve health ability research information will be made care for spinal injured patients, to access information available in multiple formats and will be arising from within each of the model systems research sorted for use in many different ways. This issue of The Research Exchange highlights and educational programs, and to provide, input to help the work to date of the NCDDR on these shape thd systems of the future. 99 gateways. It is my hope that as these gateways take shape, individual NIDRR grantees will see how pieces of their work/results can fit into the larger infor- mational system and will bring it forward to the NCDDR staff for inclusion. Our common challenge into the future is to make NIDRR's disability research The Research Exchange, a newsletter to promote the effective dissemination and utilization of information as accessible and available as disability research outcomes, is published quarterly by the National Center for the Dissemination possible. In this new age of the WWW, of Disability Research (NCDDR) which is operated by the Southwest Educational Development it does not matter where the electronic Laboratory (SEDL). Neither SEDL nor the NCDDR discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, information may be "housed." What does creed, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, marital or veteran status, or the presence of a disability. SEDL is an Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer and is committed to matter is whether a potential user will affording equal employment opportunities for allindividuals inall employment matters. The have to diligently investigate and try contents of this newsletter were developed under a grant (#H133D50016) of $500,000 per project year many non-useful alternatives before from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of arriving at the information needed. Education (ED). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of SEDL, NIDRR, or The NCDDR does not intend to duplicate the ED; do not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. what any other NIDRR grantee has © Copyright 1997 by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory established via their website. The An electronic version of The Research Exchange, Volume 2, Number 3 NCDDR does hope to centralize is available on the Internet at URL http://www.ncddr.org/ NIDRR's disability research information in a new way that is helpful and useful The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request. to consumer and researcher alike. John Westbrook Lin Harris Joann Starks Jane Thurmond Director Information Services Technician Research Associate Graphic Design John D. Westbrook, Ph.D. Director 2 72 BEST COPYAVAILABLE The Research Exchange

A member of the Dissemination Committee, Lesley M. Hudson, M.A., Co-Project Director of the Georgia Regional Spinal Cord Injury Care System, has this to say NIDRR's about the new gateway:

66In spite of the fact that the model system program is over Online 25 years old, it has always remained current by embracing emerging technology that enhances its function. With the Grantees URL www opportunity, the 18 currently funded systems can truly work as one system nationwide. Information can be shared very quickly, dialogue will be facilitated, and feedback can be Directory instantaneous. This should encourage an acceleration of the work of the model system and increase its efficiency. External This issue of The Research Exchange of to the system itself, the www provides a new and eXciting comes to you with a directory addresses of websites being main- opportunity to disseminate information gathered over nearly tained by NIDRR grantees. This direc- thme decades. The possibilities are virtually endless!!! 99 tory will be updated annuallyby the NCDDR due to the fact that this infor- The NCDDR's Project Officer, Ellen Blasiotti, states the following about this mation rapidly becomes outdated. example of gateway development: The NCDDR staff hope that this booklet is useful to you in highlight- " It is a great pleasure to see the information 'gateway' concept ing sites that you may not have take shape with the MSCIS. Hopefully, this is only the begin- known were available. If you, as a NIDRR grantee, develop a WWW site, ning of a series of information activities that will significantly please let us know and we will add enrich NIDRR's dissemination efforts. Through the exceptional your site to this directory. work of the NCDDR and the Model Spinal Cord Injury System The directory is divided into the projects, a dynamic collaboration has taken place, which is major funding programs of NIDRR. increasing the flow of information about research, not onlY Each entry provides: among SCI colleagues, but within the larger rehabilitation and the WWW URL for the site, research communities, and with the public. the NIDRR grant name, The 'gateway' concept is a 'win-win-win' proposition. First, the grantee organization name. and it is a powerful tool to use in presentthg the topics of rehabil- the grantee organization's address. itation research to the public in a new way. With its various levels of information and its links to many resources, the 'gateway' can practically become a self-guided tour of as little National or as much information as the consumer desires. Second, for Institute researchers, it provides a place to showcase the results of and Rehabilitationon Disability (NIDRR) Research research in an untraditional venue and with richer descrip- Grantees' (World tion. Lastly, the 'gateway' allows NIDRR to combine the Zh. NM/ bide SITE results of individual projects to show the world a 'patchwork (nC00:::"..fth *0 AnIZR.rehn, The, on the quilt' of information that, organized and presented over time, um..--""" reel, it 48.

will make evident the patterns of the NIDRR research invest- MnAR MOM, Rehaby.... ment as a whole. " DU 4lans,"4.elm.ch AILDRIi hqtc _ M. Rek..1., MSRARad4nee, . 4,14,,3 OMR° moe. . The MSCIS Gateway has recently been activated and you can access it via the. P'*et. 'n'Re neee, WWW at the following URL: new°,

Nzo,th " http://www.ncddr.org/mscis/ %wee,

oak, This site continues to grow and develop through the participation of MSCIS TR,ZZahl .4 project staff.All members of the MSCIS will be oriented to the website this "MU summer and will begin to suggest additions to the gateway, through the Werr leadership of the Dissemination Committee. MST COPY AVAILABLE 373 The Research Exchange National Association of NIDRR Disability Rehabilitation Research Gateways Research and Training Centers In the Summer of 1996, the NCDDR solicited from allgrantees nominations of results of their NIDRR grant work that were considered to be in need of further dissemina- Plan WWW tion. In response to this request the NCDDR received a total of 266 nominations.

Gateway The results nominated by grantees represented a wide variety of product types: NCDDR staff were invited to make a staff development presentation at 16.1% 17.2% the recent meeting of the National General Awareness Books, Chapters, and Papers Association of Rehabilitation Research Materials Books and Training Centers (NARRTC). This Abstracts Chapters in Books presentation focused on principles of Book Reviews Paper Presentations effective dissemination, patterns of Brochures Concept Papers past dissemination, and resources Fact Sheets Conference Proceedings available to grantees to assist in Newsletters Working Papers development and implementation (43 items) (46 Items) of their dissemination plans. The NARRTC has indicated a desire to work with the NCDDR to create a 21.6% 10.1% gateway on the WWW that will focus Training Materials Mediated Materials on their unique membership and Curricula Audiotape accomplishments. Development of Handbooks Videotape these gateways will include compo- Guidelines CD-ROM nents discussed earlier for the MSCIS Training Modules Database but will also include features such as: Workbooks WWW Pages enhancement of the current Design Booklets Software project descriptions/abstracts to (58 Items) Electronic Library improve the ability of the NCDDR (27 Items) search engine to distinguish between projects and facilitate 6.7% more appropriate sorting within 10.4% the search process Reports Journals Annual Reports participation in the development Journal Articles Final Reports of a typology of "outcomes" that may represent the scope Journal Special Issues Other Reports (18 Items) of results/accomplishments that (26 Items) are realized through the NIDRR- 16.4% funded program as a whole 1.5% Miscellaneous investigation of the extent to which Aids/Devices Radio Interviews experimental designs and Technological Aids Test Materials "tentative" conclusions can Assistive/Adaptive Devices, Survey Instruments be advantageously shared with Related Technologies Discussion Groups consumers, family members of (4 Items) (44 Items) consumers, or other researchers Progress in this development effort will be reported in future issues. The majority of results nominated had not been formally reviewed/evaluated Individuals wishing to comment on by users. The primary request for assistance described by the nominators was the development of this and other for development of a press release, with no particular outlet for the press release gateways are encouraged to contact specified. This may have been due to the use of a press release as an example in the NCDDR staff. the solicitaiton materials.

4 74 The Research Exchange

It became clear to NCDDR staff that the production of such press releases would The development of these disability not have the desired effect described by many grantees. For example, some grantees research topical gateways reflects a way had specific populations of people that they felt would benefit from the information, of capturing information. The gateways, others specified associations or organizations that were perceived to have interest/use although developed on the WWW, will for the result. In most cases, however, grantees had not identified definable popula- also be made available in other formats tions who would receive benefit from the result. These and other factors caused the in a variety of configurations depending NCDDR staff to consider ways in which NIDRR-funded "splintered information" could upon the informational need. Once be aggregated into more of a whole. And, the NCDDR staff was concerned with ways a critical mass of this information in which disability research information developed through NIDRR funding could be has been entered, the informational more visible to wider groups of audiences that may be able to use the information. base could be used in a variety of These considerations prompted the NCDDR to develop the concept of NIDRR ways including: Disability Research Topics Gateways. These gateways will serve as a centralized point development of press releases for from which a person can search and locate grantees and/or grantee results that are background and related information related to their informational need. The system is organized around three "levels" of often needed by journalists; information. Conceptually these levels are demonstrated in the graphic Disability incorporation into informational and Information Gateways. The informational gateway system is designed around three awareness material being developed vertically and horizontally linked components. Briefly described these are: by grantees; used online to assist in answering NIDRR Disability Research Topics Gateways consumer questions more rapidly

LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 and with other information or referral activities; General Information NIDRR Research Results Related Information for Your Use development of presentations, poster User-friendly Information developed by a* Related research supporting finding sessions, or articles dealing with consumer-oriented NIDRR Grantee that supports current NIDRR research results; statement/synthesis the synthesis statement ce* Data sets produced by Grantee used by consumers and researchers of major research to learn more about NIDkR funded LINK findings or ast* Tables and other data activities and results; and knowledge Information developed by used by NIDRR researchers as a NIDRR Grantee that supportsenk Illustrations/graphics of effects free-of-charge way to access new the synthesis statement audiences in new ways. E s, Audio/visual representations LINK It is hoped that NIDRR grantees will view the developing information Information developed by Ego 3-0 images gateways as a new avenue for dissemi- NIDRR Grantee that supports nation of your NIDRR grant results. the synthesis statement retfr Consumer Case Study/Feedback Information on your W\XW site can be linked via these gateways to create a Thissection This section will provide This section can provide a new way of organizing disability provides a information developed variety of information that research information. For those grantees summary or by one or more NIDRR relates to the NIDRR Research without WWW sites, this information synthesis of grantees. This section Results. For example, the gateway alternative provides a new out- NIDRR research provides more information section could include related let that you can use in your outreach in a particular related to the previous research (not NIDRR-funded) effort. Most importantly, through the area. It is General Information. or databases of NIDRR participation of all NIDRR grantees, intended to grantee's raw data, tables or these information gateways can produce be free of other graphic representations a unique and innovative approach to jargon and of grantee's results; audio- information dissemination. user-friendly. visual "snippets" to reinforce/ expand understanding; 3-D imaging of particular items; and/or feedback from con- sumers or reactions by other researchers to NIDRR grant results. Links to related infor- mation developed by OSEP or RSA grantees and others can be added at this level.

5P'ib' The Research Exchange Assessing the Communication Power of Your WWW Site A variety ofways exist to examine Visitors to websites can be asked for Focus Groupsthisstrategy can your World Wide Web (WWW) site. In information about their "visit." Using be used to obtain fairly detailed infor- fact, a thriving industry has developed forms, e-mail, and other accessible mation about user perceptions and with consultants and independent formats for obtaining this information, also generate ideas about new or agencies that, for a fee, will analyze visitors might be asked: improved features of your site. and evaluate your WWW site. Given How much did you enjoy your visit Benchmark Comparisonthis the current and projected future use to our website? strategy allows website developers of WWW sites, all of us should be Were you confused at any point (and others) to compare several sites measuring the "communication power" during your visit? that are similar in their purpose, ori- of our WWW Sites. Did you become frustrated in entation, and target audience. This What factors can be used in measur- navigating our site at any point? type of comparison allows for devel- ing "communication power?" The fol- opers to project areas in which their Did you find your visit to be useful lowing represent areas or dimensions site could be generally improved or a waste of time? of your WWW sites that can be used and/or made more accessible. in structuring evaluation activities. What did you find to be most useful The primary information source for and least useful in the site? Concept mapping can also be used as the majority of these evaluation efforts Did our website meet or exceed a tool in evaluating websites. Generally is the current users and the target your expectations? speaking, conceptual mapping for the audience(s) of your WWW site. What was your level of satisfaction purpose of website evaluation simply WWW site evaluation can address with the site? provides an activity-base for convening the following areas: Would you return to our website? a wide array of stakeholders that may Content of Your WWW Site find your website useful from their var- ied perspectives. The activity of the con- Ease of Navigation Your website is creating an impression of your project and your organization as vened group is to "map out" the content Visual Attractiveness a whole. Use of visitor sampling is a way of your website and determine the rela- Organization of WWW Site to sense how others perceive the com- tive importance of the components from Information munication power of your WWW site. their individual perspectives. Concept Interactive Dimensions such as Evaluation data reveal relative strengths mapping can also be used to elicit infor- Chat Rooms and weaknesses of your site. Experience mation from stakeholders concerning Search Engine Availability teaches that websites must be dynamic, their expectations for your website and Graphics, Audio, Video, ever-changing entities to retain their how well these expectations have been Animation Components positive impression on users. met by your website to date. Statistical analyses of the resulting data can display Accessibility Provisions There are several strategies that can be used to collect data concerning relationships between the "concepts" Uniqueness, Innovativeness, mentioned by the stakeholders. and Currency of Information your site. Four basic methods have proven effective: Many sites employ a traditional sur- Links Within and Out of Site User-Behavior Trackingthisstrate- vey approach to gather information from Forms, Electronic Mail, and Other gy measures how much time users of visitors to their websites. These website Methods for Interacting with your site are spending at each loca- forms can gather any of the data men- Website Personnel tion, What features they are using, tioned earlier or can focus on particular what paths ther are choosing to move parts of your website that you might through the site, and where they came particularly want to learn more about. from. This strategy requires special As use of the WWW increases, it software and may require consultant becomes more important for us to eval- assistance. uate the degree of effectiveness the medium has for your target audiences. Online User Surveythisstrategy Website evaluation is an activity that can be effective in requesting or merits increased attention from all who requiring users to give some feedback create and maintain sites on the WWW. information about their perception of specific features of your site.

6 The Research Exchange NIDRR Grantees and Staff Receive Recognition

The NCDDR congratulates each of "...his visionary work, dedicated efforts Larry Goldberg, Principl the following NIDRR grantees or staff and steadfast commitment.on behalf of Investigator for CPB/WGBH's members. All NIDRR grantees are individuals and families who experience Motion Picture Access H project, encouraged to contact the NCDDR brain injury." Dr. Gordon can be contact- can be reached at (617) 492-2777 with information to share in future ed at (212) 241-7917 or by e-mail: or via e-mail at issues of The Research Exchange. [email protected] larry_goldberggwgbh.org Dr. Richards is Director of Research oNio Dr. Katherine D. Seehnan, Ph.D., at the RRTC in Secondary Complica- Researchers at Meeting the Challenge, Director of the National Institute on tions in Spinal Cord Injury, Spain Inc. have been honored for the second Disability and Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Center, at the University consecutive year by the Colorado Research (NIDRR), was chosen to of AlabamaBirmingham. In December, Chapter of the Technology Transfer address the Sixth International World 1996 Dr. Richards was awarded Society for work done in transferring Wide Web Conference (WWW6) in Diplomate status by the American Small Business Initiative Research (SBIR) Santa Clara, California, on April 6, 1997. Board of Rehabilitation Psychology. results into technology products. This This forum was used to launch the Web For more information, contact him year's award is for PocketCoach, a hand- Accessibility Initiative (WAD, which is at (205) 934-3454 or by e-mail: held audio prompting device that was coordinated by the World Wide Web [email protected] developed through research sponsored Consortium (W3C). The project will oNo by the NIDRR. Researchers Daniel K. guide the development of industry- The May 19, 1997 edition of US. Davies (Transition AbleAide: sponsored specifications for accessibility News and World Report Online A Needs-Based Computer System of software programs and technology featured an article called "Catching for Matching Assistive Technology that will use the Internet as a means of Sight of the Web" It is found on and Home Automation Devices to communications. Interest also has been the World Wide Web at: Students Transitioning from Schonl received from several European nations http://www.usnews.comiusnews/ to Adult Life Project) and Steven E. and trade organizations in supporting nycuiblinhigh.htm Stock (MenuCoach: A Multimedia the project. The project is jointly funded The online story is specially designed Software Tool to Enhance by the Federal government, several with large print, real audio, color combi- Independence and Knowledge in foundations and the technology nations and text to try to accommodate Menu Planning, Grocery Shopping, industry, represented by the top 150 the blind or low-vision user. To comple- Meal Preparation, and General international technology corporations ment the story, a "resources" section has Nutrition for Individuals with that comprise the W3C. NIDRR/OSERS been added which includes a mention of Developmental Disabilities Project) and the National Science Foundation ABLEDATA, and acknowledges that it is were at the Denver Museum of Natural are the principal Federal participants sponsored by the Department of History in January of 1997 to receive the in this project. Education's National Institute on award. The two men accepted the same Disability and Rehabilitation award in 1996 on behalf .of Meeting the NIDRR-funded researchers Dr. Wayne Research. The US. News site links to Challenge for developing Phase I and II Gordon and Dr. Scott Richards other NIDRR-supported grantees such as SBIR projects into MoneyCoach, a multi- were appointed to the National Center the Trace Center and WGBH, as well as media budgeting and checkbook man- for Medical Rehabilitation Research other resources. agement software program for persons (NCMRR) Study Section in late 1996. Lynn Halverson is Principal with developmental disabilities. Meeting The purpose of this_expert group is to Investigator for ABLEDATA and can the Challenge is the only company review grant applications and make be reached at (301) 572-0477 or by to ever receive more than one award funding suggestions to the NCMRR. e-mail at [email protected] from the Society, and the only company Dr. Gordon, Principal Investigator Gregg Vanderheiden, Ph.D. is ever to receive an award for work of the Rehabilitation Research and Principal Investigator of the RERC done in the disability field. For more Training Center on the Community on Adaptive Computers and information, call Meeting the Challenge, Integration of Individuals with Information Systems and Inc. at (719) 444 0252, or send Traumatic Brain Injury at Mount Sinai Understanding and Increasing the e-mail to Daniel Davies at Medical Center, was also honored on Adoption of Universal Design in [email protected] and October 1, 1996. He was presented with Product Design at the Trace Center. Steven Stock at a Recognition Award from the New He can be reached at (608) 262-6966 [email protected] York State Department of Health for or by e-mail at [email protected]

continued on page 8 7 The Research Exchange NIDRR Grantees and Staff Receive Recognition continued from page 7

Brian Bolton, Ph.D. and Jeanne Researchers of the Northern New How To Contact Neath, Ph.D. of the Rehabilitation Jersey Model Spinal Cord Injury The National Research and Training Center on System have been recognized for a Enhancing Employment at the number of achievements. Dr. Joel Center For The University of Arkansas received the DeLisa, Principal Investigator, was Dissemination Of 1996 Research Award from the awarded the Outstanding Service Award American Rehabilitation Counseling from the Association of Academic Disability Research Association (ARCA). The award, shared Physiatrists for 1997. He also received with Dr. James Bellini of Syracuse the Sixteenth Annual Sidney Licht University, was given for their joint Lectureship award from the Ohio State study "Influence of Applicants' Personal University School of Medicine on March History on Counselors' Ratings of 7, 1997. Dr. DeLisa gave the Fourteenth Functional Limitations." The study Annual fames W. Rae Scientific Day a Call Us was published in the Rehabilitation Lecture at the University of Michigan 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 V/TT Counseling Bulletin, Vol. 39, pages Medical Center on May 9, 1997. 8 A.M.-NOON and 1 P.M.-5 P.M. C.T. 265-275. The award was presented Marca L Sipski, M.D., and Craig J. Mon.-Fri. (except holidays) at the ARCA National Convention in Alexander, Ph.D., Project Co-Directors, or record a message 24 hr./day Orlando, Florida on April 5, 1997. Drs. received the Elizabeth and Sidney Licht Bolton and Neath serve as faculty at the Award for the most outstanding article Arkansas Research & Training Center. published in the Archives of Physical Contact Roy C. Farley, EcLD., Principal Medicine and Rehabilitation. The article Explore Our Web Site Investigator of the Arkansas RRTC entitled "Orgasm in Women with Spinal http://www.ncddr.org/ on Enhancing Employment, at Cord Injuries" was published in Vol. 76 E-mail Us (501) 624-4411 or by e-mail at (December 1995). Drs. Sipski and [email protected] [email protected] Alexander also recently co-edited the 01.1 book Sexuality with Disability and Dr. William Anthony, Principal Chronic Illness: A Health Practitioner's Write Us Investigator of the Research and Guide which will be available from National Center for the Training Center in Rehabilitation for Aspen Publishers in August, 1997. Dissemination of Disability Research Persons With Long-Term Mental For more information, contact Southwest Educational Illness received two awards in 1996. Drs. DeLisa, Sipski, and Alexander Development Laboratory The American Psychiatric Association at (201) 243-6805. 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 presented him the Van Ameringen 110 Austin, Texas 78701-3281 Award in Psychiatric Rehabilitation for Steven J. Taylor, Ph.D., Principal his "tireless advocacy on behalf of peo- Investigator of the National Resource ple with severe mental illness, notewor- Center on Community Integration Visit Us thy contributions in research and schol- for People with Mental Retardation, In downtown Austin, Texas arship, and innovative approaches to has received the 1997 Research Award 4th floor, Southwest Tower, development of a wide variety of psy- of the American Association on Mental Brazos at 7th St. chiatric rehabilitation." He also received Retardation. Dr. Taylor received the 8 A.M.-NOON and 1 P.M.-5 P.M. C.T. the GROW In America's Con Keyogh award "for significant contributions to Mon.-Fri. (except holidays) Visionary Award for "sharing with the the body of scientific knowledge in the world a vision of recovery." Dr. Anthony field of mental retardation." His NIDRR- may be reached at (617) 353-3549 or funded research has led to "the develop- by e-mail: [email protected] ment of new concepts and principles Fax Us 512-476-2286 "1.10 that have gained widespread acceptance in the field." Dr. Taylor can be contacted for more information at (315) 443-3851 or via e-mail at [email protected]

Southwest Educational Development Laboratory SCKNIDRR National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research xchange

VOLUME 2, NUMBER 4 1 9 9 7

The Research Exchange isavailable in alternate formats upon request.

At a Glance How Do Consumers Get A Word from the Director How Do Consumers Get Information

They Can Use? 1 Information They Can Use? Survey Process 3 Prelbninamy Findings and Is disability research information useful for dissemination are increasing rapidly Implications 5 to people with disabilities? If it is, with new technological development. Grantee Recognition 7 where and how do they find it? Would This growth is helpful in meeting the information-be more useful if it the need for numerous and varied were more accessible? The NCDDR dissemination media (SEDL, 1995). recently conducted a nationwide survey However, it is critical to keep in A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR of consumers to find answers to these mind that "consumers continue to lack and other related questions. the basic tools required for accessing Is Disability While research results generally are what is currently available" (Leung, available to those who seek them, they 1992, p. 293). For example, computers Research Useful? are not widely accessible to several may help 'level the field' of communi- Millions of dollarsare spent annually to critical audiences, namely persons with cations, but if consumers with disabili- support the design and implementation disabilities, their families, advocates, or ties cannot afford to own computers, of activities that can be lumped under direct service providers (Edwards, this potential is not realized. the general topic of "disability research." 1991). There is a critical distinction In an effort to understand the tools These activities tend to be far-flung and between availabilitywhich may consumers use and prefer, a literature divergent in nature and often embrace mean, for example, that a scholarly search was undertaken. No literature a variety of information-generation, article may be found in a professional was identified that directly asked information-implementation, and journal, or that a final report will be consumers with disabilities how they information-dissemination efforts. sent upon requestand accessibility, find and access information that is Quite often, however, the intended which implies ease of access and useful to them. Similarly, an on-line "user" of the produced information is simplicity of comprehension and use. search of the Educational Resources only vaguely defined or unknown. Better understanding of consumers' Information Center (ERIC) yielded no Research on effective dissemination information-gathering practices and citations. The National Rehabilitation has clearly pointed to several characteris- preferences can help those who Information Center (NARIC), through tics that are related to the utilization of conduct NIDRR research to make its REHABADATA on-line database information by intended user grouPs: their results more useful and accessible (http://www.cais.com/naric/rehabdata- Each user determines how and to consumers (SEDL, 1995). rehabdata.html), offered four citations when she or he will (or will not) Edwards (1991) notes that finding focusing on Participatory Action use information. the proper fit among the dissemination Research as a means of involving Intended user groups must be defined medium, user, and the knowledge consumers in rehabilitation research, well enough by the disseminator or product "includes recognizing that but with little emphasis on dissemina- to know the context and content no one channel is always sufficient" tion and utilization. Newman and of information that is desired by (p. 79). The media and formats available Vash (1994) prepared a report for the the user. continued on page 8 Th continued on page 2 The Research Exchange Field Test Procedures A two-part field test activity was How Do Consumers Get Information They Can Use? used to develop and pilot materials continued from page 1 and procedures used for thesurvey. First, a draft survey instrumentwas National Council on Rehabilitation help them in their daily lives. In order developed to identify the primary formats and modes that consumers Education. As part of this report, the to make NIDRR-sponsored disability prefer as ways to get information. authors noted that dissemination research information accessible and NCDDR staff, a professional efforts of NIDRR grantees have been usable, we must know more about researcher, and the members more successful in reaching other consumers with disabilities and their of a focus group of people with professionals than consumers and information needs. disabilities reviewed the consumer other audiences. There is no national database of survey draft and suggested modifica- The purpose of the NCDDR consumers with disabilities from which tions and additions. The survey consumer survey was to identify the to draw a sample of individuals to instrument was translated into ways consumers (people with disabili- survey. The NCDDR elected to use the Spanish by NCDDR staff with ties and their families) find information loose national network of independent assistance from staff members of the Southwest Educational that is useful to them in their daily lives. living (IL) organizations to ask the opin- Development Laboratory (SEDL) These data can be compared with the ions of consumers. Independent living Language and Diversity Program. modes and formats used by NIDRR centers, including Title WI-funded Part The survey was modified to gather researchers to determine the degree C Centers for Independent Living (CIL), similar data from independent living of match between formats and modes are community-based and consumer-run organization administrators. consumers prefer and what researchers organizations. Also included with this Site visits were made to four typically use. group are the Statewide Independent CILs located in different geographical Living Councils (SILC), which foster regions of the state of Texas to Who are consumers with communication among CILs in each gather first-hand information and disabilities? state. The consumers who participate impressions from administrators It is difficult to comprehensively identify with the CILs, SILCs, and other indepen- and consumers, and to observe the survey administration process. the population of Americans who have dent living programs that do not fall Different cultural groups, including physical or mental impairments that under Title VII, are generally individuals Anglo (White), Hispanic, and limit one or more of life's activities. who have searched for, found, and are African-American cultures, wererep- The Rehabilitation Research and using services in their community. That resented among staff and consumers Training Center on Disability Statistics is the population sampled by this survey at these CILs. Spanish-speaking (http://dsc.ucsf.edu/) proposed a figure activity. Although the survey is limited consumers and staff members were of 36.1 million, based on the 1990 by the fact that many consumers who asked to comment on the Spanish National Health Interview Survey. have not sought such services are not translation of the draft consumer The Americans With Disabilities Act of represented, that is offset by the fact survey. A total of 32 consumer 1990 (Public Law 101-336, 104 Stat. 328) that centers located throughout the responses and 5 administrator estimated some 43 million people with country were invited.to participate. responses were received. A report disabilities. The ADA definition was Responses were received from all of this field test is available from the NCDDR on request (Report of Field broadened to include those who have 50 states. Test Results: Survey of Consumers recovered from an impairment in the The NCDDR staff focused on this with Disabilities, October, 1996). past, as well as people regarded by group in its initial attempt to identify the A second field test to pilot the others as having an activity-limiting information needs and preferences of mail-out and return mail procedures impairment (LaPlante, 1992). Using consumers. If this group, for example, was conducted with eight IL centers recent trends in disability rates reported expressed no need for disability located in four states. Seven of the by Keye, LaPlante, Carlson, and Wenger research information, what would that volunteer field test sites returned (1997), 15% of the current estimated imply for individuals with disabilities? materials and provided feedback population of 267,982,550 (U.S. If the consumers who participate with on the materials, survey instructions, Census Bureau, 1997) would yield independent living organizations do not and procedures. The administrators 40.2 million persons with disabilities use the Internet, or do not know how commented on the need for such information and suggested that in the United States. to find disability research information, most independent living organizations This grouppeople with disabilities what would that suggest for the larger, would be eager to participate in includes individuals with diverse more varied population of people with the survey activity. A total of 37 cultural, socioeconomic, age, and disabilities as a whole? consumers and 7 administrators disability characteristics. One thing this responded. These data, along with heterogeneous group has in common, the data from the initial field test, however, is the need for information to were included in the analysis of the data gathered from the survey. BEST COPY AVAILABLE 2 80 The Research Exchange State Responses Overall response: 70% MI 100% Survey Process (11 states, or 20%) MI 7599% Procedures -mu (16 states, The NCDDR plan to gather information or 32%) from consumers with disabilities focused on asking for voluntary help from inde- n 50-74% pendent living organizations, including: " (19 states, or 38%) Centers for Independent Living (CILs), funded under Title VII of Less than 50% the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, (4 states, as amended or 8%) Statewide Independent Living Councils (SILCs) and Other independent living programs providing services which may assist people with disabilities in living more independently (ILPs). Telephone calls were made to but called later to decline due to an projected if all responding organizations administrators to explain the purpose increased work load. The independent had returned five surveys. Over half and procedures of the survey, and to living organizations represented among of the respondents (56%, or 148) did ask if they would volunteer to partici- the volunteers were: 55% Title VII CILs, return five consumer surveys. Fewer pate. A group of 514.independent living 13% SILCs, and 32% other ILPs. than five surveys were returned by 38% organizations were identified in the The volunteer administrators were (100) of the respondents, while 6% (17) Independent Living Research Utilization asked to solicit survey responses from returned more than five surveys. Seven (ILRU) Directory of independent living a minimum of five consumers with of the volunteers did not return any centers and related organizations, Vol. disabilities, or, as appropriate, to desig- consumer surveys (2%), and only 18, January, 1996. The final data base nate a representative to administer the submitted administrator survey forms. included 502 organizations, as some surveys. This ensured that respondents An average of 4.6 consumer surveys from the initial list were determined were people who receive services or were received per responding IL to no longer be functioning. Of support from the groups contacted and organization. Administrator surveys were these, 117 did not participate for that the anonymity of the consumers not returned by 10 (3%) of the volun- the following reasons: was protected. In addition, the teering organizations. some programs listed in the Dfrectory administrators were asked to complete All 50 states were represented among were not independent living centers a similar survey from the perspective the responding independent living or SILCs and did not have direct of their role. organizations. Eleven states had a 100% contact with consumers; Follow-up telephone calls were response rate from all volunteering centers located outside the continen- made, letters were sent to encourage organizations in the state, and only tal US, Hawaii, and Alaska were participation, and duplicate packets four states had less than a 50% response not contacted; were sent to volunteers who did not rate. Forty-nine states were represented direct contact was never made with receive the original mailed materials. among those that returned five con- 30 centers (in some cases messages sumer surveys. More than five surveys were left but no response was Participants were returned from 12 states (24%), received, and in other cases phone Materials were returned from 70% (265) while respondents from 40 states (80%) calls were never answered); of the volunteering organizations. A returned fewer than five surveys. Sixty many of the listings for the SILCs maximum total of 1,900 consumer percent of the surveys were received included a second representative, responses was possible from the 380 from Title VII CILs, 10% from SILCs, while only one was asked to organizations that volunteered, and and 30% were received from other participate from each state; and a maximum of 1,325 was expected independent living programs. branch offices for some centers did from the 265 volunteers who actually A total of 15 Spanish-language con- not participate. returned the survey materials. Not all sumer surveys were returned from 12 A total of 380, or 99%, of the 385 volunteers returned five surveys, while volunteer organizations in 7 states. Five administrators contacted, did volunteer a few returned more than five. A total groups from California, two from Texas, to participate in the survey. Only of 1,170 consumer surveys were and one organization from each of five four administrators did not agree to received, or 88% of the total other states returned surveys in Spanish. participate, and one did volunteer continued on page 4 84- BEST COPY AVAILABLE The Research Exchange

Administrator Survey Materials use? organization usual! yget information that you Each administrator 1.How does your is provided if g each answer. Space who volunteered ply. Some to participate in the study received a See other para Consumidores packet by US Mail. 1. &marm side. forthe questions se informa in English. Materials included ejeplas Ud., en para Cada general?(Marque an overview of the respuesta. Hay todas las frases espacio si quiere apropiadas. O Medios Poner un ejemplo Ha survey purpose and de comunicacion e (telev4sirin, process; five color- radio, po ul CI coded consumer ConsumerSurvey forms in both English para las preguntasen espatiol.) (yea as otro lado and Spanish, with a that youuse? provided if bilingual introduction get information answer. Spaceis 1. How doyou usually examples aregiven for each sheet attached to each (Check all thatapply. Some specific examples.) form; and one color- you wouldlike to include radio, movies,videos, etc.): coded administrator media (television, brochures, etc.): O Popular newsPaPers,pamphlets, form. If requested, O Print media(books, magazines, readers, etc.): alternate formats were media (Braille,audio tapes, etc.):__ 0 Non-print lawyers, teachers,caseworkers, sent, such as large prin people (doctors, etc.): O Professional family, friends,co-workers, (two requests), audio people (parents, etc.): 0 Other workshops, classes,conferences, tape (two requests), (meetings, CI Groups Internet, etc.): and computer disk 0 Computer(electronic mail, (three requests). 0 Other (BriefdescriPtion) Also included with the do you liketogetinformation? survey materials were 2. What ways (Check all thatapply) NCDDR notepads for respondents, and a O Regularprint postage-paid envelope 0 Large print for returning the 0 Braille survey forms. 0 Audio tape 0 Video tape 0 CD-ROM 0 Computer(file/disk) (online) ID Other: 0 Computer 0 Spanish 0 Non-Englishlanguage: description): 0 Other (Brief the Internet? ever getinformdtion from 3. Do you answer.) (Please checkone best 0 Very often 0 Often 0 Onlyonce/twice O Never O Don't know research usefulto you? information fromdisability ,(11 4. Is answer.) (Please checkone best

/,.....acticIt or0 httpI 0 Yes ;wt-AbroGi 'AYR 011 0 No 10, the 0 Don't know research? ..1111.1 COW, information fromdisability th,1110,1101n know howto find 01,11,1111\ 5. Do you VA0C311010 answer.) .11,1111.,11, one best 00011,1111.110 (Please check /II SOCI101 .110 0 Yes IK'til?a," 0 No 13 Don't know (2) Dissemination otDisability Research National Centertor the 3-97 1.3

ZEST COPY AVMA2LE Z. The Research Exchange Preliminary Findings and Implications

Initial results from the consumer survey are presented QUESTION TWO below. The responses of all consumers to each What ways do you like to get information? question are reported. The consumer group was then divided into four regions to see if any differences The most frequent response was 'Regular Print' (66%) and were identified. These regions, based on census the least frequent responses were 'Braille' (5%) and 'Non- reporting, are Northeast (NE), South (S), Northcentral English Language' (3%). The table below shows the percentage (NC), and West (W). of consumers who preferred to receive information through the various information formats. QUESTION ONE Information Formats All NE S NC W Now do you usually get information that you use? Consumers The most frequent way consumers get information is through Regular Print 66% 68%67%67%63% 'Popular Media' (76%), which included television, radio, Large Print 25% 24%22%25%27% movies, and videos. 'Print Media' (73%) including books, Braille 5% 4% 6% 5%5% magazines, newspapers, pamphlets, brochures, etc.) was Audio Tape 28% 26%27%30%28% also reported by consumers as a frequent information source. Video Tape 36% 32%38%40%32% Non-print Media' (Braille, audio tapes, readers) was least CD-ROM 13% 11%11%14%14% frequently identified by consumers. The table below shows 26%25%23%25% the percentage of consumers who reported using these Computer (file/disk) 25% 25%24%28% information sources. Computer (on-line) 26% 25% Non-English Language* 3%* 3%3% 2%4% Information Sources All NE S NC W * Non-English Language: (n = 35) Italian: 1 Consumers Spanish: 15 Portuguese: 1 Popular Media (television, American Sign Language: 7 Russian: 1 76% 72%79%75%78% radio, movies, videos) German: 2 Unspecified: 8 Print Media (books, magazines, Fewer regional differences were observed among responses 730/0 77%72%71%71% newspapers, pamphlets, brochures) to this question. Consumers from the Northeast and the West Non-Print Media (Braille, 20% 21%20%18%19% reported slightly lower preferences for 'Video Tape' (32%) while audio tapes, readers) Northcentral consumers reported a higher preference for 'Video Professional People (doctors, Tape' (40%) than did consumers as a whole. lawyers, teachers, caseworkers) 62% 65%60%64%58% Other People (parents, family, QUESTION THREE co-workers) 68% 72%64%70%67% Groups (meetings, workshops, Do you ever get information from the Internet? 63% 67%58%62%64% classes, conferences) The response choices for this question were 'Don't Know;' Computer (electronic mail, Internet) 27% 29%24%25%32% 'Never,"Only Once/Twice,"Often,' and 'Very Often.' Over 50% of the consumers indicated that they have 'Never' used A few regional differences were observed. Consumers the Internet to obtain information, while 4% responded from the South reported higher use of 'Popular Media' (79%) 'Don't Know.' Only 25% of consumers reported using the and consumers from the Northeast had higher responses Internet 'Often' or 'Very Often' to get information. The graph for 'Print Media' (77%) than the total group of consumers: below illustrates consumer responses to Question Three. Consumers in the West identified 'Professional People' (58%) as an information source less often than consumers in other regions. Respondents from the Ndrtheast reported 'Other . 60 People' as an information source more often (72%) than the 50 other groups, while those from the South identified 'Other People' less often (64%) than did consumers in other regions. 40 This split between the Northeast and the South was also 30 reflected in their responses to 'Groups' as an information 20 source. Consumers in the Northeast identified 'Groups' more 10 often (67%) than did all consumers, while those in the South 0 reported 'Groups' less often (58%). Consumers from the Don't Never Only Often Very Western region identified 'Computers' more often (32%) Know Once/Twice Often than other regions or all consumers. Consumer Responses

5 85 BEST COPYAVAILABLE The Research Exchange

Some regional differences were noted in response to the Fewer regional differences were observed. Consumers question about use of the Internet. Fewer consumers in the from the Northcentral regional reported fewer 'Don't Know' West reported 'Never' using the Internet to get information (46%), responses (16%) while Western consumers responded while those in Northcentral region had a higher response of 'Don't Know' (23%) more often than other groups or than 'Never' (56%) than did the group of consumers as a whole. all consumers.

Do you ever get Information All PE S NC W Do you know how to find All NE S NC W from the Internet? Consumers information from disability Consumers Don't Know 3% 3%3% 4%4% research? 16%23% Never 51% 51%53%56%46% Don't Know 20% 20%19% 32%32%34%30% Only once/twice 20% 2/1%16%20%23% No 32% 47% Often 15% 16%13%13%17% Yes 48% 48%49%50% Very Often 11% 10%15%7%11% Summary QUESTION FOUR The data from the consumer survey help give a tentative picture of what consumers around the country identify as usual and Is information from disability research useful to you? preferred sources of information, as well as an indication of The response their current use of the Internet, and their perceptions about the 70 choices were: 'Yes,' importance and accessibility of disability research information. 60 'No,' and 'Don't A general description of perceptions of 'the average consumer' 50 Know.' Responses can be drawn from this information. A comparison with 40 to Question Four the information formats and modes used by researchers to 30 showed the majori- disseminate information should be made to see if there is a match with what consumers use and prefer to use. _20 ty of consumers Over three-quarters of consumers identified 'Popular Media,' g 10 (72%) believe this type of information including television, radio, movies, and videos as a source of a. 0 information. Nearly as many also identified 'Print Media.' Don't Know is useful, with No Yes People, including professionals and others, as well as 'Groups,' Consumer Responses 'Don't Know' (20%) as the next most were identified as information sources by about two-thirds of frequent response selected. Only 8% of consumers responded consumers. 'Computers' and Non-Print Media' were identified 'No,' that information from disability research is not useful to as information sources by one-third or fewer of the consumers. them. The graph above illustrates the responses of consumers. The ways consumers prefer to get information were also Consumers from the South .had a much lower response varied. Only two-thirds of consumers identified 'Regular Print' to 'Don't Know' (14%) and a higher response to 'No' (13%) as a preferred format. 'Video Tape,' the second most preferred than consumers from other regions. Northcentral consumers format, was identified by over one-third of consumers. 'Audio responded 'Yes,' information from disability research is Tape,"Computer' (disk and on-line), and 'Large Print' were important to them, more often (75%) than consumers as preferred by over one-quarter of the consumers who responded a whole or from any other region. to the survey. Use of the Internet reflected the responses about computer Is information from disability All ti S NC W use in the first two questions. About one-fourth of consumers research useful to you? Consumers reported using the Internet 'Often' or 'Very Often,' while the Don't Know 20% 22%14%19%22% great majority of consumers used the Internet 'Never' or 'Only No 8% 6%13%6%8% Once/Twice.' Regional differences show more use of the Yes 72% 72%72%75%70% Internet by consumers in the West, and less by those in the Northcentral region. QUESTION FIVE New questions emerge when responses to the two questions Do you know how to find information from about information from disability research are compared. The disability research? comparative graph on the following page shows that although The response nearly three-quarters of consumers responded that information 50 choices were: Yes from disability research is useful to them, less than half report (48%), No (32%), 40 that they know how to find this information. The issue ofacces- and Don't Know sibility of information for people with disabilities is undoubtedly 30 (20%). Less than reflected in these responses. A much larger percentage of 20 half of the con- consumers reported they do not know how to get information g 10 sumers stated generated by disability research (32%), than those who felt 0 II that they know such information was not important (8%). The number who Don't Know No Yes how to find responded 'Don't Know' was the same for both questions Consumer Responses disability research (20%). These data reflect a potential issue related to disability information. research dissemination strategies currently in practice. 6 8 BEST COPYAVAILABLE The Research Exchange

Is information 70 from disability 60 research useful 50 NIDRR Grantees and Staff to you? 40 O Do you know 30 Receive Recognition how to find 20 information -a from disability 2,)1 0 41 The NCDDR congratulates each of the following NIDRR research? a. grantees or staff members. All grantees are encouraged to Don't Know No Yes Consumer Responses contact the NCDDR with information to share in future issues of The Research Exchange.

Who is the "average consumer?" Dr. Mitchell Rosenthal, Principal Investigator of the From the information about consumers reported in this brief Southeastern Michigan Traumatic Brain Injury System survey, a "typical consumer" in the NCDDR survey can be (http://www2.sedl.org/4d.acgi$retrievegrantee?H133A20016) described. ThiS typical consumer uses popular and print media located at the Rehabilitation Institute of Michigan, Wayne State as information sources, and does not use a computer as a pri- University, was recognized by the Division of Rehabilitation mary information tool. The average consumer prefers regular Psychology of the American Psychological Association print, followed by video tape and audio tape formats. The (APA)(http://www.apa.org/). He received the Roger Barker typical consumer has very little or no experience using the Research Achievement Award for cireer achievement in Internet, although this varies across regions. Finally, the aver- rehabilitation research at the 105th Annual Meeting.of the APA age consumer believes that information from disability research held August 15-19, 1997 in Chicago. For more information, is important, but may not know how to find this information. Dr. Rosenthal may be reached at (313) 745-9769 or via e-mail: [email protected] References iNd Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. § 12101 Dr. Harry Levitt, Principal Investigator of the Rehabilitation et seq. (West 1993). Engineering Research Center on Hearing Enhancement Edwards, L. (1991). Using knowledge and technology to and Assistive Devices atThe Lexington Center, Inc. improve the quality of life of people who have disabilities: (http://gramercy.ios.com/-reslex/), received the Special Friends A prosumer approach . Philadelphia: Pennsylvania College of People with Hearing Loss Award. The honor was conferred of Optometry. at the annual convention of the Self Help for Hard of Hearing Independent Living Research Utilization (ILRU). (1996). People (http://www.shhh.org/) in June, 1996. The recognition Directory of independent living centers and related organiza- is presented to organizations or people who have worked tions, Vol. 18, January, 1996. (Available from ILRU, The diligently over time to improve the life and circumstances Institute for Rehabilitation Research, 2323 South Shepherd of people with hearing loss. Dr. Levitt can be reached at Blvd., Suite 1000, Houston, TX 77019) (718) 899-8800, or via e-mail: [email protected] Kaye, H.S., LaPlante, M.P., Carlson, D., & Wenger, B.L. (1997). Trends in disability rates in the United States, 1970- Dr. Gregg Vanderheiden of the Trace Research and 1994. Disability Statistics Abstract Series, #17. (Available from Development Center (http://trace.wisc.edu/) was recendy the Disability Statistics Rehabilitation Research and Training honored with the third annual Yuri Rubinsky Memorial Web Center, Institute for Health & Aging, University of California, Award (http://www.webjammers.com/www6-press/press- Box 0646, San Francisco, CA 94143-0646) 10am.html). Dr. Vanderheiden received this award in April, LaPlante, M.P. (1992). How many Americans have a 1997 at the Sixth International World Wide Web Conference disability? Disability Statistics Abstract Series, #5. (Available (http://www6conf.slac.stanford.edun in Santa Clara, California, from the Disability Statistics Rehabilitation Research and for his contributions in promoting accessibility through Training Center, Institute for Health & Aging, University of technology for people with disabilities. The recognition from California, Box 0646, San Francisco, CA 94143-0646) the Yuri Rubinsky Insight Foundation (http://www.yuri.org/) Leung, P. (1992). Translation of knowledge into practice. includes a monetary award of $10,000. In Walcott & Associates, N1DRR National CRP Panel Final Dr. Vanderheiden is Principal Investigator for two Report. Washington, D.C.: Walcott & Associates. current NIDRR grant activities, Understanding and Increasing Newman, S.S., & Vash, C.L. (1994). Utilization of rehabilita- the Adoption of Universal Design in Product Design tion research results. Rehabilitation Education, 8(4), 380-385. (a Research and Demonstration project) and the RERC Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL). on Adaptive Computers and Information Systems (1995). Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research. (a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center). He is also a Co- Proposal developed in response to CFDA 84.133D, submitted Investigator for the RERC on Universal Telecommunications to the U.S. Department of Education. Austin, TX: Author. Access (http://tap.gallaudetedu/pij5.htm) based at Gallaudet U.S. Census Bureau. (1997). Current U.S. population count. University. He can be reached at the Trace Center, University of Available: http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html Wisconsin,...at 608-262-6966 or via e-mail: [email protected] continued on page 8 7 86 The Research Exchange A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR continued from page 1 NIDRR Grantees and Staff Information must be shared through a Receive Recognition medium that the intended user deems How To Contact to be accessible. continued from page 7 The National The utilization of information usually requires more than a one-time The Consumer Assistive Technology Center For The exposure to basic information. Transfer Network (CATN) Dissemination Of Clearly, the extent to which a dissemi- (http://www.ft66.com/catn.org/) has nator "understands" the intended users, been awarded the Non-Government Disability. Research the more likely the dissemination (Lab) Organization Award from utilization process is to be successful. the Federal Laboratory Consortium All too often, dissemination is approached for Technology Transfer (FLC) as an act of documentation. While docu- (http://www.zyn.com/flc/). The award mentation of research findings is impor- was presented in July at the FLC Joint tant and inherently critical to potential Conference of the Mid-Continent use of the resulting information, it is not Region/Mid-Continent Technology adequate as the predominant strategy Transfer Center Affiliates in Denver, Call Us 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 V/TT and basis of effective dissemination and CO. On hand to accept the award was utilization. Grantees should not approach 8 A.M.NOON and 1 P.m.-5 P.M. C.T. Bill Newroe, CATN Project Manager. Mon.Fri. (except holidays) dissemination as if it were simply a Mr. Newroe and the CATN can be or record a message 24 hr./day matter of documentation of research reached at (505) 989-9408 (v), results or findings. (800) 866-2253 (v/tdd) or via e-mail: Effective dissemination is a process [email protected] LJ that requires a match between the time and content-related needs of the intended Explore Our Web Site user, and the information that is available. http://www.ncddr.org/ E-mail Us It is virtually impossible to accomplish The Research Exchange, a newsletter to pro- [email protected] the goal of disseminationutilization mote the effective dissemination and utilization of disability research outcomes, is published without knowing how intended users quarterly by theNationalCenter forthe typically access information that they Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR) use. The NCDDR has undertaken a which is operated by the Southwest Educational ,L Development Laboratory (SEDL). Neither SEDL Write Us survey activity to identify some of the nor the NCDDR discriminate on the basis of age, National Center for the information-utilization characteristics of sex, race, color, creed, religion, national origin, Dissemination of Disability Research people with disabilities and their families. sexual orientation, marital or veteran status, or Southwest Educational It is hoped that these initial survey data the presence of a disability. SEDL is an Equal Development Laboratory EmploymentOpportunity/AffirmativeAction are useful to NIDRR grantees in develop- 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 Employer and is committed to affording equal Austin, Texas 78701-3281 ing a dissemination plan involving out- employment opportunities for all individuals in all reach to consumer groups. This issue employment matters. The contents of this newsletter were developed under a grant of The Research Exchange reveals some (#H133D50016) of $500,000 per project year of the findings relevant to consumers' from the NationalInstitute on Disability and utilization characteristics. Rehabilitation Research (N I DRR), U.S. Visit Us Department of Education (ED). However, these In downtown Austin, Texas Also, I want to point out that the contents do not necessarily represent the policy 4th floor, Southwest Tower, NCDDR survey data underscore the fact of SEDL, NIDRR, or the ED; do not assume Brazos at 7th St. that consumers continue to have high endorsement by the Federal Government. 8 A.M.NOON and 1 P.M .-5 P.M. C.T. regard for disability research. Mixed © Copyright 1997 by the Southwest Educational Mon.Fri. (except holidays) messages have been sent from some Development Laboratory disability-related groups espousing An electronic version of The Research Exchange, Vol. 2, No. 4 that consumers could care less about is available on the Internet at URL disability research. It is important to http://www.ncddr.org/ Fax Us know that consumers do care. It is also 512-476-2286 TheResearch Exchange isavailable equally important to note that too many in alternate formats upon request. consumers appear to have limited or John Westbrook no dependable pathways to obtain Director information about disability research. Lin Harris A re-assessment of current dissemination Information Services Technician strategies appears to be in order. Joann Starks Southwest Educational Development Laboratory Research Associate SMINIDRR Jane Thurmond National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research John D. Westbrook, Ph.D. Graphic Design Director, NCDDR 85 Researc

VOLUME 3, NUMBER 1 1 9 9 8

The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request.

At a Glance Common Characteristics A Word from the Director

Common Characteristics of IVIDRR Grantees Websites 1 Trends in Dissemination Patterns of MDRR Grantees 4 of NIDRR Grantees' Grantee Recognition 12 Websites A. W 1:1D; FR,O-M T`H E.,DI R E:C.T-OR NIDRR grantees' use of the WWW as a dissemination tool has grown quickly and currently reflects an aspect of NIDRR grant How do you measure success? activity of approximately 58 percent of all grantees. A doubling For individuals workingwithin a NIDRR-funded grant in the overall number of NIDRR grantee websitesfrom 88 in activity, the answer to the question. "How do you measure mid-1996 to 176 at the close of 1997parallels an accompany- success?," initially may he"to be successful in obtaining ing trend in general WWW growth that has been and contin- ues to be exponential. During the second half of 1993, the grant funding." As the quantity and quality of competition web doubled every three months, and currently is doubling in grows annually, surely being successful in this sort of a period of less than six months (Gray, 1995, 1996a, 1996b). competition process at the national level is an indicator In light of this trend, the NCDDR decided to analyze of quality in targeting needed research but also carefully grantees' websites to profile their common characteristics. considered methods of conducting that research. NCDDR staff analyzed 171 NIDRR grantee websites for Given success in the grant competition process, how the frequency of certain characteristics and for their else do you measure success in your NIDRR grant activity? overall accessibility. Some may indicate this type of success in terms of timeliness The NCDDR chose 20 characteristics to use in the analysis in initiating and conducting planned work, some would procedures. These characteristics were chosen for their objec- measure success in terms of spending at levels slightly less tive nature. NCDDR staff participating in the analysis engaged than those in an original proposal. yet others would measure in several practice sessions to increase inter-rater reliability. success in terms of implementationsimply "doing what I The characteristics chosen for use in the analysis stemmed said I would do." from a discussion in The Research Exchange (NCDDR, 1997a), These "measures" of success are often taken as "givens" in addressing the "communication power" of a WWW site. From the responsible implementation of publicly-funded research these general categories, the NCDDR staff chose the following activities. It is important to recognize that a growing number observable NIDRR grantee website characteristics: of disability stakeholders are asserting that true "success"can Access Iconsinclusion of symbols indicating accessibility only be measured in terms of the impact produced byyour grant-funded work. for users with disabilities, e.g. Bobby Approved, NCAM Impact, of course, is highly variable from project to Globe, Speech Friendly Site icons project. Generally, however, impact can be categorized by: Audioinclusion of audio snippets as part of the website usefulness in guiding overall judgments, facilitating improve- Animationinclusion of moving graphics ments, and generating new knowledge. This issue of The Copyrightinclusion of a copyright symbol Disclaimerinclusion of a statement that the views Research Exchange suggests some data thatmay be useful in your further consideration of NIDRR grantee "success." expressed did not necessarily reflect the views of the This issue adds to the data previously reported by the Government and general responsibility for content of site NCDDR concerning the types of products being reported Forms/E-mailinclusion of feedback channels such as forms or electronic mail links continued on page 23 ,/ continued on page 2 Volume 3, Number 1 The Research Exchange

A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR Common Characteristics of NIDRR Grantees' Websites continued from page 1 continued from page 1

by NIDRR grantees. Information from NARIC's 1995 and Framesinclusion of multiple "window panes" on a single 1996 Compendium of Products of IVIDRR Grantees and web page Contractors is added to data reported by grantees for Fiscal InteractiveDimensionsinclusion of special features to Years 1993 and 1994. Dissemination trends of grantees promote interaction among website users, e.g. chat rooms, appear to be clearer in this iteration of data reporting. bulletin boards, or other interactive elements One trend across these fiscal years demonstrates that GraphicsOnlyinclusion of only graphics to communi- approximately one-third of all grantees reporta product cate information through the website in any single year. Linksto NCDDRinclusion of a hypertext link to the This issue also highlights results of an NCDDR staff National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research analysis of NIDRR grantees' websites. Approximately175 (NCDDR) NIDRR grantees currently report a websiteas part of their Linksto NIDRRinclusion of a hypertext link to the grant-related dissemination strategy. NCDDR staff have homepage of National Institute on Disability and reviewed each grantee's website in order to developa Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) profile of common characteristics, includingan objective Links to NIDRRProjectsInclusion of one or more links assessment of the overall level of accessibility provided by to other projects funded by the NIDRR each site for people with disabilities. The results of this NavigationToolsinclusion of "buttons" or other devices analysis highlight areas that NIDRR granteesmay wish to to assist users in moving around to major areas of a website evaluate and consider the need for improvements. NIDRRAcknowledgedinclusion of a statement that the As we all strive for success, it is useful to note that website was an extension of a project funded by the NIDRR success comes as much from an attitude as it does from Search EngineAvailabilityinclusion of one or more a set of tried-and-true actions. A philosophy of continuous search engines as part of the website design improvement assists grantees in aspiring to continued Text andGraphicsinclusion of both text and graphics success. Hopefully, analyses conducted and reported by the within the website NCDDR may be helpful in thinking aboutnew areas of TextOnlyinclusion of only text, with no graphics or potential improvement of current dissemination practices. inclusion of an alternative text-only site UpdateNoticeinclusion of a date indicating the last John D. Westbrook, Ph.D. revision to the site Director, NCDDR Videoinclusion of video snippets as part of the website NCDDR staff reviewed all grantee websites during the period from November 11-20, 1997. Sites that could not be The Research Exchange, a newsletter to promote the effective dissemi- accessed on the first attempt were re-tried the following day. nation and utilization of disability research outcomes, is published quar- terly by the National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research Sites that could not be accessed the second day were not (NCDDR) which is operated by the Southwest Educational Development included in the review. Of the 175 websites, only four were Laboratory (SEDL). Neither SEDL nor the NCDDR discriminate on the unable to be accessed by NCDDR staff during the timeframe basis of age, sex, race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, marital or veteran status, or the presence of a disability. SEDL of the review. is an Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer and is committed to affording equal employment opportunities for all individuals in all employment matters. The contents of this newsletter were developed under a grant (#H133D50016) of $608,100 from the National Institute on Major Findings Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of Education (ED). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the The following were the major findings of the NCDDR policy of SEDL, NIDRR, or the ED; do not assume endorsement by the review of websites: Federal Government. CD Copyright 1998 by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory The most common feature of NIDRR grantees' websites An electronic version of is the use of forms and/or electronic mail links The Research Exchange, Vol. 3, No. 1 No websites used graphics only as a communication is available on the Internet at URL technique http://www.ncddr.org/ More than half (57 percent) of the grantees acknowledged The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request. NIDRR as the funding agency supporting the project work addressed on their website John Westbrook, Director Simon Fleischmann-Shostak, Technology Associate Approximately one-fourth (24 percent) of grantees include Lin Harris, Information Services Technician a link to NIDRR's homepage within their website John Katzman, Dissemination Associate Few grantees currently include a copyright symbol or Ken Schatz, Survey Assistant disclaimer within their website Joann Starks, Research Associate Jane Thurmond, Graphic Design Specific frequencies of characteristics reviewed are reflected in Figure 1. 2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 1

FIGURE 1 Percentage of Characteristics Noted Across Access Icons NIDRR Grantees' Websites In addition to the "Bobby Approved" icon, the National Center for Accessible Media provides another option for Characteristic Percentage use in describing website accessibility: Forms/Email 86 From the Center for Applied From the CPB/WGBH Navigation Tools 78 Special Technology (CASD: National Center for Text and Graphics 70 Accessible Media (NCAM): NIDRR Acknowledged 57 Update Notice 51 BOBBY Text Only 31 IP? D Links to NIDRR 24 Links to NIDRR Projects 23 Copyright 21 Disclaimer 19 Accessibility Findings Search Engine Availability 16 According to Bobby, 65 percent of all NIDRR grantee websites Animation 13 demonstrated less than a "four-star" accessibility rating. Bobby Frames 13 evaluated the accessibility level of NIDRR grantee websites as Links with NCDDR 11 described in Figure 2. Access Icons 10 FIGURE 2 Audio 4 Accessibility Level of NIDRR Grantees Websites as Interactive Dimensions 4 Evaluated by Bobby Video 2 Not Graphics Only NIDRR Program Area 4 stars 3 stars 2 stars1 star Included All Grantees 36% 31% 6% 27%4 Sites (N=171 websites)

Review of Accessibility The accessibility levels established by Bobby were distributed among major NIDRR Program areas as described in Figure 3.

As the use of the webpage moves from being a novelty FIGURE 3 to being a legitimate tool in the arsenal of dissemination Accessibility Level Demonstrated by NIDRR Program and knowledge utilization practice, the issue of accessibility Areas as Evaluated by Bobby the relative "friendliness" of website information for users Not with disabilitieshas become more immediate. NIDRR Program Area 4 stars 3 stars 2 stars1 star Included In addition, the extent to which a NIDRR grantee's ADA Technical Assistance 5 3 1 4 1 website serves as an accessibility model for others is a relevant Contracts 0 0 0 2

consideration. The NCDDR previously addressed issues of Fellowships 1 3 0 0 accessibility in The Research Exchange, Volume 2, Number 1. Field-Initiated Research 5 4 3 13 1 The article entitled "General Guidelines for Improving Innovative Research 1 0 0 0 Accessibility of World Wide Web Pages" (NCDDR, 19971)) included a section called "Check your Pages" that discussed Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects 3 2 1 6 the use of a graphical Web-based program called Bobby to Research & Demonstration 5 2 1 1 assess general accessibility of Web pages. Projects In its "snapshot" review of NIDRR grantees' websites for Rehabilitation Engineering 9 6 0 1 accessibility, the NCDDR used Bobby as a standard measure. Research Centers Application of Bobby results in a ranking of the site by stars. Research Training Grants 3 1 0 2 One to four stars are assigned to each URL reviewed. Only Rehabilitation Research & 11 21 0 4 sites receiving a four-star rating are allowed to use the Bobby Training Centers accessibilitysymbol. Sm. Bus. Innovative Research 1 0 2 0

NCDDR staff reviewed websites for accessibility State Technology Assistance 14 10 1 13 2

from November 11-20, 1997. Websites that could not be Utilization Projects 4 1 1 0 accessed on one day were re-tried the following day. 10 46 4 Four websites could not be accessed and were not included Total 62 53 in the review. continued on page 4 BEST COPY AVAILABLE Volume 3, Number 1 The Research Exchange Common Characteristics of NIDRR Grantees' Websites, continued Conclusions Trends in Dissemination Information gained from the NCDDR review of NIDRR grantees' websites suggests that considerable commonalities Patterns of NIDRR exist among grantee websites. Namely, a majority of grantees with websites: used update notices (51 percent); Grantees acknowledged NIDRR (57 percent); used text and graphics Researchers who receive funding from the National Institute (70 percent); included navigational tools (78 percent); and on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (N1DRR) were asked included forms and/or electronic mail feedback options to report the products of their research to the National (86 percent). One can debate whether these overall Rehabilitation Information Center (NARIC) during Fiscal Years frequencies are as high as may be desired at the current 1993-1996 (FY93-FY96). NARIC presented the information time. At any rate, it is clear that the characteristics of NIDRR received in the Compendium of Products of NIDRR Grantees grantees' websites are changing. The snapshot of today and Contractors (NIDRR; 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997). The purpose may not look remotely like the snapshot of tomorrow. of the Compendium is to provide "researchers, rehabilitation It is of concern that an objective measure of accessibility professionals, and others in the field of disability with practical of websites would suggest that approximately 65 percent of information on the spectrum of research, demonstration, all websites are not as accessible as they could be. Again, training, engineering, and technical assistance materials while this characteristic is also undoubtedly changing, this produced with NIDRR support" (NIDRR, 1995). characteristic is created by each grantee that has chosen The dissemination patterns reflected by the products reported to develop and design their own website. Each grantee is to NARIC and presented in the Compendium were first analyzed encouraged to apply the graphical web-based program by the NCDDR in The Research Exchange, V1 N3 (NCDDR, of Bobby to their website in order to begin appraising 1996). Now, the NCDDR has added data from FY95 and FY96 this characteristic of your website. It does seem reasonable in order to identify longer-range trends in the types of products to expect that NIDRR grantees websites should be held produced by NIDRR-fundecl research and reported to NARIC. to a higher standard reflecting what is desired in every It must be noted that product reporting is not required of WW\XT sitethe most accessible sites possible for users grantees, and the format for collecting and reporting these data with disabilities. has changed over the four-year period. This has some impact on the data gathered and presented in the Compendium References each year. The data Sources for this analysis were the printed Gray, M. (1995). Measuring the growth of the documents produced by NARIC for each of the four fiscal years Web: June 1993 to June 1995. [Online]. Available: studied. The NCDDR analysis provides a picture of the research results that were reported by NIDRR grantees as well as the Gray, M. (1996a). Internet growth: Raw data. trends observed, limitations notwithstanding. Comparisons [Online]. Available: purposes, with no intent to suggest that all program areas Gray, M. (1996b). Internet statistics: Growth and should have similar results. Projects with a training focus usage of the Web and the Internet. [Online]. Available: would be expected to produce more training materials, while research studies would be more likely to produce results reported in journal articles and conference presentations. NCDDR (1997a). Assessing the communication Note: In December, 1997, NARIC made an online electronic power of your W\XW site. The Research Exchange, version of the Compendium available on its Web site, 2(3), 6. [Online.] Available: See: NCDDR (1997b). General guidelines for improving One noticeable trend has been a steady decline in the overall accessibility of World Wide Web pages. The Research percentage of grantees reporting products resulting from their Exchange, 2(1), 5-7. [Online.] Available: reported products to NARIC. This contrasts with data from the most Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). recent Compendium which shows that 83 of approximately 300 Bobby is a free, graphical Web-based program designed projects (28 percent) reported one or more products resulting to help make Web pages accessible. [Online.] Available: from their NIDRR grant activity during FY96 (NIDRR, 1997). In considering whether this response-rate pattern affected CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media the overall number of products reported, the NCDDR analyzed (NCAM). The Web Access Symbol is used to indicate that the number of products reported for each program area for a Web site is accessible for all users. [Online.] Available: FY93-FY96. Although the overall percentage of NIDRR-funded number of products reported by NIDRR grantees has steadily increased since FY93, when 766 products were reported (NIDRR, 4 9 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 1

1994). In FY 94, 1,010 products were reported, followed by Reporting 1,128 products in FY95 and 1,185 products in FY96 (NIDRR; 1995, 1996, 1997). Differences in reporting by NIDRR program areas also were The following figures show the decrease in the percentage analyzed. Figure 3 shows the percentage of total grantees in of projects that responded to the request to report products, each program area reporting one or more products during and the contrasting increase in the number of products that FY93 through FY96: were reported. Figure 1 shows the percentage of grantees that reported products for FY93-FY96. Figure 2 shows the FIGURE 3 number of products that were reported by grantees each Percentage of NIDRR Grantees Reporting year from FY93-FY96: Products for Fiscal Years 1993-1996

FIGURE 1 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY 96 Percentage of N1DRR Grantees that Reported Program Area Percent Percent Percent Percent Products for Fiscal Years 1993-1996 Research & Demonstration Projects 20 26 50 35 Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers 76 71 64 63 Utilization Projects 60 46 37 83 Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centeis 60 75 69 69 Fellowships 50 11 0 0 Field-Initiated Research Projects 32 30 23 20 Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects 38 83 44 28 Research Training Grants 14 42 50 13 State Technology Assistance Projects 32 20 32 14 ADA Technical Assistance Projects 33 17 37 18 Other Projects ** 31 36 17 0 All Program Areas 44 38 37 28 ** Other Projects: Contracts, Innovative Research,Interagency Agreements, Small Business Innovative Research,Technology- Related Programs of National Significance

['hese data show that only two program areas, Rehabilitation esearch and Training Centers (RRTCs) and Rehabilitation FISCAL YEAR Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) had a reporting rate FIGURE 2 3f 50 percent or greater over the four-year period. The Number of Products Reported by NIDRR Grantees yield-Initiated Research projects showed a slight decrease for Fiscal Years 1993-1996 :_ach year in the percent of projects reporting, dropping from 1500 32 percent in FY93 to 20 percent in FY96. One third or less of 1400 3rojects in the State Technology Assistance and ADA Technical Ae-P"TED kssistance program areas reported products each of the four 1300 ,fears. Other program areas showed increases and decreases 1200 1185 1128 .wer the period, with no discernible trends. 1100 1010 M 1000

900

800 -766

700

600

500, 400 300. REST COPY AVAILABLE 200

100

0 1993 1994 1995 1996 FISCAL YEAR jii continued on page 6 Volume 3, Number 1 The Research Exchange Trends in Dissemination Patterns of NIDRR Grantees, continued

FIGURE 4 FIGURE5 Numbers of Products Reported by Comparison of Number of RERC and RRTC Grantees for Fiscal Years 1993-1996 Projects that Reported and the Number of Products Reported for Fiscal Years 1993-1996 Program Area FY93*FY94 FY95 FY 96 650 Number Number Number Number Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Engineering Research and Research Centers Training Centers_ Research & Demonstration Projects 42 32 60 60 600 Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers 325 411 444 634 550 III Projects that reported Utilization Projects 52 33 36 47 IIIProducts reported Rehabilitation Engineering 500 Research Centers 55 170 185 202 450 Field-Initiated Research Projects 47 91 54 52 Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects 48 90 78 91 400 Research Training Grants 2 12 53 22 State Technology Assistance Projects 102 115 192 73 350 ADA Technical Assistance Projects 46 37 21 4 Other Projects ** 47 19 5 0 Total Products Reported 7661,0101,1281,185 * Data for FY93 have been revised following additional analysis since first reported in 7be Research Exchange, V1, N3 (NCDDR, 1996). ** Other Projects: Contracts, Fellowships, Innovative Research, Interagency Agreements, Small Business Innovative Research, Technology-Related Programs of National Significance

The RERCs and RRTCs, with the highest percentage of projects responding, also demonstrated a substantial increase in the number of products reported from FY93 through FY96. The RERCs reported nearly four times the number of products in 1993 1904 1995 1996 1993 1994 1995 1996 FY96 as in FY93, with only a small increase in the overall num- FISCAL YEAR ber of projects reporting throughout the four-year period. The In addition to evaluating data on the number of projects that RRTCs reported nearly twice as many products in FY96 as in reported and number of products, the NCDDR analyzed the FY93, despite a slight decrease in the total number of projects variety of products reported by grantees. The products of that responded to the request for products. Figure 5 shows the NIDRR research presented in the Compendium for FY93 and total number of RERC and RRTC projects that responded and FY94 were listed by title, with an abstract in some cases. By the total number of products: grouping these reported products, NCDDR staff identified the following eight broad categories: Journa/sjournal articles, special issues of journals Mediated Materiatsaudiotape, CD-ROM, database, online Internet pages, software, videotape, electronic library, electronic bulletin board Reportsincluding annual reports, final reports, and others General Awareness Materialssuch as abstracts, book reviews, brochures, fact sheets, newsletters Books, Chapters, Papersbooks, chapters in books, concept papers, paper presentations, conference proceedings, working papers Training Materialsincluding curricula, handbooks, guidelines, training modules, workbooks, design booklets Miscellaneous or Unclassified Materialproducts that could not be identified or that had only one occurrence, such as radio BEST COPYAVAILABLE interview, test materials, survey, discussion groups; etc. Aids/Devicestechnological aids, assistive/adaptive devices 6 tC4 ,) Volume 3, Number 1 The Research Exchange JOURNA

FIGURE 7 JOIgp The FY95 Compendium (NIDRR, 1996) identified specific Product Type: Document Types including: journal articles, books, book chap- Journal ters, video and audiotapes, directories, curricula, speeches, con- Journals ference proceedings, databases, brochures, factsheets, CD-ROMs, 200 software, and Internet resources. For purposes of comparison with the FY93-FY94 data, these Document Types were grouped 190 under the classification system previously developed by the Research& Demonstration Projects 180 **** NCDDR. This resulted in far fewer Miscellaneous or Unclassified Emu Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers .41) products in FY95 and FY96. A summary of product types x x x Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers 170 tssis reported by grantees is presented in the following figure: Field-Initiated Research Projects s% Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects 160 CI0 0 Other** s"% FIGURE 6 Summary of Product Types Reported by N1DRR 150 .0% Grantees for Fiscal years 1993-1996 140 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY 96 Program Area Percent Percent Percent Percent 130 Journals 22.3 30.8 24.5 26.7 120 Mediated Materials 8.4 5.0 11.4 7.8 Reports 7.0 3.7 9.8 6.8 General Awareness 24.3 26.2 21.6 17.9 Books, Chapters, Papers 20.4 21.7 24.0 34.4 Training Materials 4.7 6.3 7.4 4.1 Miscellaneous/Unclassified 12.9 5.8 .05 2.0 Aids/Devices 0 0.4 0.6 .08

InFY93 the three most reported product types (Journals; 60 0 General Awareness Materials; and Books, Chapters, Papers) accounted for approximately 67 percent of all products 50 IN reported. In FY94 and FY96, these same three product types Oxxxx:fietieseAlt comprised approximately 79 percent of all product reported, 40 +." and 70 percent of all product types reported for FY95. +4, 30 .+ The greatest increase between FY93 to FY96 was in the * category of Books, Chapter's, Papers, which exhibited an increase 20 * 000CI 0.IDC1(648 e 0000°0- 1` of 160 percent. The Journals category grew by 86 percent over * * * * the four years. General Awareness Materials increased by 15 10

percent in the same time period. The only category showing a 0 notable decline was Miscellaneous/Unclassified, which decreased 1993 1994 1995 1996 by 75 percent as a result of modifications in the data collection Total=171 Total=311 Total=276 Total=319 and reporting process. FISCAL YEAR ** Other Projects: Innovative Research, Technology-Related Programs of National Significance, Contracts, Utilization, Research Training Grants. State Technology Assistance The following figures show the Projects,andADA Technical Assistance Projects

numbers of each product type The RRTCs reported the greatest number of products identified as Journals, including journal articles and special issues. Although RRTCs made up 30 percent of the total projects reported by NIDDR Grantees reporting, this group accounted for 42 percent of the Journal products in FY93. This increased to 56 percent in FY96, when in each program area funded RRTCs made up 35 percent of the total projects reporting. R&D projects, making up five percent of the projects report- ing, accounted for 17 percent of Journal products in FY93. during Fiscal Years 1993-1996: This dropped to eight percent in FY96 when R&D projects made up eight percent of the reporting projects. continued on page 8 TEIEST COPY AVAILABLE 93 7 RFSTCOPYAVAILABLE -111 Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Field-Initiated Research Projects

cr, State Technology Assistance Projects Total=64 Other** Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Field-Initiated Research Projects

.0. State Technology Assistance Projects cri Utilization Projects Total=51 Other** Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Field-Initiated Research Projects Research & Demonstration Projects State Technology Assistance Projects Utilization Projects Total=129 Other**

OM Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Field-Initiated Research Projects Research & Demonstration Projects Slate Technology Assistance Projects Utilization Projects Total=92 Other**

II

II

II :, to s e e ' ( t e

11- "4 0 0 0 I Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers - . ! e e 5 5 III Field-Initiated Research Projects . . O I I II- 0 Research & Demonstration Projects -DO -4 0 O 8 0 C.] State Technology Assistance Projects Utilization Projects o p- to ',to Total=27 Other** . .. Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers " - - . -DO . Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers . ..,,, Field-Initiated Research Projects .0. Research & Demonstration Projects .- . ',pp c, State Technology Assistance Projects

II ,`"Total=37 .1- 0- Other** -. ! - . Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers di! -DO : 0 ' Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers

i Field-Initiated Research Projects Research & Demonstration Projects L.,I State Technology Assistance Projects ..__ 0, .,111, cs, Utilization Projects ,i ,, -... , Total=111 Other** Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Field-Initiated Research Projects Research & Demonstration Projects State Technology Assistance Projects cr, Utilization Projects Total=75 Other"

1 1 1 1 1 1 ,1 .1 : I "II

- IJOI- I

ot The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 1

Exchange FIGURE 10 Common CharadelinlICS of Product Type:General Awareness Materials ;NIDRR &mums Wenn. The RRTC program area I I 59

(30 percent of projects 1 10 reporting) accounted for I ' 1118 1 1 MI11 32 percent of the FY93 I 11 1111111111111111111 48 General Awareness I I 18 product types reported. ; 111111111111132 132 This increased to 46 I. 111M10 percent in FY96, when I' 13

1 1 RRTCs made up 35 1111111111111111111111111165 percent of projects 1 1 22 reporting. The State I 11H101011133 Technology Assistance . 80 1 1 161106118 group (13 percent of ' 1118 the projects reporting) 1 1 1 1I ' 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111100 produced 26 percent of , 1 1 MM17 the General Awareness 111111111 21 products reported in , 98 .1 1 1 WM= 20

FY93. This group I 1 111111118 accounted for 21 i I. I INO11113 percent of this product I I I ' , 111111111111111111 44 . . i NM 12 type in FY96 while 1 In 7 making up 10 percent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90100 110 120 130 140150 of projects reporting. NUMBER OF PRODUCTS ** Other Projects: Innovative Research, Fellowships, Technology-Related Programs of National Significance, Interagency Agreements, International Projects, Contracts, Research Training Grants, ADA Technical Assistance Projects, and Small Business Innovative Research

FIGURE 11 Product Type:Books, Chapters, Papers The RRTC program area Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers 95 (30 percent of projects Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers reporting) accounted for Field Initiated Research Projects 61 percent of the FY93 Research & Demonstration Projects Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects Books, Chapters, Papers Total.156 Other**

reported. This decreased I 70 to 56 percent in FY96, , . 1 I e ' 69 I. 111111111111111 39 when RRTCs made up I 111113 35 percent of projects 11111 12 reporting. 111111 16 94 62 111111 17 I I 27 I1 1 1 1111111111 25 111111111111111111146 IN= 229 0111.111111111111111111MIRIMPRWIRINIII 102 1111112 I I 20

1 1 1111111111111 33 11111113 fo- 20 30 40. 60 /0 80 90100110 220 230 240 NUMBER OF PRODUCTS ** Other Projects: ADA Technical Assistance, Fellowships, Innovative Research, Research Training Grants. State Technology Assistance, Technology-Related Programs of National Significance, Utilization Projects

BEST COPYAVAIMBLEcontinued on page 10 Volume 3, Number 1 The Research Exchange Trends in Dissemination Patterns of NIDRRGrantees, continued

FIGURE 12 FIGURE 13 Product Type:Training Materials Product Type:Miscellaneous/Unclassified

85 5 34 - Rehabilitatior) Research & 33 Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers

Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers I 1 31 -t-M-State-Technotogy-Assistance-Projects FieldInitiated Research Projects MTN-0Th e r* * State Technology Assistance Projects110111121 29 Utilization Projects 71 1 28 1-- Total=27 Other**1111111p 2 27 28 26 25 24 I 12 IS 23 I II 117 22 4 21 11119 20 Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers 19 Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers 18 Field-Initiated Research Projects 17 State Technology Assistance Projects 16 Total=111 15 Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers 13 14 Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers 13 Research & Demonstration Projects 6 12 State Technology Assistance Projects 1 11 Total=75 Other** 2 10 0 10 20 36 40 50 NUMBER OF PRODUCTS ** Other Projects: ADA Technical Assistance, Innovative Research, Model Spinal Cord Injury, Research Training Grants

The RRTC program area, which accounted for the majority of products reported over the period, also reported the largest 1993 1994 1995 1996 Total=36 Tota144 Total=84 Total=49 number of Miscellaneous/Unclassified products. The total FISCAL YEAR number in this category decreased by 75 percent from FY93 to FY96. ** Other Projects: ADA Technical Assistance, Field-Initiated Research, Model Spinal Cord Injury, Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers, Research & Demonstration, Research Training Grants, Technology-Related Programs of National Li:111 111111.1141:1144112111111MAUI Significance, Utilization Projects t11: I: f I; l k1 L ir 1: lillitlainkekUMMak

: The RRTC program area (30 percent of projects reporting) accounted for 44 percent of the FY93 Training Materials product types reported. This increased to 46 percent in FY96, when RRTCs made up 35 percent of projects reporting. The Product Type:Aids/Devices State Technology Assistance group (13 percent of the projects Aids and devices were rarely reported. R&D projects (one in reporting) produced 31 percent of the Training Materials FY94), RERCs (three in FY94 and six in FY95), Field-Initiated products reported in FY93. This group accounted for Research (one in FY96) and Small Business Innovative 25 percent of this product type in FY96 while making up Research (one in FY 95) were the only program areas 10 percent of the projects reporting. reporting this product type. BEST COPY AMLA'ZLE 10 9 it-) The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 1

Observations NIDRR grantee research should be reported and made available for use by others. The data from FY93 established a starting point for The products that have been reported in the Compendium describing NIDRR grantees' patterns of dissemination. succeed in showing the results of NIDRR research, and greater Data from FY94-FY96 provided an opportunity for the efforts should be expended to make decisionmakers and the NCDDR to observe trends. public, including people with disabilities, aware of these Less than 40 percent of grantees funded by NIDRR reported results. For example, the increased emphasis on publishing a product to NARIC during the fiscal years 1994, 1995 and journal articles should be examined. The NCDDR is carrying 1996. FY96 data represented an overall decrease of 36 out further analysis to identify journals that publish articles by percent from the percentage of projects that initially grantees related to their NIDRR research, and determine which reported in FY93. of these are peer-reviewed. This information will be made The majority of grantees that did report provided available in future NCDDR products. information for only one of the four years studied. Only five Looking toward the future, it is apparent that the grantees (less than 2 percent) were funded and reported a requirements of the Government Performance and Results product during all four fiscal years. This could be due to a Act (GPRA) will necessitate reporting from grantees to provide wide variety of reasons such as the timing of the request data addressing specific Performance Goals. Evidence of the for information, limited motivation to report, or the lack of variety and depth of NIDRR grantees' research results will completed products to report. help to ensure the continuation of support for further Variations in the rate of reporting existed across program research with the purpose of improving the lives of areas each year, with the rates of participation as low as consumers with disabilities. zero in some areas. The lack of consistency does not promote interpretation of general trends. In spite of the decline in projects reporting, the number of References products that were reported by grantees increased by 55 percent from FY93 (766 products) to FY96 (1,185 products). National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research This may be due to increased awareness and diligence (NCDDR). (1996.) Dissemination patterns of NIDRR grantees. of the grantees that do report, or an actual increase in The Research Exchange, 1(3), 1-4. [Online.] Available: completed products. The majority of reported products each year were produced National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research by Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers (44 percent (NIDRR). (1997.) Compendium of products by NIDRR grantees over the four-year period). Over the four years, RRTCs and contractors-1996. Silver Spring, MD: National made up 30 percent of the total number or projects Rehabilitation Information Center (NARIC). reporting products to NARIC. The greatest increase in product type over the four-year National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). (1996.) Compendium of products by NIDRR grantees period was Books, Chapters, Papers, followed by Journal and contractors-1995. Silver Spring, MD: National publications. Growth in these areas mark an increase in Rehabilitation Information Center (NARIC). scientific effort across all NIDRR projects. Mediated Materials and Aids/Devices were mixed, with National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research increases and decreases exhibited during the period (NIDRR). (1995.) Compendium of products by NIDRR grantees observed. and contractors-1994. Silver Spring, MD: National There is no assurance that all products produced were Rehabilitation Information Center (NARIC). actually reported to NARIC. It is not possible, from the data National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research presented in the Compendium, to report conclusively how (NIDRR). (1994.) Compendium of products by N1DRR grantees many grantees are producing products, and what type of and contractors-1993. Silver Spring, MD: National products are being produced. Rehabilitation Information Center (NARIC). Conclusions The limitations described earlier in the data collection process, as well as the great differences among the program areas and the size and resources of NIDRR grantees, must be considered in drawing conclusions 'from these data. For example, an individual receiving a twelve-month fellowship counts as a NIDRR grantee, as does a large university with multiple research facilities and resources that may have one or more RRTCs and/or RERCs. Whether large or small, the results of Volume 3, Number 1 The Research Exchange

NIDRR Grantees and Staff The Research and Training Center on Rural Rehabilitation Services at the University of Montana's Rural Institute on Disabilities has received a special Receive Recognition Citation from the Governor of the State of Montana. The Citation was awarded to the RTC on September 1, 1996 The NCDDR congratulateseach of the following NIDRR "in appreciation of its efforts to support full participation in grantees or staff members. All grantees are encouraged community life for people with disabilities, through research to contact the NCDDR with information to share in future and training." issues of The Research Exchange. For more information, contact Dr. Tom Seekins, Principal Investigator, at(406) 243-5467. Researchers from the Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Aging with Mental Retardation at the Institute on Disability and Human Development (IDHD), University of Illinois at Chicago, have recently been recognized: Glenn Hedman, coordinator of the IDHD's Assistive How To Contact Technology Unit, has been honored with a Distinguished The National Center For The Service Award from the Rehabilitation Engineering and Dissemination Of Disability Research Assistive Technology Society of North America (RESNA). In addition, the IDHD's Assistive Technology Unit received the Ameritech and National Council on the Aging Current Innovator Award for its work in helping older people, young adults and children increase their independence Call Us through the use of communication aids. 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 V/TT 8 A.M.NOON and 1 P.M.-5 P.M. C.T. Mon.Fri. Ann McCracken, Ph.D., R.N.C., Principal Investigator for the (except holidays) or record a message 24 hr./day RRTC, received the Faculty Research Excellence Award at the University of Cincinnati College of Nursing and Health. Alison Miller, Research Associate, received the Leonard Explore Our Web Site http://www.ncddr.org/ Eron Award for excellence in research and scholarship E-mail Us given to the top Psychology graduate student at the [email protected] University of Illinois at Chicago. Tia Nelis, Self-Advocacy Specialist, received five honors. During 1996, she was awarded the President's Committee on Mental Retardation Elizabeth Boggs Award on Leadership Write Us National Center for the and Self-Advocacy, The American Association of University Dissemination of Disability Research Affiliated Programs' (AAUAP) Leadership and Self-Advocacy Southwest Educational Development Laboratory Award, and was named the Self-Advocate of the Year by 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 People First of Illinois. Ms. Nelis was also elected chair of Austin, Texas 78701-3281 the national self-advocacy movement for persons with developmental disabilities, Self-Advocates Becoming Empowered (SABE), and President of the Illinois People First Chapter. Visit Us In downtown Austin, Texas 4th floor, Harvey L. Sterns, Ph.D., director of the Institute for Southwest Tower, Brazos at 7th St. 8 A.M.NOON and 1 P.M .-5 P.M. C.T. Life-Span Development at the University of Akron and a Mbn.Fri. (except holidays) Principal Investigator for the RRTC, received the 1996 Distinguished Service Award in Education, Research and C'ommunication, from the Association of Ohio Philanthropic Homes and Housing for the Aging and received the 1996 Fax Us Dr. Arnold L. Heller Memorial Award for Contribution to the 512-476-2286 Field of Gerontology, Menorah Park Center for the Aging, Cleveland, Ohio. For more information, contact Dr. Tamar Heller, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory S400.INIDRR Director of the RRTC on Aging with Mental Retardation, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research at(312) 413-1537or via e-mail: [email protected] 96 The Research Exchange Errata: Volume 3, Number 1

Errata The Research Reporting Found on page 5 FIGURE 3 Percentage of NIDRR Grantees Reporting Exchange Products for Fiscal Years 1993-1996 Volume 3, Number 1, 1998 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY 96 Please substitute the Program Area Percent Percent Percent Percent following figures for those Research & Demonstration Projects 28 26 50 35 printed in Volume 3, Number 1 Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers 76 71 64 63 of The Research Exchange. Utilization Projects 60 46 38 83 Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers 60 75 69 69 FIGURE 7 50 11 0 0 Product Type:Journals Found on page 7 Fellowships Field-Initiated Research Projects 32 30 23 20 200 Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects 38 83 44 28 190 Research Training Grants 14 42 50 13 ****Research& Demonstration Projects State Technology Assistance Projects 32 20 32 14 180 Emu Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers 17 37 18 xxxx Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers os ADA Technical Assistance Projects 33 170 Field-Initiated Research Projects Other Projects ** 21 17 14 0 Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects 160 All Program Areas 44 38 37 28 7 Other**

150 ** Other Projects: Contracts, Innovative Research, Interagency Agreements. Small Business Innovative Research, Technology- 140 Related Programs of National Significance Rev. 4/98 130

120

110 Found on page 8 100 FIGURE 8 Product Type:Mediated Materials 90

26 81"1 . ORB 8 11 111111116 1111111 13 60 0 0.10 $ . 14 11 7 . It 50 se a I. 111111117 se Oiesesciestfielt3e0Ittst"- 1i 40 *++ 2 so 45 40 40 II . 30 ED + ' 21, ci ci u.4?* To 0 20 et )4- ouoclo'Do 18 41,013ociuD * * * * * 10 47 37 18 0 111 9 1993 1994 1995 1996 'I I 1 2 Total=311 Total=276 Total=318 Total=171 I. , 15 FISCAL YEAR, 17 114 " Other Projects: Innovative Research, Technology-Related Rev. 4/98 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Programs of National Significance, Contracts, Utilization, NUMBER OF PRODUCTS Research Training Grants, State Technology Assistance " Other Projects: Interagency Agreements, Model Spinal Cord Projects, and ADA Technical Assistance Projects Injury Projects, Research Training Grants, Small Business Rev. 4/98 Innovative Research, and ADA Technical Assistance Projects

'BEST COPY AVAILABLE I I

. 0 i .. . 0 .

Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Field-Initiated Research Projects Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Research & Demonstration Projects Field-Initiated Research Projects State Technology Assistance Projects State Technology Assistance Projects a, c. 0, Utilization Projects Utilization Projects Total=54 Other** cn.-- Total=99 Other** Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Field-Initiated Research Projects Field-Initiated Research Projects cr Research & Demonstration Projects Research & Demonstration Projects . State Technology Assistance Protects State Technology Assistance Protects Tote 1=37 Other** cr cr, CI Utilization Projects Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Total=54 Other** Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Field-Initiated Research Protects Research & Demonstration Projects Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers .., State Technology Assistance Protects LC) Field-Initiated Research Projects c. D.> State Technology Assistance Projects a, Utilization Protects T.- Total=6 v.-Total=111 Other** Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Field-Initiated Research Protects Research & Demonstration Projects Research & Demonstration Protects cr) State Technology Assistance Protects

VD State Technology Assistance Projects Total=24 Other"

. Utilization Projects I I I I I CI ".r. °: ,I .--Total=80 Other** : 1 "11 i

5 . _ I 0 III" 11 _ . I MO ; .. . .

AIMIL - .. Mb AM 0 A l

Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers

Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers i Field-Initiated Research Projects Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects State Technology Assistance Projects Utilization Projects Total=186 Other** Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers

Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers i Field-Initiated Research Projects Model Spinal Cord Injury Protects State Technology Assistance Projects al al Utilization Projects Total=265 Other** Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers Field-Initiated Research Protects Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects State Technology Assistance Projects Utilization Projects Total=244 Other** Rehabilitation Research & Training Centers Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers i Field-Initiated Research Projects : Model Spinal Cord Injury Projects State Technology Assistance Protects Utilization Protects Total=212 Other"

, : i i I I I I I : 1 "11 ' II I - . a D- o .

4 .8 THE 'Research Exchange' ,°4/op D s VOLUME 3, NUMBER 2 1 9 9 8

The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request.

At a Glance How Do Stakeholders Find A Word from the Director Hon, Do Stakeholdos Find and Disseminate Infbrmation? 1 and Disseminate Information? Sumer Procethires 4 Results 6 NIDRR Grantees and Staff During the spring of 1997, NCDDR Receit'e Recognitiml 11 Who are Stakeholders? conducted phase 1 of a nationwide The Americans with Disabilities Act survey. Respondents included 1,238 A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR (ADA) of 1990 (Public Law 101-336, individuals with disabilities (consumers) 104.Stat. 327) estimated that there are who participated in services of 43 million people with disabilities in Surveying for independent living centers and other the United States. The ADA definition Dissemination independent living organizations of individuals with disabilities includes (NCDDR, 1997). Phase 2 of the survey anyone who has "a physical or mental Characteristics was conducted with stakeholder groups impairment that substantially limits one Frequently, dissemination plansare in fall, 1997 and spring, 1998. Later or more of the individual's major life created in the heat of a proposal in 1998, phase 3 of the survey will activities; a record of this impairment; development process. These plans focus on dissemination practices of or is regarded as having this impair- are often based in what a particular researchers who receive funds through ment" (Authority: Section 7(8)(B); applicant may have done in the past the National Institute on Disability and 29 U.S.C. 706(8)(B)). With the or consider to be their "strength" in Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) of the large number and variety of people disseminating the outcomes of their U.S. Department of Education, Office of with disabilities, a vast number of grant activity. In other cases, an appli- Special Education and Rehabilitative organizations work with consumers cant may include what is perceived to Services (OSERS). with disabilities, and it would not be be the newest "cutting edge" strategy For the purposes of the phase 2 feasible in phase 2 to survey each one. that will give his/her proposal a survey activity, stakeholder groups For the purposes of this phase 2 competitive edge over all others. are defined as non-NIDRR grantee survey, four broad categories of stake- Less frequently, dissemination organizations that provide services or holders were identified as participants plans are developed based upon the information to people with disabilities to ensure that a wide variety of characteristics of a project's intended and their families. Four categories perspectives were represented: rehabili- audience(s). In many cases; applicants of stakeholders were surveyed to tation researchers (excluding those may not describe or be familiar with determine the following: Is disability funded through NIDRR, who will be the dissemination-related characteristics research useful to stakeholders? If it is, surveyed in phase 3), service providers, of their intended target audiences where and how do stakeholders find supporters, and policymakers/informa- addressed in the dissemination plan. such information? How do stakeholders tion sources. Across these four broad Frequently, dissemination plans disseminate information to their categories, representatives of eight developed in the proposal process consumers? Are there differences among groups were sampled. These groups are based upon a particular type of stakeholder groups in the way they vary in their purpose and size, and are document format. For example, it is not answer these questions? not strictly comparable with each other. continued on page 2 .1.01 continued on page 2 Volume 3, Number 2 The Research Exchange

A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR How Do Stakeholders Find and Stakeholder Groups continued from page 1 Disseminate Information? and Sampling uncommon for applicants to propose continued from page 1 Procedures to develop a certain number of articles for journal publication, or to develop a However, itis of interest to examine Rehabilitation Researchers were summary report of their findings, or to the data for similarities and differences represented by a sample of the mem- conduct a training session. The problem among the groups. The survey results bership of the Rehabilitative Engineering with this type of dissemination planning are presented both in aggregate and Assistive Technology Society of is that it is not based upon what is form and by individual stakeholder North America (RESNA). Many RESNA known about conducting effective group. The four broad categories, the members conduct research in areas dissemination (NCDDR, 1996). Effective groups within each category, and the related to disability, rehabilitation, and dissemination plans need to be based sampling procedures are described in special education. A random selection upon an integrated understanding of the following section. process was used to identify a sample the relationship of: from the 1996 RESNA membership list 1. the intended user, of approximately 2,000 names. The 2. the content of the message, The Research Exchange, a newsletter to sample was obtained by using a ran- 3. the source from which the promote the effective dissemination and uti- dom numbers table to choose a begin- message will come, and lization of disability research outcomes, is ning point on the membership list and published quarterly by the National Center for 4. the medium that will be used the DisseminationofDisabilityResearch then selecting every twentieth member. to transfer the message. (NCDDR) which is operated by the Southwest Many of the members of RESNA were The NCDDR staff have conducted Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL). also NIDRR grantees who may partici- surveys to help inform NIDRR grantees Neither SEDL nor the NCDDR discriminate on pate in phase 3 of our study, and were of the dissemination characteristics the basis of age, sex, race, color, creed, reli- excluded from this sample. The final gion, national origin, sexual orientation, mari- of a variety of audiences. This issue tal or veteran status, or the presence of a dis- RESNA sample included 82 individuals of The Research Exchange addresses ability. SEDL isanEqual Employment who represented about five percent of stakeholder groups of non-NIDRR Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer and the eligible RESNA membership. grantees that disseminate information is committed to affording equal employment to people with disabilities. The value in opportunities for all individuals in all employ- Service Providers include two ment matters. The contents of this newsletter surveying this diverse audience rests in were developed under a grant (#H133D50016) stakeholder groups that provide direct the fact that some NIDRR grantees cite of $608,100 from the National Institute on services to people with disabilities and these stakeholders as their intended Disability andRehabilitation Research their families. The first is administrators dissemination target audience(s). (N1DRR), U.S. Department of Education (ED). of independent living organizations, A clearer understanding of the However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of SEDL, NIDRR, or the including Title VII-funded Part C characteristics of this audience should ED; do not assume endorsement by the Centers for Independent Living (CILs), facilitate more effective dissemination Federal Government. Statewide Independent Living Councils strategies to address their needs. Copyright 1998 by the Southwest (SILCs), and other independent living It never has been the case that Educational Development Laboratory programs. Administrators from all the effective dissemination includes the An electronic version of groups listed in the Independent Living notion of "one size fits all." There is an TheResearch Exchange, Vol. 3, No. 2 Research Utilization (ILRU) Directory of indication that the target audiences of is available on the Internet at URL Independent Living Centers and Related dissemination activities and, hopefully, excluding those located outside the of the disseminated information, do have 50 United States and the District of variable characteristics. Yet, many times, TheResearch Exchange isavailable Columbia, were contacted by telephone dissemination plans treat their intended in alternate formats upon request. and asked to participate. Contact was audiences as if there were no significant John Westbrook, made with a total of 385 organizations, differences among them. This issue high- Director and 380 administrators volunteered to lights the results of the latest NCDDR Simon Fleischmann-Shostak, participate. Responses were collected survey of stakeholders and past survey of Web Administrator from this sample to coincide with the consumers (see The Research Exchange, Lin Harris, sampling of consumers of independent Volume 2, Number 4). We hope this Information Assistant living organizaions during phase 1. information can help to inform appli- Ken Schatz, cants and grantees in the development Survey Assistant The second group included in the service provider category is health care or refinement of dissemination plans. Joann Starks, Program Associate providers, represented by administrators John D. Westbrook, Ph.D. Jane Thurmond, of acute and post-acute medical reha- Director, NCDDR Graphic Design bilitation facilities. A random sample of 169 rehabilitation facilities was drawn

2 102 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 2 from a listing in The Complete Directory of Indian Affairs (BIA) Schools. The The designated representatives of two for People with Disabilities (1996). The state directors were contacted by Governor's Committees had already listing included 1,338 facilities. The telephone and invited to participate. responded to the survey representing sample was obtained using a random Questionnaires were sent to 51 of the a different stakeholder group, so a numbers table to choose a beginning 53 directors (vacancies were found at second response was not requested. the BIA and Hawaii State Department point on the membership list and then 4. Disability Media of Education). A to* tal of 46 state selecting every eighth entry. Surveys This sample was identified from directors volunteered to participate; were sent to administrators of 57 acute America's Telability Media (Winston, six were not contacted directly after and 112 post-acute facilities. 1995) with additional entries from multiple attempts. Follow-up was The Complete Directory for People The NCDDR planned to sample direc- conducted by telephone and by with Disabilities (1996). Surveys were tors. of state vocational rehabilitation mail to those directors who did sent to 201 representatives of the agencies as part of the service provider not respond by the date specified category in the phase 2 stakeholder sur- disability media, which included in the contact letter. vey. Approval was not granted through journals, magazines, newspapers, the Council of State .Administrators of 2. Legislators and Aides radio, and television. Vocational Rehabilitation (CSAVR) to Federal legislators who served as administer the, survey and, therefore, members of the Senate Committee on Sampling procedures varied among state vocational rehabilitation agencies Labor and Human Resources and the stakeholder groups and were depen- are not represented among the House Committee on Education and dent on the total number of the group stakeholder groups. the Workforce were identified using population or the clarity of the group the Congressional Yellow Book definition. In some cases, the stakehold- Supporters include organizations that directory (1997). All members of er group was small (e.g., State Directors advocate for and assist consumers with the Senate Committee, and one of Special Education) and it was possi- disabilities. Supporters were represented Representative from each participating ble to send surveys to all the represen- by Client Assistance Programs state on* the House Comrhittee, were tatives in this group. In other cases, (CAPs) and Advocacy and Protection contacted through telephone calls to the number was large and a random Agencies (APAs) located throughout their aides. Messages were left giving sample was selected (e.g., members the country. Telephone calls were an overview and inviting participation of RESNA), or the parameters of the made to the administrators of CAPs and in the survey when direct conversa- group were not clearly defined (e.g., APAs to describe the study and ask for tions were not possible. The survey Disability Media representatives) and a volunteers to participate in the survey. was sent to 78 federal legislators convenience sample was used from In some states, the CAP and APA were and aides. available lists of contacts. operated by the same agency, and only The State Yellow Book (1997) was used one was asked to participate in the In summary, eight stakeholder groups to identify state legislators who served survey. Questionnaires were sent to a were surveyed within the four general as Chairs/Vice-chairs of Health. and total of 32 CAPS and 48 APAs. categories of phase 2. The acronym in Education committees or subcommit- parentheses following each stakeholder tees. The survey was sent to 194 state Policymakers/Information Sources group represents the group identifica- legislators. This yielded a total of 272 are stakeholders that affect the lives of tion in the subsequent tables and federal and state legislators and aides. people with disabilities and their fami- graphs in the Results section. lies through making and implementing 3. Committees on Employment of People with Disabilities 1. Members of RESNA (RESNA) policy, and through sharing information 2. Administrators of Independent Living Questionnaires were sent to 559 about people with disabilities and Organizations (IL) about research outcomes. Four different officers or other members of state 3. Administrators of Medical groups were included for sampling in and local Committees. These Rehabilitation Facilities (RF) this category: included Governor's Committees 4. Directors of Client Assistance on Employment of People with 1. State Directors of Special Programs/Advocacy and Protection. Disabilities or other state-wide Education Agencies (CAP/APA) committees (49), Mayor's Committee A list of all State Directors was 5. State Directors of Special Education on Employment of People with obtained from the National (SDSE) Disabilities (218), local ADA Association of State Directors of 6. Federal and State Legislators/Aides Committees (202), and other local Special Education (NASDSE). The (LEG) groups similar to Mayor's Committees sample population included the 7. Members of Committees on (90). The contacts for the Mayor's and directors of special education in the Employment of People with other local committees were obtained Disabilities (CEPD) 50 United States, plus the District of through telephone calls to the Columbia, Department of Defense 8. Disability Media Representatives Governor's committee in each state. Dependents Schools, and the Bureau (MEDIA) 3 Volume 3, Number 2 The Research Exchange

Several stakeholder groups were contacted by telephone to determine their willing- Survey ness to participate in the survey, prior to receiving the survey materials. A cover letter with a brief description of the purpose of the survey, instructions, and a survey ques- tionnaire were mailed to representatives of the eight stakeholder groups selected to Procedures participate in the survey. The instrument was similar to the questionnaire field-tested and used in phase 1 of the study. The survey questions were modified to reflect each stakeholder group and a sixth question was added. These six questions were designed to obtain baseline data concerning stakeholder preferences in obtaining information, as well as how they disseminate information to their consumers. The survey questions are presented below.

Survey AdmilliStrator examples aregiven (Check all thatapply. Some information thatyou use? usually get examples.) would like toinclude specific 1 How doesyour organizationprovided if you Space is etc.): for each answer. movies, videos, brochures, etc.): (television, radio, pamphlets, Popular media newspapers, (books, magazines, readem, etc.): 0 Print media audio tapes, etc.): media (Braille, caseworkers, 0 Non-print lawyem, teachers, people (doctors, etc.): friends, co-workers, 0 Professional(parents, family, etc.): 0 Other people conferences, workshops,classes, Groups (meetings, (electronic mail,Internet, O Computer description): 0 Other (Brief (Check all thatapply) information? organization liketo get does your 2. What ways 0 Regularprint o Large print 0 Braille U Audio tape 0 Video tape 0 CD-ROM (file/disk) C.1 Computer ClOther: 0 Computer(online) OsPanish Non-English language: answer.) U Other (Briefdescription): check one best from theInternet? (Please get information organization ever 3. Does your Li Very otten Often 0 Only once ortwice Never check onebest answer) 0 Don't know organization? (Please to your research useful from disabiliW 4Is information Yes Cl No check one bestanswer) Don't know research? (Please fromisability a way tofind information organization have 5. Does your Yes 0 No (Check all thatapp/y) Don't know consumers? information toyour usually get organization 6. How doesyour 0 Personalcommunication Newsletters Information mailouts 0 Meetings D Electronicmail World WideWeb) online (Internet, 0 Computer line TelePhone/inf ormation C.1 Fax sessions/classes/workshops .0 Training holdings t.3 Library/information C3 Reports 0 Other (pleasedescribe):

4 10 4 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 2

Following the sample selection, survey As Table 1 illustrates, the State Directors Responses were received from 112 of materials were mailed and participants of Special Education (SDSE) had the 201 disability media representatives were asked to respond within two the highest response rate (96 for a response rate of 56 percent. weeks. Forms were initially coded to percent). Forty-nine out of 51 surveys Administrators of rehabilitation facilities facilitate follow-up. If responses were were returned for this stakeholder (RF) had the next highest response rate not received within two weeks of the group. Client Assistance Programs/ with almost half (49 percent) respond- mailing of materials, follow-up contacts Advocacy and Protection Agencies ing. Eighty-two of 169 surveys were were made by telephone and/ (CAP/APA) had the second highest completed and returned. Of the 82 sur- or by mail. response rate of 80 percent. Twenty- veys sent to members of RESNA, five eight of the 32 surveys sent to CAPs were returned as undeliverable and were returned (response rate.of 88 these were not used in the calculation Response Rate percent) and thirty-six of the 48 APAs of the response rate. Twenty-eight of responded (response rate of 75 the remaining 77 members included in A total of 1,789 surveys were sent and percent). Of the 380 surveys sent to the sample of RESNA returned complet- 851 completed surveys were returned, administrators of independent living ed surveys for a response rate of 36 for an overall response rate of 48 organizations (IL), 267, or 70 percent, percent. The two stakeholder groups percent. Table 1 presents the number were completed and returned. with the lowest response rates were the of surveys sent to each stakeholder Participants from these three groups Committees on Employment of People group, the number responding and the received follow-up telephone calls with Disabilities (CEPD) and the response rate for each group. The and letters if responses were not sent Legislators/Aides (LEG). These two table is rank-ordered according to the within two weeks. groups had response rates of 32 percent response rate. First, the overall stake- and 25 percent, respectively. Participants holders' response rate is presented, from these groups received follow-up followed by the individual groups in letters if responses were not received descending order. within two weeks after the survey materials were sent. TABLE 1 Response Rate by Stakeholder Group (Ranked) Key Key to Acronyms used in the tables and figures on pages I 6. 5 through 9 Rehabilitation Researchers: All Stakeholders 1,789 851 48% R ESN A=Members of the Rehabilitative Engineering and SDSE 51 49 96% Assistive Technology Society of CAP/APA 80 64 80% North America Service Providers: IL 380 267 70% IL=Administrators of Independent Living Organizations MEDIA 201 112 56% RF=Administrators of Medical Rehabilitation Facilities RF 169 82 49% Supporters: CAP/APA=Directors of Client RESNA 77 28 36% Assistance Programs/Advocacy and Protection Agencies CEPD 559 180 32% Policymakers/lnformation Sources: LEG 272 69 25% SDSE=State Directors of Special Education LEG=Federal and State Legislators/Aides CEPD=Members of Committees on Employment of People with AVAILABLE Disabilities BEST COPY NIEDIA=Disability Media Representatives Volume 3, Number 2 The Research Exchange Results Question One Question Two How does your organizationWhat ways does your Responses to questions one, two, and usually get information that organization like to get six are presented in the following tables, you use? information? and responses to questions three, four, and five are presented in figures on Responses among the stakeholder Stakeholder groups responded similarly pages six through eight. Each table or groups to this question were similar, to this question. As Table 3 illustrates, figure presents overall responses for although there were some variations in 'Regular Print' was the most frequent stakeholder groups in aggregate form, the percentage of respondents using a response when all stakeholder groups followed by responses for individual particular source to get information. were combined and when each individ- stakeholder groups. The tables are Overall, the stakeholders chose 'Print ual group was examined separately. organized with response choices listed Media,' including books, magazines, Computer online (53 percent) and in columns and the stakeholder groups newspapers, pamphlets, and brochures, computer files and disks (49 percent) listed in rows. In addition, the responses most frequently. followed this response. The least chosen most frequently by all stakehold- frequent responses were 'Braille' (18 Examining the stakeholder groups ers are in the first column, followed by percent) and Von-English Linguage' individually, all but Rehabilitation the second, third, and so on, regardless (14 percent). Of those stakeholders Facilities (RF) and Legislators/Aides (LEG) of the order in which the response who chose Non-English Language', also chose this as the most frequent choice appeared on the survey. The 85 percent indicated that the language response. The range of percentages for stakeholder groups are listed according was Spanish. Examining the stakeholder this information source was 75 to 97 to their overall rate of response as pre- groups individually, the SDSE and IL percent. The least frequent response sented in Table 1. The number in each respondents preferred a greater variety for most groups was Non-Print Media' cell gives the percent of respondents of formats, while LEG identified fewer (Braille, audio tapes, readers) with a that selected a particular response. of the information formats. range of 3 to 33 percent. The State Directors of Special Education (SDSE) had See Table 3 at right. a higher percentage of participants identi-' fying a wide variety of sources to obtain information, while Legislators/Aides (LEG) reported using few of the information sources. The most frequent response for Legislators/Aides was 'Professionals.' TABLE 2 Question One:How does your organization usually get information that you use?

1I * I I All Stakeholders 90 82 76 64 62 48 21 16 SDSE 96 90 82 76 94 39 33 29 CAP/APA 97 91 77 72 77 47 19 22 IL 95 93 76 76 70 60 32 12 MEDIA 87 61 70 52 71 38 21 29 RF 88 89 88 65 61 43 16 11 RESNA 86 75 86 54 61 29 7 7 CEPD 87 78 68 51 41 52 16 12 LEG 75 71 87 59 39 33 3 22

6 106 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 2

TABLE 3 Question 'Ivo:What ways does your organization like to get information?

Stakeholder Regular Computer Computer Video Large Audio CD-ROM Braille Non- Other Group Print Online Files Tape Print Tape English

All Stakeholders 93 53 49 37 27 27 25 18 14 5

SDSE 98 90 57 55 14 29 55 10 20 6

CAP/APA 100 67 56 23 14 22 42 11 19 6

IL 94 56 62 49 48 44 29 35 24 3

MEDIA 92 63 61 23 17 14 20 13 3 9

RF 95 45 44 46 24 26 27 7 18 5

RESNA 93 64 32 39 7 7 29 4 7 7

CEPD 91 35 31 33 22 19 12 14 5 4

LEG 86 35 26 16 3 14 7 0 0 9

Question Three Does your organization ever get information from There is a great deal of variation in the Internet? the responses among the stakeholder groups to this question. SDSE reported Overall, stakeholders reported they use the Internet to get information. Fifty-nine using the Internet most often with94 percent of the stakeholders responded that they access information from the Internet percent choosing 'Very Often' or 'Often.' 'Very Often' or 'Often,' while36percent responded 'Only Once or Twice' or 'Never.' CAP/APA was next highest with72 Five percent responded 'Don't Know.' percent choosing 'Very Often' or `Often,' FIGURE 'I followed by MEDIA(71percent), Question Three: Does your organization ever get information from the Internet? RESNA(71percent), IL(62percent), RF(55percent), and LEG(54percent). 94 Key CEPD was the only stakeholder group 90 Very Often/Often with less than half the respondents Never/Only Once or Twice reporting frequent use of the Internet 80 (36 111 Don't Know percent). The two groups who 72 71 71 reported using the Internet least often 70 to access information were CEPD(53 59 percent reported they used the Internet 60 55 -1 54 53 to get information 'Never' or 'Only LLI (40 50 Once or Twice') and RF percent LIJ responded 'Never' or 'Only Once 40 40 or Twice'). 136 ,137 36 3. 30 28 :125

20

10 :6 3 3

All SDSE CAP/APA MEDIA RESNA IL RF LEG CEPD 3EST COPY AVAILABLE Stakeholder Group 7 1 0 7 Volume 3, Number 2 The Research Exchange

Question Four Is information from disability research useful to Examining individual groups,96percent your organization? of RESNA respondents indicated that disability research is useful, followed by When all stakeholder groups' responses were aggregated,84percent reported 94percent of MEDIA. Only one stake- disability research was useful to their organizations. holder group had less than80percent FIGURE 2 of respondents reporting that informa- Question Four:Is information from disability research useful to your organization? tion from disability research was useful to their organization. Interestingly, only 94 61percent of Legislators/Aides found 90 89 87 this information useful, while29percent 83 81 of this group responded 'Don't Know'.

All RESNA MEDIA SDSE CAP/APA IL CEPD LEG Stakeholder Group

Question Five FIGURE 3 Question Five:Does your organization have a way to find Does your organization information from disability research? Key have a way to find 100 7Yes information from disability No 90 research? Don't Know 80 Overall, about two-thirds of stakeholder 80 -7 78 75 respondents reported having a way to 71 obtain information from disability 70 67 65 64 research. For individual stakeholder r: 62 60 groups,80percent of the SDSE responded 'Yes,' followed by RESNA 51 Ca 50 ce (78percent), CAP/APA(75percent), IL LLI (71percent), MEDIA(67percent), LEG 40 (64percent), RF(62percent); and r,44 CEPD(51percent). 30 28 26

'1 20 20 H 18 ,:, 16 4 1716 5'11 11 ;,..:11 10 ' tv.*tt

All SDSE RESNA CAP/APA IL MEDIA LEG RP CEPD BEST COPY AVAILABLE Stakeholder Group 8 ILI, Li The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 2

Question Six Variations existed among the individual stakeholder groups. SDSE and IL How does your organization usually get information reported the widest variety of formats to your consumers? used to get information to their consumers. MEDIA had the highest The most frequent response to this question was 'Personal Communication' (79 response of 'Other' (51 percent) and percent). Other information formats frequently identified were 'Meetings' (76 identified their medium (e.g., news- percent), 'Newsletters' (64 percent), 'Information Mail Outs' (62 percent), 'Training paper, magazine, journal, television, Sessions/Classes/Workshops' (62 percent), and 'Telephone Information Line' (51 radio) as a primary way of getting percent). The least-cited responses were library/Information Holdings' (22 percent) information to their consumers. Only and 'Other' (16 percent). one response, 'Newsletters,' received a higher percent of response (56 percent) TABLE 4 from the MEDIA group. How does your organization usually get information to your consumers?

Stakeholder Personal Meetings News- Mail Work Phone Fax ReportsComputer E-Mail Library Other Group Comm. letters outs shops Online

All Stakeholders 79 76 64 62 62 51 40 32 26 24 22 16

SDSE 82 100 76 92 94 63 69 78 82 63 41 8

CAP/APA 95 78 59 69 83 67 55 42 20 27 20 11

MEDIA 42 43 56 46 39 34 31 17 45 35 16 51

RF 83 74 68 61 72 44 34 38 17 10 22 12

RESNA 93 61 54 68 79 43 46 36 39 29 21 14

CEPD 75 88 49 51 53 40 28 27 16 16 17 11

LEG 75 64 42 36 7 35 41 33 19 19 7 17

IL 92 82 83 74 76 66 45 27 19 21 29 8

Discussion of Results Examining the responses concerning between State Directors of Special the usefulness of and the ability to find Education (SDSE) and Legislators/ The results of the phase 2 survey show information from *disability research, a Aides (LEG). State Directors of Special that stakeholders are more alike than general consensus was observed among Education eported the greatest variety different. When comparing the aggregat- stakeholder groups. When all stakehold- of sources and formats to get informa- ed responses to individual stakeholder er responses were aggregated, 84 per- tion, whereas Legislators/Aides used responses, many similarities were noted. cent stated that disability research was the fewest. The response selected most The average stakeholder uses a variety useful. However, fewer stakeholders often was 'Professionals.' This suggests of sources in a variety of formats to (65 percent) are able to find disability that Legislators/Aides rely more on obtain information. 'Print Media' was research. One might ask the following other people as information sources. the source used most often to get question about this discrepancy: if In addition, while there was agreement information, followed by 'Groups' stakeholders sometimes have difficulty among groups that disability research is and 'Professionals."Regular Print' and finding disability research, how do they useful, Legislators/Aides had the highest 'Computers,' both online and file/disk, know it is useful? percent of 'Don't Know' and 'Not were the formats which stakeholders While there were many similarities in Useful' responses to this question. preferred for obtaining information. In the responses of stakeholder groups, This may imply that many Legislators/ addition, over half of the stakeholders there were also differences. The widest Aides may not use or have adequke reported using the Internet 'Very Often' differences among stakeholder groups access to disability research in or 'Often' to access information. to the first five questions were found their work. 9 1 Volume 3, Number 2 The Research Exchange

When interpreting the above results, There is some alignment to the living organizations, 'Other People' one must consider that differences responses made by stakeholders would be a more likely response than between State Directors of Special concerning methods they use to get 'Professionals' when communicating Education (SDSE) and Legislators/ information to consumers. About with the staff of these organizations. Aides (LEG) groups may be a result three-fourths of the stakeholders The findings of the phase 1 of variations in response rate. Ninety- cited 'Personal Communication' and consumer survey also determined that six percent of the State Directors of 'Meetings' as the two methods used the a majority of consumers (72 percent) Special Education responded to the most by their organizations, while about reported that disability research is useful survey, while only 25 percent of two-thirds of the consumers cited 'Other to them, but over 50 percent reported Legislators/Aides responded. In People,"Groups,' and 'Professional that they did not have or did not know addition, there was no differentiation People' as information sources. of ways to find this information (NCDDR, between surveys completed by However, greater numbers of consumers 1997, pp. 6-7). Stakeholders reported Legislators or Aides. This may account identified 'Popular Media' and 'Print slightly higher numbers: 84 percent for this group's higher percent of 'Don't Media' as primary sources of informa- identified information from disability Know' responses to questions three, tion. Stakeholders reported 'Newsletters' research as useful, while 65 percent four, and five. The NCDDR did attempt and 'Information mail outs' as the third reported their organizations have ways to improve the response rate for and fourth methods used to get infor- to get such information. With improved Legislators/Aides by contacting federal mation to consumers. In addition, only dissemination channels, stakeholders legislative offices prior to participation about one-third of the stakeholders might be able to help consumers find in the survey. A legislative aide told identified 'Reports' and less than one- and use disability research information. NCDDR that members of this stake- fourth selected library/Information holder group rarely respond to surveys. Holdings' as methods used to get Limitations One-fourth of the Legislators/Aides information to consumers. responded, which for this group is a NCDDR survey results would suggest No research is without limitations; this good response rate. 'Popular Media' as the most effective survey study is no exception. The most The primary purpose in adding method to disseminate information to apparent limitation in the phase 2 por- question six for the stakeholder survey consumers, however, there was no tion of the survey is the low response was to facilitate a comparison of (a) the option for 'Popular Media' sources on rate for some stakeholder groups. way consumers usually get and like to question six of the Stakeholder survey. However, in survey research, no single get information with (b) the methods One stakeholder group, MEDIA, report- response rate is considered a standard stakeholders use to disseminate ed 'using 'Popular Media' to a great (Fink, 1995; Fowler, 1993). For some information to their consumers. degree by choosing the response 'Other' surveys, a response rate of 90 percent is Consumer responses in phase 1 to and identifying newspapers, journals, desired; in others, 65 percent is deemed questions one and two are reported in magazines, television, radio, and so on adequate. Mail surveys typically have The Research &change, Volume 2, as the information formats they use to lower response rates than other types of Number 4 (NCDDR, 1997, p. 5). get information to their consumers. surveys and because nonresponse may Responses to question one showed MEDIA also reported frequent use of introduce error, researchers should take that consumers usually get information 'Computer Online' (45 percent) to get steps designed to promote responses. from 'Popular Media' sources such as information to consumers. Other stake- Some of these steps include personally television, radio, movies, and videos holder groups with higher use of contacting potential respondents and (76 percent), and 'Print Media' such 'Computer Online' were SDSE (82 asking them to participate, sending a as books, magazines, newspapers, percent) and RESNA (39 percent). reminder to nonrespondents, assuring pamphlets, and brochures (73 percent). However, just over one fourth of respondents of confidentiality, and These were followed by 'Other People' consumers chose 'Computer Online' making the survey short and easy to such as parents, family, and co-workers as an information source and preferred complete. For this study, all these (68 percent), 'Groups' including format in phase one of this study. measures were adopted. meetings, workshops, classes, and con- NCDDR hypothesized that the stake- More critical than response rate is the ferences (63 percent), and 'Professional holder group most closely aligned with degree to which nonrespondents are People' such as doctors, lawyers, consumers would be administrators of similar to respondents. For example, teachers, and caseworkers (62 percent). independent living organizations (IL). Legislators/Aides had the lowest 'Computers,' whether e-mail, Internet, In some ways, this hypothesis was response rate, and therefore the largest or file/disk were identified by only supported. While the IL group's highest percentage of nonrespondents of the about one-fourth of the consumer response choice for sharing information stakeholder groups sampled. This raises respondents. Preferred formats reported was 'Personal Communication' (92 per- the question: Are nonrespondents simi- by consumers on question two included cent), 'Other People' (parents, family, lar to respondents? If the answer is 'Regular Print' (66 percent), 'Video tape' and co-workers) was chosen by over no, then conclusions may be biased. (36 percent), 'Audio tape' (28 percent) two-thirds of the consumers. Because of Unfortunately, this question is difficult to and 'Computer' (26 percent). consumers' participation in independent answer. Therefore, caution should be 1 0 liii The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 2 taken with drawing conclusions from Question six will be reworded to Shepherd Blvd., Suite 1000, Houston, the results for the stakeholder groups more accurately reflect the sources TX 77019). with the lowest response rates (i.e., and formats from which consumers NCDDR. (1996). A review of RESNA, CEPD, and LEG). get information; the literature on dissemination and Another limitation is the variable Several open-ended questions will be knowledge utilization. Austin: Author. sample sizes as well as response rates added at the end of the survey to within groups. Ideally, the sample allow NIDRR grantees an opportunity NCDDR. (1997). How do consumers would be chosen randomly, stratifying to provide additional information; get information they can use? The on stakeholder group and with every and Research Exchange, 2(4), 1-8. group having the same response rate. If If necessary, nonrespondents will be State Yellow Book. (1997). this were the case, a mean percentage contacted and asked to complete the Washington: Leadership Directories, Inc. could be calculated for the 'All survey by telephone. Stakeholders' category and each stake- It bears repeating that while disability Winston, C. (1995). America's holder group would be equally repre- research is important for many telability media (1st ed.). (Available sented. Unfortunately, several of the stakeholders, it is also important for from the National Telability Media stakeholder groups were difficult to consumers with disabilities and their Center, PO Box 1488, Columbia, MO define (e.g., MEDIA), and others were families. Phase 1 results indicated that 65205). difficult to personally contact (e.g., consumers think disability research is LEG). Others were so large or so varied useful, but have difficulty accessing it. that it would be impossible to identify Interestingly, phase 2 results showed an inclusive list for the entire group that stakeholder groups also value (e.g., CEPD represented different ways disability research and generally have local commtinities choose to address the more ways to find such information. concerns of people with disabilities, and Phase 3 survey activities will gather are not comparable across the country). information from NIDRR grantees to In addition to the limitations in learn more about how disability NIDRR Grantees regard to sample size and response rate, research information is disseminated. is the survey questionnaire itself. The The extent of integration and/or questions were few and the content of a comparability among the three major and Staff Receive limited nature. NCDDR used this survey survey groups of consumers, stake- to gather baseline information and holders, and NIDRR grantees will Recognition it was important for consumers and be the subject of further analyses. stakeholders to respond. Therefore, the decision was made to limit the number and content of the questions, with the References The NCDDR congratulates each of intent to follow this survey with another Americans With Disabilities Act of the following NIDRR grantees and staff in-depth survey. 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. members. All grantees are encouraged to' contact the NCDDR with information to The. Complete Directory for People share in future issues of The Research Future Research with Disabilities 1996-97 (5th ed.). Exchange. Phase 1 of this study identified the (1996). Lakeville, CT: Grey House NV sources and formats used and preferred Publishing. Rachel Wobschall, Executive Director by consumers to get information. Phase Congressional Yellow Book. (1997). of Minnesota's System of Technology 2 gives the NCDDR an indication of the Washington: Leadership Directories, Inc. to Achieve Results (STAR) Program ways stakeholder groups get informa- , the State consumers. While comparing the con- sumeys. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Technology Assistance program, was sumer results with stakeholder groups' Fowler, F. J. (1993). Survey research honored by the California State results showed some alignment, stake- methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: University at Northridge (CSUN) Center holders do not necessarily use the SAGE. on Disabilities . She was named to receive the consumers. Independent Living Research Strache Leadership Award during the The results of this stakeholder survey Utilization (ILRU). (1996, January.) Twelfth Annual Technology and Persons will serve as a framework for phase 3 of Directory of independent living centers with Disabilities Conference on NIDRR grantees and their dissemina- (Available from ILRU, The Institute held in Los Angeles in March, 1997. The tion practices. The survey will be for Rehabilitation Research, 2323 S. Strache Leadership Award, given annual- modified to reflect the following: ly to those who have directly impacted continued on page 12 Volume 3, Number 2 The Research Exchange

NIDRR Grantees and Staff award focused on Ms. Calman Holt's dedication and strong commitment as Receive Recognition a volunteer at the University of How To Contact Washington Burn Center and at the The National continued from page 11 Hope House orphanage for children with autism, physical disabilities, and Center For The the lives of people with disabilities emotional disturbances. She also was through assistive technology, is the cited for her outstanding contributions Dissemination Of highest honor the CSUN can bestow. by helping the community through the Disability Research For more information, contact Ms. school re-entry program and rural out- Wobschall at (651) 297-1554. reach, as well as assisting burn survivors In June, 1998, the STAR Program's and their families. U.S. Army Gen. H. Urban Outreach Project, in partner- Norman Schwarzkopf was on hand for ship with the Urban Leagues of the presentation of the award. Minneapolis-St. Paul, was awarded a David Patterson, Ph.D., Co-Principal Best Practice Award by the Health a Investigator received The Milton Call Us Care Financing Administration at their Erickson Award Jbr Scientific 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 V/T1 conference in Phoenix. Minnesota STAR Achievement in HVnosis at the 1997 8 A.M.NOON and 1 P.m.-5 P.M. C.T. was recognized for information and International Society for Hypnosis and Mon.-Fri. awareness activities regarding assistive (except holidays) or record American Society of Clinical Hypnosis a message 24 hr./day technology, reaching over 10,000 indi- Annual viduals in underserved communities. Meeting. The paper for which he and For additional information, contact Tom co-authors Dawn Ehcle, Ph.D. and Shaffer at (651) 296-9718 or e-mail: Myron Goldberg, Ph.D. were honored [email protected] focused on decreasing burn pain Explore Our Web Site through hypnosis and was published http://www.ncddr.org/ Several staff members of the University E-mail Us in the American Journal of Clinical [email protected] of Washington Burn Injury Rehabili- Hypnosis . For more information, contact washington.edu/-jaycee/> at the Dolores Palacpac, Project Coordinator University of Washington Burn Center of the University of Washington Burn have recekred honors. Injury Rehabilitation Model System, Write Us National Center for the Jason N. Doctor (with co-author8 at (206) 731-2866 or via e-mail: David Patterson, Ph.D. and Roberta Dissemination of Disability Researcl- [email protected] Southwest Educational Developmen Mann, MD) was awarded the American roir Laboratory Burn Association's 1997 Clinical Dr. Kristofer Hagglund, Principal 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 Research Award for his presentation Investigator of the Missouri Model Austin. Texas 78701-3281 entitled "Health Outcome for Burn Spinal Cord Injury System Survivors." This award went to the best and Associate Professor doctor at the 1997 American Burn in the Department of Physical Medicine VisitUs Association Annual Meeting. The paper Southwest Tower, Brazos at 7th St. Missouri-Columbia, was honored by the discussed health outcomes of burn 8 A.M.NOON and 1 P.M.-5 P.M. C.T. Division of Rehabilitation Psychology of survivors at one month and one year Mon.-Fri. (except holidays) the American Psychological Association follow-up periods, and was published in (APA) . the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabili- Dr. Hagglund was selected to receive tation, 18(6), November/December the James S. Garrett Early Career 1997 . This award was based on his career Kim Calman Holt, a founding achievements to date, many of which member of the NIDRR Advisory Group are derived from his NIDRR-fundecl at the University of Washington Burn work. For additional information, Injury Rehabilitation Model System, was please contact Dr. Hagglund at Southwest Educational Development Laboratory chosen as one of six individuals from (573) 882-6271 or by e-mail: the Inland Northwest to be honored at SCKINIDRR [email protected] National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research "Stars: A Celebration Of Heroes" at the Spokane in Spokane, WA. The 112 T H E Research Exchange VOLUME 3 NUMBER 3 tj

In this issue, Web URL and e-mail The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request. addresses are usually placed to indicate where the address starts and stops. Do not include these brackets when keying the address on your or e-mail software. Who Needs Web At a Glance A WOrd fiDin the Director 1 Site Accessibility? Who Aeeds Web Site Accessibility? . . . 1 Interactive Elemetits of the Internet . . 5 A7DI?R Grantees Ofter Listservs 7 The World Wide Web (WWW) has become an important Microsoft Announces Grant medium for sharing information. A recent issue of The 9 **r Update on Strategies 'Or Research Exchange (Volume 3, Number 1) reported that 88 Web Accessibility 10 NIDRR grantees (about 28 percent of all grantees) had Web ,Vetr Rei.iew of NIDRI? sites in early 1996 (NCDDR, 1998a). In November, 1998, Girintees. 1Veh Sites 1 2 the NCDDR identified 214 Web sites operated by NIDRR Annotated WWW ResourceList 15 grantees, reflecting 72 percent of all grantees funded NIDRI? Gmnteesand Staff Receive at that time. Recogito, t 22 Who visits these NIDRR grantee Web sites? How many people among this audience have disabilities? Learning A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR about Internet and WWW users can help N1DRR grantees focus on the need to develop more accessible Web sites to Electronic best meet the needs of a varied audience. Who Uses the Internet? Accessibility It is difficult to define who uses the Internet. Across the Overalluse and information resources board, a variety of methods have been used to track the available through the Internet have audience of Internet users. A survey of the U.S. popula- continued to skyrocket since the previous tion's use of the Internet and online services identified 62 issue of The Research Exchange address- million adults, or 30 percent of Americans age 16 and ing the accessibility of information on older, as 'being online' during the last quarter of 1997 the Internet (Volume 2, Number 1). (IntelliQuest, 1998). One study determined that 30 million While we lack the ability to precisely people may use the Internet within a 24-hour period measure usage of the Internet, it is clear (Commerce Net/Nielsen Media Research, 1997). Another that more Americans than ever before study estimates that 200 million people worldwide will use have computers in their homes and at the Internet by the year 2000 (CyberAtlas, 1998). work, and are using online services at unprecedented rates. Georgia Tech's Graphics, Visualization and Usability The growth of electronic information Center (GVU) conducts large scale online surveys in April sources offered by NIDRR grantees has and October each year. Beginning with the Second GVU also grown significandy. In the summer WWW User Survey in October, 1994, respondents were of 1997, the NCDDR reported (Volume 2, asked about their disability status, and five percent of the Number 2) that half of NIDRR's grantees respondents indicated they had a disability. A slight had established Web sites. Today, in increase in the percentage of respondents with a disability 1998, over 72 percent of current NIDRR was reported with each new survey. The most recent continued on page 2 11 3 continuedon page 2 Volume3,Number 3 The Research Exchange

Who Needs Web Site Accessibility? continued from page I GVU User Surveys (GVU, 1998). computers or may have problems The small but steady growth seen in accessing information on the World survey reported, the Ninth GVU WWW the GVU WWW User Surveys does Wide Web. The data from the GVU User Survey from April, 1998, shows that show an increase in theparticipation Surveys are considerably lower than 6.99 percent of respondents indicated of people with disabilities on the the incidence rate for disabilities in the they had a disability. For all GVU Internet. The low numbers of people population as a whole, but do support Surveys, the category "Vision" was who identified themselves as having the suggestion that approximately identified by over half of all respon- a di§ability may reflect the online, 5 percent of people with disabilities dents who indicated they have a self-selecting nature of the survey, and have computers, compared with 30 disability. Figure 1 shows summary reinforces the fact that many people percent of the general population data on disabilities from the with disabilities may not have access to (Hagins, 1995).

Figure 1: Summary of Disability Responses from the GVU WWW User Surveys

GVU UserSurvey Disability Category 2nd (10/94) 3rd (4/95) 4th (10/95) 5th (4/96) 8th (10/97) 9th (4/98) n=3522 *n.13,006 n=23,348 n.11,736 "n.10,109 "n=12,591 Vision 118 (3.35%) 396 (3.04%) 802 (3.43%) 436 (3.72%) 447 (4.42%) 520 (4.1%) Motor 23 (0.65%) 123 (0.95%) 196 (0.84%) 116 (0.99%) 209 (2.07%) 242 (1.9%) Hearing 20 (0.57%) 115 (0.88%) 185 (0.79%) 102 (0.87%) 176 (1.74%) 175 (1.4%) Multiple 10 (0.28%) 80 (0.62%) 166 (0.71%) 75 (0.64%) ""Not a choice **Not a choice Cognitive 9 (0.26%) 40 (0.31%) 74 (0.32%) 46 (0.39%) 71 (0.70%) 96 (0.80%) All disabilities 180 (5.11%) 754 (5.80%) 1,423 (6.09%) 775 (6.61%) +784 (7.76%) ++881 (6.99%) None 3,342 11,939 21,450 10,761 9,168 11,507 (94.89%) (91.81%) (91.87%) (91.69%) (90.69%) (90.3%) Rather not say Not a choice 311 (2.39%) 475 (2.03%) 200 (1.7%) 157 (1.55%) 203 (1.6%) *3rd: Total of all categones = 13,004 **8th/9th: The category "Multiple" was not a choice; respondents were asked to check all categories that applied. +8th: The total of all disability categories is 903. The figure "784" is the total number "n" minus the number of respondents who selected "None" and "Rather not say." ++9th: The total of all disability categories is 1,033. The figure "881" is the total number "n" minus the number of respondents who selected "None" and "Rather not say." NOTE: Disability questions were not asked in the 1st (1/94), 6th (10/96), and 7th (4/97) Surveys Source: GVU. (1998). GVU's WWW User Swveys. [Online]. Available:

A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR Continued Iron, page I grantees maintain a Web presence. As the Internet has grown, new Recent advances such as those Clearly, the past year has represented applications that can be used in Web reflected in HTML 4.0, give hope that phenomenal growth in Web-based page design and implementation have accessibility features may, one day, be information channels focusing on increased. As the NCDDR has pointed more automatic. Today, however, accessi- disability research funded by NIDRR. out previously, the Internet should not be bility comes from a purposeful set of Along with the growth of the Internet viewed as an electronic form of what has actions to create it. As NIDRR grantees, as an informational medium come already been produced on paper. New we must serve as good accessibility mod- challenges for NIDRR grantees to ensure potential features such as chat rooms, els for others. This issue of The Research that Web-based information is accessible. news groups, search engines, video, Exchange, along with the past issue It is additionally challenging to note that audio, animation, 3-D imaging, merged addressing accessibility, provides helpful what may have been considered "accessi- media, streaming, real-time conference information and resources that can guide ble" on a Web page a year ago, may not participation, and many other cutting- you in making your Web site more acces- be considered "accessible" today. Changes edge features bring rich, powerful com- sible.Several NIDRR-funded grantees are are occurring in software and design prac- munication options to Web sites. As is national leaders in the area of World tice that are "raising the bar" of accessibili- often the case, the way in which each is Wide Web accessibility, so if you do not ty for Web sites. Recent changes in the used and the requirements associated find the information you need to make Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) guide- with their use, may severely limit some your site as accessible as you wish, lines of the World Wide Web Consortium potential viewers with sensory or contact the NCDDR and staff will direct (W3C) require most NIDRR grantees to cognitive disabilities unless special care you to resources that should be helpful. re-visit their Web sites and make changes is taken to ensure alternate accessibility John D. Westbrook, Ph.D. to meet the new level of accessibility. is also accommodated. Director, NCDDR BEST COPY AVAILABV 2 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 3

How many Americans have Disabilities? Figure 2: Americans with disabilities, 1991-92 Estimates of the total number of Americans with disabilities vary, depending on the Race/Ethnic group Total Number Total with Percent with disability disability criteria used and the extent of limitations due to disabling conditions. The Native Americans 1,649,000 361,000 21.9 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of African Americans 31,420,000 6,277,000 20.0 1990 (Public Law 101-336, 104 Stat. 327) Whites 210,873,000 41,521,000 19.7 described a population of 43 million peo- 777,000 9.9 ple with disabilities in the United States. Asian/Pacific Islanders 7,855,000 The Disability Statistics Rehabilitation Hispanic Origin (may include any race) 21,905,000 3,343,000 15.3 Research and Training Center (a NIDRR All 251,796,000 48,936,000 19.4 grantee located at the University of Source: McNeil, J. M. (1993). Americans with disabilities: 1991-92, U.S. Bureau of the California, San Francisco) proposed a Census, Current populations P79-33. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office. figure of 36.1 million, or 14.5 percent of the total population, based on data from the 1990 National Health Interview What about in general, for households with Survey and additional sources (La Plante, Demographic Factors? annual incomes below $40,000 a year, 1992). This figure increased to 15 percent Poverty is a consideration that impacts Whites were twice as likely as African by 1994 (Key, La Plante, & Wenger, 1996). disability rates. LaPlante, Carlson, Kaye Americans to own a computer. The The National Council on Disability Bulletin and Bradsher (1996) found that: "Across study concluded that "income appears (September, 1997) identified 54 million the board, the poverty rate increases to exert its effect on computer access; Americans who reported some level of substantially when a householder has a it is computer access which in turn disability between October 1994 and disability and even more so when both explains subsequent Web use" (Novak January 1995 (NCD, 1997). householders (in partnered families) & Hoffman, 1998). have disabilities." (p. 3). The data from this study are not The poverty rate for partnered fami- supported by the findings of other The Research Exchange, a newsletter to researchers. A Baruch College-Harris promote the effective dissemination and uti- lies without disability is 7.8 percent. Poll survey found that "almost equal lizationof disability research outcomes,is In partnered families, the poverty published quarterly by the National Center for percentages of whites, African rate increases to 14.2 percent when theDisseminationofDisabilityResearch Americans, and Hispanics logged (NCDDR) which is operated by the Southwest both partners have disabilities. Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL). onto the Web (30 percent, 27 percent, Neither SEDL nor the NCDDR discriminate on The poverty rate rises to 20.8 and 26 percent, respectively)" (Birdsell, the basis of age, sex, race, color, creed, reli- gion, national origin, sexual orientation, mari- percent in partnered families with Muzzio, Krane, & Cottreau, 1998, p. 34). tal or veteran status, or the presence of a dis- both one partner and one child with These differences could also be due to ability.SEDLisan EqualEmployment a disability. (LaPlante, Carlson, Kaye Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer and the issue of computer access described is committed to affording equal employment & Bradsher, 1996). above, and that those surveyed in 1997- opportunities for all individuals in all employ- The incidence of disability among ment matters. The contents of this newsletter 98 already had computer access that were developed under a grant (#H133D50016) racial and ethnic groups in the U.S. facilitated their use of the Web. The of $559,986 from the National Institute on also varies. Bradsher (1995) found reasons for limited use of the Internet Disability andRehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of Education (ED). that Native Americans and African by consumers with disabilities have not However, these contents do not necessarily Americans had higher rates of disability yet been clarified through careful study, represent the policy of SEDL, NIDRR, or the ED; do not assume endorsement by the than other groups. Figure 2 displays but applying information from research Federal Government. some estimates of disability rate by on the population as a whole would © Copyright 1998 by the Southwest race/ethnic group. suggest that lack of computer access Educational Development Laboratory A study conducted at Vanderbilt is likely a primary reason. An electronic version of University and published in the April The Research Exchange, Vol. 3, No. 3 17, 1998 issue of Science magazine Do People with is available on the Internet at URL concluded that "a racial divide exists Disabilities Surf selected high school and college NCDDR staff conducted a survey The Research Exchange is available students interviewed from December of consumers with disabilities affiliated in alternate formats upon request. 1996 through January 1997, 73 with Independent Living Centers (ILCs) John Westbrook, Director percent of White students reported throughout the United States, to learn Lin Harris, Information Assistant having a computer at home, how they prefer to get information they Joann Starks, Program Associate compared to 32 percent of African can use. One question asked about Woody Woolcock, Program Specialist John Middleton, Web Administrator American students. Although income consumers' use of the Internet. Over Jane Thurmond, Graphic Design tends to impact computer ownership continued on page 4 11 50 BEST COPYAVAILABLE Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

Who Needs Web Site Accessibility? continued from page 3 Since the WWW was first established half of the 1,238 consumers that mation on a host computer, or server, to responded (51 percent) said they had CyberAtlas (1998). How Many People be accessed through the Internet by any on the Net.: Author. [Online]. Available: never used the Internet. Twenty percent other computer (Gromov, 1996). The Internet once or twice and just over of the Web have also seen the expan- one-quarter had used the Internet often sion of multimedia capabilities that can Graphics, Visualization and Usability (15 percent) or very often (11 percent) affect the accessibility of information for Center (GVU). (1998). GVU WWW to get information (NCDDR, 1997). all potential users. The use of graphics, User Suiveys. (2nd, October 1994-8th, In June, 1998, the NCDDR surveyed animation, tables, and frames have October 1997). Atlanta, GA: Graphics, 79 administrators of ILCs located the potential unintended consequence Visualization & Usability Center, The throughout the United States to learn of limiting, rather than expanding, Georgia Institute of Technology about consumers' computer and Internet information access on the Web for [Producer and Distributor]. [Online]. usage. Only 13 percent of the adminis- some people, for example, those using Available: generally knew how to use the Internet. The WWW provides creative oppor- Gromov, G. R. (1996, September). Over half of the ILCs (52 percent) tunities within an evolving medium. It is Histoiy of the Internet and WWW offered Internet training for their important to keep in mind that all users [Online]. Available: administrators (78 percent) felt their researchers are embracing the Web as Hagins, J. (1995, July). Benefits and consumers do not have adequate an alternate format for communication baniers: People with disabilities and the hardware and software access to the and information dissemination. NIDRR national information infrastructure. Internet. Respondents were also asked grantees should be especially aware of to estimate the percentage of their Austin, TX: The University of Texas the issues related to physical and cogni- at Austin, Center for Research consumers that have personal tive accessibility of information placed on Communication Technology computers with Internet access. on the World Wide Web. It is not easy and Society. Only 11 percent of administrators to ensure that the format and content estimated that more than 25 percent of a Web site are accessible for all IntelliQuest Information Group, of their consumers have their own users, but that should be each Inc. (1998, February 5). Sixty Two computers. Figure 3 presents the grantee's goal. Million American Adults Access results of this NCDDR survey item the Internet/Online Services: (NCDDR, 1998b). Author. [Online]. Available: Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 5 12101 et seq. Kaye, H. S., LaPlante, M., & Wenger, B. L. (1996, November). Trends in Figure3: Independent Living Birdsell, D., Muzzio, D., Krane, Center administrators' disability rates in the United States, D. & Cottreau, A. (1988). Web users 1970-1994. Disability Statistics Abstracts estimate of ILC consumers are looking more like America. The who have personal computers No. 17. (Available from the Disability and Internet access Public Perspective, 9(3), 32-35. [Online]. Statistics RRTC, Institute for Health & Available: California, Box 0646, Laurel Heights, with computers respondents Bradsher, J. E. (1995, October). 3333 California St., San Francisco, CA Disability among racial and ethnic 94143-0646). [Online]. Available: Less than 5% 41% groups. Disability Statistics Abstracts 5 to 24% 37% No. 10. (Available from the Disability LaPlante, M. (1992, December). 9% 25 to 49% Statistics RRTC, Institute for Health & How many Americans have a disability? Aging, School of Nursing, University of 50 to 74% 2% Disability Statistics Abstracts No. 5. California, Box 0646, Laurel Heights, (Available from the Disability Statistics 75 to 100% 0 3333 California St., San Francisco, CA I RRTC, Institute for Health & Aging, No idea 11% 94143-0646). [Online]. Available: School of Nursing, University of California, Box 0646, Laurel Heights, CommerceNet/Nielsen Media 3333 California St., San Francisco, CA Research. (1997). Fall 1997 Internet 94143-0646). [Online]. Available: Demographic Study. [Online]. Available:

4 lib The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 3

La Plante, M. P., Carlson, D., Kaye, H. Interactive for meeting others with their interests. S., and Bradsher, J. E. (1996). Families The NCDDR has created and with disabilities in the United States. maintains several listservs to assist in Disability Statistics Report, (8). Elements of facilitating communication among Washington, DC: U.S. Department NIDDR-affiliated individuals, including: of Education, National Institute on RRTC Research Directors Disability and Rehabilitation Research. the Internet work group for a general RRTC (Available from the Disability Statistics World Wide Web site RRTC, Institute for Health & Aging, School of Nursing, University of Ldividuals and groups are increasingly work group for a general RERC California, Box 0646, Laurel Heights, using interactive tools that offer innova- Web site 3333 California St., San Francisco, CA tive ways to share ideas and resources dissemination committee of the 94143-0646). [Online]. Available: on the Internet. These include such Model Spinal Cord Injury System

1510 continued on page 6 Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

Interactive Elements of the Internet, continued from page 5 Research and Training Centers: required learning a variety of . As with other easier to use. Commercial derivatives people should read and follow before Internet resources, there is a search are available for many platforms and posting messages. engine available to find Web bulletin can be accessed from separate Accessing the Usenet can be boards: Forum One tracks page via . such as Forte's Free Agent for PCs and indexes over 180,000 such ichat ROOMS , discussion forums. , which then Even more interactive are the various ConferenceRoom by WebMaster connects to a news server to list and forms of direct online discussion ("chat- retrieve postings. Internet service ting"). A chat, in virtual-spaces identified Chat Server by Microsoft providers often have a server dedicated as "channels" or "rooms," allows ware combines e-mail and newsreading communicate by typing comments back IRcHelp functions into one package, so switch- and forth, in real-time. This way of is a complete archive of helpful files ing between the two is easy. Netscape, communicating is transitory as it is only including.FAQs, guides, etc. for example, builds the capability to viewed by participants as the discussion occurs, although a chat log may be As it does with listservs, Liszt connect to Usenet servers into its Communicator software, while saved for later review. Online chatting identifies current IRC channels. Microsoft offers an e-mail/newsreader has the benefit of being immediate, addition to its Internet Explorer browser mirroring such real-world concepts as A listing of Internet Chat sites called Outlook Express. teleconferencing, and can be used as an can also be found at WebWorld Web gateways to Usenet that do alternative or supplemental way to talk software, such as the free DejaNews (admittance by password) and sched- Ziff-Davis's chatUser uled for particular topics or to speak discusses a variety , also or they can be open and available of online interactive elements, exist. Both of these allow newsgroups continuously for anyone who might including how to add chatting to be searched and read directly from happen to stop by. In either case, the technology to Web sites. their Web sites, as well as messages to communications are often informal, be posted online. with active chatters creating their own NIDRR Grantees and electronic slang or "Netspeak." Web Interactivity Web Bulletin Boards The best known chatting system is These and other evolving technologies An alternative to newsgroups are the "Internet Relay Chat" (IRC) in which can be incorporated into grantees',Web Web-based discussion forums, or thousands of people simultaneously sites to increase interaction with other bulletin boards, which are hosted on a take part in chats about numerous top- researchers and members of the greater specific Web server. These bulletin ics, on hundreds of servers worldwide. public audience. The purpose and goals boards are private and may be moni- IRC predates the Web; it was originally of such interaction must be specified tored. They are often more convenient developed in Finland in 1988 to ahead of time. Some strategies (such as than either listservs or Usenet groups replace the "Talk" program which let a chat) require more effort in terms of because they can be accessed through a single Internet user type messages monitoring and guiding the interaction. a Web browser and integrated into a to one other. Most online chatting Others require more resources in terms Web site. Web bulletin boards vary programs are modeled on IRC. of server and hardware and/or software. greatly in appearance and complexity, Many Servers are available for public As with all Internet technologies, and may be customized for your use, and each "chatter" must have client the use of interactive components must site's need. software to be able to connect to a consider accessibility for varied users. One popular option is the server and join a chat room or channel. Screen readers can manage text-based Ultimate Bulletin Board While public chat servers are used formats, such as those employed in , primarily for socializing, running the listservs, Usenet, and IRC, but may have which comes in both free and hosting software on a private system difficulty with Java implementations. professional versions. A demonstration would make it feasible for research and Grantees should strive to make their of this forum can be seen on the work groups to conference in online Web sites as accessible as possible for NCDDR's Web site for Rehabilitation meetings. The original IRC software all potential visitors. 6 113 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 3

NIDRR Grantees Project:Kentucky Assistive Technology Service Network (KATS) List Name:KATS Network mailing list Offer Listservs Description: The KATS Network is a statewide, consumer- driven organization. Its primary mission is to establish a statewide, comprehensive system for the provision of assistive Several listservs are operated by grantees around the topics technology devices and services to individuals with disabilities. of their NIDRR-funded projects. These lists were reported to Subscription Instructions: Go to the NCDDR in the fall of 1998. The list name, description and and enter your other information, and subscription instructions are provided. email address in the space provided. Submit form. Generally, to subscribe through automated software, you should leave the "Subject:" line of your message blank (you may be directed otherwise), and be sure any automatic signa- Project:Ohio Regional Traumatic Brain Injury ture features are turned off. Terms placed between brackets [ ], Model System such as [list name] [your first name] [your email address], indi- List Name:Assembly, BI-ISIG, BI-Pedia, Casemantbi, cate where you should put the actual list name you want to RehabPsych, SprtGrpLdr, StateExec, TBI-IR, TBI Prevnt, join, or your own first name, last name, or email address. TBISATREAT, TBIState URL for Information: Project:ADA National Access for Public Schools Project Description: List Name:ADA-L Assembly: a list for state Brain Injury Association executive URL for Information: directors and presidents. BI-ISIG: a list for members of the Brain Injury Note: ADA and the SchoolsListServ Information page is being Interdisciplinary Special Interest Group of the American updated, December, 1998. Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Description: The ADA ListServ is a mailing list for people BI-Pedia: a list for caregivers and parents of children with involved with the Americans with Disabilities Act in schools brain injuries. throughout the United States. The participants in this list are Casemantbi: a list for persons that are case managers or urged to use this mechanism to share their thoughts, ideas and resource and service coordinators for persons with brain suggestions regarding the ADA in schools. injuries. The primary focus is for persons working in community-based settings. Subscription Instructions: Send a message to Kathy Gips RehabPsych: a list for American Psychological Association at the ADA National Access for Public members in Division 22 (Rehabilitation Psychology). Schools Project and she will add your name to the list. SprtGrpLdr: a list for Brain Injury Support Group Leaders. StateExec: a list for Executive Directors of state Brain Injury Project:California Assistive Technology System (CATS) Associations. List Name:CATS News TBI-IR: a list for persons working in Information and URL for Information: Referral about issues of TBI. URL for information: Description: CATS Assistive Technology News Service is an TBI-Prevnt a list for persons working in the area of announcement list. Subscribers will receive short articles, prevention of brain injury. URI, for information: reviews, and announcements about the world of assistive weeks, as it is published. Subscribers will be able to read, TBISATREAT: a list for persons serving individuals with brain save and use all the information posted, and will be free to injuries and substance abuse problems. URL for information: use these articles in other newsletters and bulletins so that editor and CATS ask only that CATS Nevs is credited. TBIState: a list for state government employees responsible Subscription Instructions: Send an email message to: for brain injury programs and eligible for membership in the National Association of State Head Injury Administrators. You do not need to include any text in the subject or body of the message. You will receive a confirmation message before your address is added to the list. continued on page 8 Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

NIDRR Grantees Offer Listservs, continued from page 7 with a request to join the 'affiliates' list). Subscription Instructions: Please subscribe only to those netadmin: This list consists of all Network Administrators, lists you are eligible to join. Send an email message to designated by each DBTAC State Affiliate to serve as single (leave Subject: line point of contact in each state. The list is open only to blank) and in the body of the message type: subscribe [list designated DBTAC network administrators (to subscribe, name] [your first name] [your last name]. You may also send send an e-mail message to email to Gary Lamb-Hart and request with a request to join the 'netadmin' list). to be added to a specific list. netwk: This is a group of individuals who use telecommu- nications for a variety of purposes. They communicate for Project:Oklahoma ABLE Tech information sharing and problem solving about challenging List Name:ABLETECH List Server ADA issues and concerns. To subscribe, send a message to: URL for Information: with the message: Subscribe. When a confirmation to verify the email address is received, use 'Reply' and 'Send' in your email program to Description: The List Server is a public forum for conversation be added to the mailing list. among parents, consumers, and people who work in the disability-related field (currently has 230 subscribers). Project:Speaking to Write: Realizing the Potential of Subscription Instructions: Send an email message to: Speech Recognition for Secondary Students with Disabilities Type the message: SUBSCRIBE ABLETECH-L [your name]. After List Name:spk2wrt you have subscribed, you may email a message to everyone on the list by using: URL for Information: Project:RRTC in Neuromuscular Diseases Description: This is a moderated discussion forum for stu- List Name:NMD FastServ List dents or adults who have used speech recognition technology themselves or with secondary students with disabilities. The URL for Information: primary focus is the educational issues associated with using speech recognition technology to support students with Note: A new Web address disabilities in home and school settings. To access the spk2wrt will be available early in 1999. archive containing a full list of all discussion threads, go to: Description: Breaking news or information the RRTC disseminates rapidly to interested parties. Subscription Instructions: Send an email message to Subscription Instructions: Send an email message to: . (leave Subject: line blank). In the body of the message, type: subscribe spk2wrt. You do not In the "Subject:" line, indicate the name of the neuromuscular need to include your email address or name. Should you have disease or other specific topic for which you want to receive questions or comments about the spk2wrt listserv, please NMD FastServ news. contact the current owner at

Project:Southeast DBTAC (Region IV) Project:Texas Assistive Technology Partnership (TATP) List Name:adhoc, affiliates, netadmin, netwk List Name:Wired Across Texas URL for Information: URL for Information: Description: Following are brief descriptions of the lists and adhoc: This is a group of individuals selected by the regional Description: Wired Across Texas is a list for discussing ADA network who are already experienced in the online topics of interest to persons with disabilities, their families world, and who help guide the project by sharing their ADA and friends. and online experiences. To join this advisory group, send an Subscription Instructions: Send an email message to email message to and ask to . In the body of the join the 'adhoc' list. message write: subscribe wired [your first name] [your last affiliates: This list includes all SE DBTAC State and Local name]. Or, email the project directly: Affiliates, designated by the SE DBTAC and its eight and ask to be added State Affiliates to serve as additional points of contact in to the list. each state. The list is open only to disignated DBTAC network affiliates (to subscribe, send an e-mail message to 1 2 8 TheResearch Exchange Volume 3, Number 3 Microsoft Announces Project:TRACE CENTER (RERC on Information Technology Access, RERC on Universal Grant to Support Telecommunications Access, Understanding and Accessibility Research Increasing Adoption of Universal Design in Product Design) And Development List Name:basr-I, irlink-I, publicitm-I, TAAC-L, telecom-I, uaccess-I, uasig19-I, Webaccess-I Microsoft Corp. announced the creation of a new international grant program to support research URL for Information: and product development initiatives that make PC with disabilities. The new program, Exploring PC Description: Following are brief descriptions of the lists and Accessibility: New Discoveries, was introduced their subjects. during a presentation by Microsoft's accessibility group basr-1: Browsers and screen readers before the United Nations, in conjunction with the irlink-1: Discussion of Bi-Directional Infrared U.N.'s International Day of Disabled Persons on Communications Link Standard December 3, 1998. publicitm-L A forum for discussion of issues concerning Microsoft will award one-year grants of up the accessibility of Public Information/Transaction Machines to $50,000 cash to educational or not-for-profit (formerly kiosk-l) organizations that are developing accessibility TAAC-L: This list is to facilitate communication among technologies to be placed in the public domain. members of the Telecommunication Access Advisory A total of $250,000 will be distributed through Committee. Because the meetings of the Committee are this program. public, the discussions on this listserv are also public and The Exploring PC Accessibility: New Discoveries anyone may join. um, for information: grant also is intended to increase the knowledge base of all groups dedicated to improving accessibility of PC te1ecom-1: Discussion of the US Access Board's Telecom technology and to facilitate the dissemination of new Access guidelines accessibility concepts and products. Perhaps most uaccess-1: Discussion of Universal Access to Information important, the grant will provide an opportunity for Systems those in the accessibility field to share new thinking. uasig19-1: RESNA Universal Access SIG discussion group Webaccess-L Discussion of access to Web sites Applications for Exploring PC Subscription Instructions: To join any of the .discussion lists, Accessibility: New Discoveries send a message to and include grants must be submitted on or the following in the body of the message: before Feb. 12, 1999. Information subscribe [list name] [your first name] [your last name]. about the grant program and Project:Washington Assistive Technology Alliance application process can be obtained from Microsoft's Accessibility Home Page List Name:WASH-AT at Description: This discussion forum was established as a Award winners will be announced March 16, 1999 at networking resource for consumers of assistive technology the annual Technology and PersOns With Disabilities (AT) and their families, AT professionals, and others interested Conference, hosted by California State University in AT in Washington and Pacific Northwest Region (also posts Northridge in Los Angeles. to Usenet newsgroup wash.assistive-tech). Source: Microsoft Corp. (December 3, 1988). Subscription Instructions: To subscribe, send Press Release. [Online]. Available: (leave Subject: line blank). Microsoft is either a registered trademark or trademark of In the body, type: subscribe wash7at [your first name] Microsoft Corp. in the United States and/or other countries. [your last name]. Permission to use Documents (such as white papers, press releases, datasheets and FAQs) from this server ("Server") is granted. provided that the below copyright notice appears in all copies and that both the copyright notice and this permis- sion notice appear. COPYRIGHT NOTICE. Copyright 0 1998 Microsoft and/or its suppliers. One Microsoft Way, Redmond, 12A, Washington 98052-6399 U.S.A. All rights reserved.

9 Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

Updateon development of protocols and the WA1 Evaluation and Repair Interest evolution of the Web. As of November, Group (to provide input to the ER 1998, 280 companies from around the Working Group) Strategies world participate as members of the Consortium. WAI Education and Outreach The WAI was launched during the Working Group (to develop strategies for Web 6th International World Wide Web and materials to increase awareness Conference in Santa Clara, California in among the Web community of the April 1997. Through its International need for, and solutions to, Web Accessibility Program Office (IPO), the WAI enables accessibility) partnering and coordination among the many stakeholders in Web accessibility: WAI Page Author Guidelines In 1997 the NCDDR presented issues industry, disability and other non-profit Working Group (for Web page of Web accessibility in The Research organizations, government, research developers/authors) Exchange, Vol. 2, No. 1 (NCDDR, 1997). organizations, Web developers and Many of these suggestions are still content providers. Judy Brewer, Director useful for Web page developers, and of the IPO, was formerly director of the Dr. Gregg Vanderheiden is co-chair of the WAI Page Author Guidelines should be recognized by grantees as Massachusetts Assistive Technology Working Group, along with Chuck important to making information on Partnership (MATP), which was funded Letourneau of Canada's Starling Access their Web sites available and usable to through NIDRR by the Technology- Services. Dr. Vanderheiden and staff at many different users, including people Related Assistance for Individuals with the Trace Center, a NIDRR grantee, with disabilities. Rather than repeat this Disabilities Act. developed guidelines for accessible information here, the NCDDR presents Integrating the WAI on all fronts of Web sites that served as the basis for some new ideas and issues in Web Web development is critical to ensure the WAI Accessibility Guidelines: Page acessibility in this issue. The Annotated that accessibility protocols are a part Authoring (W3C Working Draft- WWW Resource List has been updated of the future of the World Wide Web. 18 September 1998) and new entries are included. Volume For example, a number of accessibility . These at or you may request a Initiative Interest Group (WAI IG) pro- paper copy or alternate formats from vides a forum for discussion of issues are encouraged to follow these guide- lines to improve accessibility for all the NCDDR office. related to Web accessibility via a listserv visitors to NX/WW sites. and occasional face-to-face meetings. A number of resources are The WAI focuses on five primary areas The power of of 'work: technology, guidelines, tools, maintained at the WAI's Web site the Web , is in its universality. education and outreach, and research and development. Specific working including news briefs, charters and min- utes of working group/interest group Access byeveryone groups and interest groups pursue meetings, subscription instructions and activities in these areas, including: regardless ofdisability ti-chives of listservs, references for Web WAI User Agent Guidelines Working accessibility, as well as drafts and final is an essentialaspect. Group (for browser software Tim Berners-Lee, versions of products developed by WAI W3C accessibility) participants (W3C, 1998c). Director and inventorof the World Wide Web (W3C,1998c) The comprehensive nature of the WAI Authoring Tool Guidelines WAL beginning with the development Web Accessibility Working Group (to make authoring of international protocols for the Web, Initiative (WAI) tools accessible to authors with the development of guidelines, and disabilities and provide support for education efforts, will help ensure The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) creating accessible Web documents) that the need for accessibility is not is an international effort to raise aware- overlooked in the ongoing evolution of ness about World Wide Web accessibili- WAI Evaluation and Repair (ER) the World Wide Web as an information ty for people with disabilities, and to Working Group (to produce tools dissemination, communication and coordinate efforts to develop standards. that will be offered to people who research medium. The participation of The WAI is sponsored by the World create and need to maintain or NIDRR and NIDRR grantees reflects the Wide Web Consortium (W3C), which repair web sites) value that NIDRR research can provide was established in 1994 to oversee to such an important undertaking. 1 0 122 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 3

Bobby various platforms (PC, Macintosh, National Center for the Dissemination Keeping up with the changes and UNIX, etc.) and with different hardware. of Disability Research (NCDDR). (1997.) progress in Web accessibility is an The W3C works to coordinate these Accessible Information on the World ongoing challenge. One source of help standards so that Web developers use Wide Web. The Research Exchange, is Bobby, a Web-based program that the same codes, and browser develop- 2(1), 1-15. [Online]. Available: reviews existing pages to verify ers (such as Netscape and Microsoft Bobby examines a page and identifies protocols. Jesse Berst, ZDNET Anchor World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). ways it may not be accessible to people Desk, identified the key improvements (1998a). Cascading style sheets. [Online]. with disabilities. Bobby describes specif- over HTML 3.2 as: Available: tips on improving accessibility, based on with the features people like from W3C. (1998b). HTML 4.0 the W3C's WAI Page Author Guidelines. Windows and Mac (labeled buttons, specification. W3C recommendation, Earlier versions of Bobby rated each disabled buttons, grouped buttons, revised on 24-Apr-1998. [Online]. page's accessibility with one to four tool tips, keyboard shortcuts Available: rates a page as Bobby Approved or not 2. Better tables. Scrollable tables, fixed approved. If all pages are approved W3C. (1998c). Web accessibility headers, tables that break across initiative (WAD. [Online]. Available: by Bobby as accessible and compatible pages for printing, and so on. with current HTML 4.0 standards, a site may display the Bobby Approved icon 3. Better programmability. A standard . 4. Better frames. "Embedded" (nline) Bobby also identifies problems frames within an HTML document. Request which prevent a Web page from being 5. Better character sets. Easier ways to displayed correctly on a variety of use special characters for languages The browsers (including different versions other than English, for mathematics, of Netscape Navigator, Internet Explorer, and for other purposes (Berst, 1997). America Online, Mosaic, Lynx, and The W3C highlighted the following Research WebTV) without having to individually features of HTML 4.0 that enhance Web test the page with each browser. Bobby accessibility for pe6ple with disabilities: examines three levels of HTML coding Exchange incompatibilities. A recent search found The new 'form' features support Vol. 2, No. 1 over 4,000 Web pages with links to groupings, labels, shortcuts and Bobby. A downloadable freestanding titles to enhance their usability. Call version of Bobby is also available to The new 'table' feature supports 1-800-266-1832 or facilitate review of an entire Web site using captions to make the content . (W3C, 1998b). E-mail Bobby is a free service that was The use of Cascading Style Sheets [email protected] developed by the Center for Applied allows a developer to provide Special Technology's (CAST) Universal options in designing a page, while Design Lab staff and Josh Krieger. CAST users can set up parameters for their ocky. is a not-for-profit organization, founded own best viewing (W3C, 1998a). Rezirch tqlp i Wimp° in 1984. CAST's mission is to expand opportunities for individuals with References TwOlmamodemgdwomAammoRilielmallommealbe*upemmg* Accessible Information on the disabilities through innovative Berst, J. (July 9, 1997.) Why orld aide ilieb computer technology (CAST, 1998). HTML 4.0 is just what we need. [Online]. Available: =matt= HTML 4.0 The Internet The codes to publish documents on the Language (HTML). The current version Center for Applied Special of HTML is 4.0, and the most recent Technology (CAST). (1998). revised W3C draft recommendation, Bobby Web accessibility validator. was made public in April, 1998 (W3C, [Online]. Available: 1998b). HTML provides a standard that allows documents to be used across BEST COPY AVAILABLE Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

New Review Framesinclusion of multiple Search Engine Availability "windows" on a single web page inclusion of one or more search Interactive Dhnensionsinclusion of engines as part of the Web site of NIDRR special features to promote design interaction among Web site users, Text and Graphicsinclusion of e.g. chat rooms, bulletin boards, or both text and graphics 'within the Grantees' other interactive elements Web site Graphics Onlyinclusion of only Text Onlyinclusion of text without graphics to communicate information graphics, or inclusion of alternate Web Sites through the Web site text-only pages links to NCDDRinclusion of a Update Noticeinclusion of a date hypertext link to the National Center indicating the last revision to the site How are NIDRR's grantees using the for the Dissemination of Disability World Wide Web (WWW) to share Videoinclusion of video snippets as Research (NCDDR) information with the world at large? A part of the Web site review of grantees' Web sites in Links to NIDRRinclusion of a hypertext link to the National NCDDR staff reviewed all grantee Web November, 1997 (NCDDR, 1998) was sites during the period November 11-20, repeated in November, 1998. Over the Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) 1997, and again November 2-9, 1998. year, the percentage of NIDRR-funded For each review, sites that could not be Links to NIDRR ProjectsInclusion of grantees with Web sites had increased accessed on a first attempt were tried from 58 percent in1997(176 of 284 one or more links to other projects again the following day. Sites that could funded by NIDRR projects) to 72 percent in 1998 (214 of not be accessed on the second day were 300 projects). In 1996, 32 percent of Navigation Toolsinclusion of "but- not included in the review. Of the 214 grantees had sites on the Web (88 of 270 tons" or other devices to assist users NIDRR grantee Web sites, NCDDR staff projects). This rapid increase reflects the in moving around to major areas of a were unable to access only one during general growth of the Web. NCDDR staff Web site the time frame of the review in 1998. originally analyzed grantees' Web sites to NIDRR Acknowledgedinclusion of a Four sites were not accessed and not identify common characteristics, and one statement that the Web site was part included in 1997. Percentages of grantee year later, to see what changes or trends of a project funded through NIDRR Web sites with specific characteristics are could be highlighted. reported in Figure 4. The NCDDR identified 20 objective characteristics to use in the Web site Figure4: Percentage of Characteristics Comparison of analysis. These characteristics stemmed Noted Across NIDRR Grantees' Web sites from a discussion in The Research Findings from Exchange Vol. 2, No. 3 (NCDDR, 1997) Characteristic PercentagePercentage 1997-1998 that addressed the "communication (1998) (1997) These were the major findings power" of a WWW site. NCDDR n=213 n=171 of the NCDDR review of staff chose to review the following Text and Graphics 98 70 Web sites: characteristics: Navigation Tools 89 78 The most common feature Access Iconsinclusion of symbols Forms/Email 86 86 of NIDRR grantees' Web indicating accessibility for users with NIDRR Acknowledged 70 57 sites was the use of both disabilities, e.g. Bobby Approved, Links to NIDRR Projects 51 23 text and graphics (98 per- cent); up from 70 percent NCAM Web Access Symbol. Update Notice 41 51 in 1997. The most common Audioinclusion of audio snippets as Links to NIDRR 31 24 feature in 1997 was the use part of the Web site Copyright 31 21 of forms and/or electronic Search Engine Availability Animationinclusion of moving 26 16 mail links (86 percent). graphics Disclaimer 23 19 This figure remained Copyrightinclusion of a copyright Access Icons 23 10 constant in 1998. symbol (0) Animation 19 13 Nearly three-quarters (70 Disclaimerinclusion of a statement Text Only 19 31 percent) of the grantees that the views expressed did not Links with NCDDR 18 11 acknowledged NIDRR as the necessarily reflect the views of Interactive Dimensions 12 4 funding agency supporting the Government and general Frames 9 13 the project work presented responsibility for content of site Audio 2 4 on their Web site (up from Forms/E-mailinclusion of feedback Video 2 2 57 percent in 1997). channels such as forms or electronic Graphics Only 0 mail links 0 12 BEST COPYAVAL.Litritz The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 3

Over half (51 percent) of grantees 3.0 is based on the W3C's WAI Page printable forms, and others use their include one or more links to other Author Guidelines (W3C, 1998). A page sites for marketing of available prod- NIDRR-funded projectS in 1998. This is identified as Bobby Approved if no ucts. This was a subjective overview, more than doubled, from 23 percent accessibility errors are found. primarily scanning several pages of in 1997. each site to see if information materials Nearly one-third (31 percent) of Accessibility Findings were directly available to Web visitors, grantees include a link to NIDRR's or if only ordering forms and instruc- In 1997, approximately one-third (36 homepage from their Web site (up tions were presented. Approximately percent) of the NIDRR grantees' Web 56 percent of the NIDRR grantees sites from 24 percent in 1997). site home pages earned four stars to be Over one-quarter (26 percent) of do provide information that can be recognized as Bobby Approved. In 1998, downloaded or printed, while 5 percent grantee Web sites included a search this figure increased to 43 percent of engine (up from 16 percent in 1997). demonstrated a marketing focus that the sites reported as Bobby Approved. It allowed visitors to order information for The use of a copyright symbol is important to note that this increase purchase that was not available directly and/or disclaimer increased over the occurred while many of the sites also from the site. year. In 1997, 21 percent of grantee use more text and graphics, animation, The updating of Web sites is Web sites displayed a copyright and other interactive elements that can important to ensure that information symbol (0); this increased by nearly impact accessibility if not implemented is current and to encourage visitors half, to 31 percent of all grantees' with care. The review of accessibility of to return frequently to seek new sites in 1998. A disclaimer statement NIDRR grantee Web sites is presented in information. The 1998 review of Web was observed in 19 percent of sites Figure 5. site characteristics found that 41 percent in 1997; this increased to 23 percent of current NIDRR grantees' Web sites in 1998. Content is Everything provided a notice of the last update on In the 1998 Web site review, NCDDR their home pages. Of these, 66 percent Review of Accessibility also looked at several content aspects were updated within 3 months of of each grantee's Web site. All (100 the review. Eleven percent were last As the use of the Web page is seen as updated from 3 to 6 months before an effective tool for dissemination, the percent) of the grantees use their Web sites to introduce the organization the review, 7 percent within 6 to 12 issue of accessibility of Web site infor- months, and 16 percent were last mation for users with disabilities has and/or NIDRR-funded grant project, as well as their products and services. updated 12 months or longer prior become more immediate. The World to the review. Wide Web Consortium (W3C), through Some use Web sites to provide data or continued on page 14 its Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) other information in downloadable or and special features in the HTML 4.0 publishing language, has embraced accessibility of the Web for people with Figure 5: Percentage of NIDRR Grantee Web Site Home Pages Evaluated as disabilities. Some accessibility features Bobby Approved, listed by NIDRR Program Areas include alternate text labels and descriptions for pictures and graphics, NIDFIR Pro . ram Area Percenta ,e (1998)n=213 Percentage (1997)n=171 ensuring that page layouts do not ADA Technical Assistance 92 39* confuse content when read by a Contracts 0 0 screenreader, supplying scripts or Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects 0 captions for video or audio content, and providing text-only alternatives Fellowships 0 25 for images that provide content. Field-Initiated Research 40 20 In its brief review of NIDRR Model Spinal Cord Injury System 27 25 grantees' Web sites, the NCDDR used Research & Demonstration Projects 30 56 Bobby as a measurement tool. Bobby is Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers 38 56 Web-based software developed by the Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers 34 31 Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) Research Training Grants 33 50 for the purpose of verifying accessibility Small Business Innovative Research 100 50 (CAST, 1998). In 1997, the Bobby State Technology Assistance 51 37** software version assigned from one to Utilization Projects 100 67 four stars, depending on the number of All Projects With Web Sites 43 36 accessibility problems found on the une site not reviewed' page reviewed. In 1998, Bobby version ** Two sites not reviewed BEST COPY AVAILABLE Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

New Review of NIDRR Grantees' Web Sites, continued from page 13 grantee Web sites that were identified as Bobby Approved. This is a good increase, especially considering the fact that the total number of grantees' Web Using Access Icons sites increased and that the use of interactive dimensions, graphics, and animation increased among NIDRR Special graphic images or iconshave been designed to grantee Web sites overall. Nevertheless, demonstrate a site's goal of accessibility. these data show that in 1998, more than half (57 percent) of the NIDRR grantee's Web sites still present accessibility errors that prevent them from being Bobby Approved. Grantees are once again encouraged to apply the graphical Web-based Bobby program to their Web site in order to The Bobby Approved icon may be displayed by a Web site on its home begin evaluating its accessibility for page when all pages in the site are Bobby Approved. CAST suggests that if some pages do not meet accessibility requirements, those pages people with disabilities. It is reasonable to expect that NIDRR grantees' Web sites that do can carry the notation "This page is Bobby Approved." In a case where most pages are approved, CAST suggests the site may use should be held to a higher standard reflecting what is desired in every the Bobby Approved icon with a list of pages which are not, preceded by the text "The pages listed below are not yet Bobby Approved." WWW sitethe most accessible sites (CAST, 1998). possible for all users, including Web visitors with disabilities. References The National Center for Accessible Media Center for Applied Special (NCAM) of CPB/WGBH in Boston developed Technology (CAST). (1998). Bobby Web the Web Access Symbol to show Web users that accessibility validator. [Online]. Available: a site is emphasizing accessibility for all users. Use of this icon is self-assigned, and there are no specific criteria required for a site to display National Center for Accessible Media the globe with keyhole Web Access Symbol for (NCAM). (1998). The Web Access people with disabilities (NCAM, 1998). Symbol. [Online]. Available: NCDDR. (1997). Assessing the communication power of your WWW site. The Research Exchange, 2(3), 6. Conclusions Greatest decreases were seen among [Online]. Available: Information gained from the these characteristics: grantees' Web sites found several trends. Use of Text Only NCDDR. (1998). Common The greatest increases from 1997 to 1998 characteristics of NIDRR Grantees' included: Use of Frames Websites. The Research Exchange, Use of Interactive Dimensions Less use of Text Only demonstrates 3(1), 1-4. [Online]. Available: increasing sophistication of Web Use of Access Icons Links.to other NIDRR projects Graphics) while a decrease in the use W3C. (1998). WAI Accessibility These characteristics demonstrate of Frames could reflect more attention Guidelines: Page Authoring, increasing use of the communication to accessibility. The drop in use of (W3C Working Draft, 18 September and information sharing features of the Audio may also respond to accessibility 1998). [Online]. Available: Web (Use of Interactive Dimensions, concerns. well as understanding and showing grantees' Web sites, there was an attention to accessibility issues (Use increase from 1997 (36 percent) to 1998 of Access Icons). (43 percent) in the percentage of

, 14 t 4,..; The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 3 Annotated WWW Resource List (Updated December, 1998)

This is a small sampling of the resources available on the Accessible Web Page Design World Wide Web (WWW). Each listing is accompanied by a http://wvvw.igs.net/-starling/acc/actoc.htm brief description. These sites provide useful information that Copyright CD 1997-8, Starling Access Services. Guidelines supports the development of effective, interesting Web pages for making Web page components accessible; links to that are accessible to a variety of visitors. other resources. General Design Tips Accessibility http://www.igs.net/-starling/acc/acgen.htm Assessing Web Pages General style guidelines and tips for specific disabilities. Browser Software Cascading Style Sheets Adaptive Technology Resource Centre Chat Technology http://www.utoronto.ca/atre/ The University of Toronto's ATRC promotes the integration General Design/Related Issues of alternative access systems throughout the information Government Policies technblogy infrastructure. Hardware/Software Developers HTML Commandments HTML Information http://www.utoronto.ca/atrc/rd/htmli Increasing Awareness of Web Sites commandments.html Internet/WWW-General 10 rules for writing accessible HTML, by Dena Shumila, ATRC Vision Technology Consultant; graphic and screen Listserv/Mailing Lists reader versions. News Groups Inclusive Web DesignHow to Create Accessible NIDRR Grantee Resources Web Pages Search Engines http://www.utoronto.ca/atrc/rd/slideshows/ Universal Design inclusive.html Presented by Kevin Nguyen and Jutta Treviranus at the Seventh Annual World Wide Web Conference, Brisbane Accessibility Australia, April 14th, 1998; Tutorial Slides. Page includes Access Ability Online Resource many links to fuither readings and references. http://accessability.noie.gov.au/welcome.cfm Commissioned by Australia's National Office for the Alliance for Technology Access (ATA) Information Economy, this Web resource aims to raise http://www.ataccess.org/ awareness of the accessibility issues faced by people with The ATA is a network of community-based resource centers disabilities who wish to use online services. Among other dedicated to providing information and support services to things, this database includes information on hardware and children and adults with disabilities, and increasing their use software products, standards development, training and of standard, assistive, and information technologies. education issues, support programs, policy papers and case Designing Access To WWW Pages studies, both from Australia and key international sources. http://www.ataccess.org/design.html Those who design and construct web sites can do a great Accessible Web Page Design deal to ensure universal acce8s to their sites. Awareness of http://weber.u.washington.edu/-doit/Resources/web- some of the potential barriers and possible solutions should design.html help web page designers to employ practices which will Information on accessible Web page design and links from the lead to the inclusion of everybody. DO-IT Project (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology) at theUniversity of Washington. Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) http://www.cast.org/ Accessible Web Page Design Founded in 1984, CAST is a not-for-profit organization http://www.eskimo.com/-jlubin/disabled/web-desi.htm whose mission is to expand opportunities for indivickials with Copyright 1994-1998 by Jim Lubin. Links to information disabilities through innovative computer technology. on accessible Web page design, testing your Web page for accessibility, graphics, and on-line design discussions; also links to other disABILITY information and resources.

continued on page 16 1 5 Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

Annotated WWW Resource List:Accessibility continued from page 15

Compatibility & Accessibility WWW Browser Accessibility Recommendations http://www.pantos.org/atw/access.html http://www.stafLuiuc.edu/-jongund/ Towards the creation of an accessible, truly World-wide Web, access-browsers.html from All Things Web. Articles include: A paper by Jon Gunderson on browser accessibility guidelines. Click Hear (A preliminary look at CSS-based audio optimization) WWW Consortium (W3C) Some Readers... Aren't (Not every visitor is a "reader") http://www.w3.org/ The Art of ALT (Building effective ALT text) The World Wide Web Consortium was founded in 1994 to devel- Could Helen Keller Read Your Page? (Technical tips on op common standards for the evolution of the World Wide Web. improving the accessibility of a Web page) Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Accommodating Imperfection (Designing for accessibility) http://www.w3.org/WAI/ The World Wide Web offers the promise of transforming EAS1: Equal Access to Software and Information many traditional barriers to infOrmation and interaction among http://www.rit.edu/-easi/ different peoples. The W3C's commitment to lead the Web to People with disabilities must have the same access to its full potential includes promoting a high degree of usability information and resources as everyone else. EASI's mission is for people with disabilities. to promote this access through on-site and on-line workshops; WAI Accessibility Guidelines: Page Authoring publications and videos; e-mail discussion lists; web site; http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-WAI-PAGEAUTH/ electronic journal; and through participation in a wide variety This document is a list of guidelines that page authors should of regional and national conferences. follow in order to make their pages more accessible for peo- ple with disabilities as well as more useful to other users, new National Center to Improve Practice (NC1P) page viewing technologies (mobile and voice), and electronic http://www.edc.org/FSC/NCIP/ agents such as indexing robots. The National Center to Improve Practice in Special Education WAI Quick Tips Reference Card through Technology, Media, and Materials promotes the effective http://www.w3.org/WAI/References/QuickTips use of technology to enhance educational outcomes for students The WAI QuickTips reference card is a concise summary of a with sensory, cognitive, physical, social/emotional disabilities. few key design principles for making Web sites accessible to Accessibility of this Site people with disabilities and more usable for everyone. The http://www.edc.org/FSC/NCIP/Accessibility.html QuickTips are based on the WAI Page Author Guidelines, Describes NCIP's design strategies to make their Web site developed by the WAI Education & Outreach Working Group, accessible for all users. and meant only to help people remember some principles of accessible design. NCSA Mosaic Access Page WM Reference List on Web Accessibility http://bucky.aa.uic.edu/ http://www.w3.org/WAI1References/ Mosaic was one of the first Internet information browsers and This WAI Reference List on Web Accessibility highlights World Wide Web clients, developed at the National Center for the work of many organizations around the world in Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois in improving accessibility for people with disabilities. Urbana-Champaign. This page presents Mosaic's disability access efforts. Assessing Web Pages WebABLE! Bobby http://www.yuri.org/webablel http://www.castorg/bobby/ Located at the Yuri Rubinsky Insight Foundation Web site, Bobby is a graphical Web-based program designed by the WebABLE! is a Web directory for disability-related Internet Center for Applied Special Technology to help web site resources. designers and graphic artists make their web pages accessible People with Disabilities Can't Access the Web by the largest number of people. http://www.yuri.org/webable/mp-pwdca.html Background paper, resource links by Mike Paciello Validators and Document Checkers http://www.htmlhelp.com/links/validators.htm WWW Accessibility to People with Disabilities This list of links to sites that check for HTML syntax errors A Usability Perspective is maintained by the Web Design Group. http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/-jongund/ access-overview.html W3C HTML Validation Service An overview of Web accessibility needs by Jon Gunderson http://va1idator.w3.org/ of the Mosaic/Web Access Project. This is an easy-to-use HTML validation service based on an SGML parser. It checks HTML documents for compliance with W3C HTML Recommendations and other HTML standards. 1 6 1 ') <.. The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 3

Web Page Accessibility Self-Evaluation Test pwWebSpeak Overview http://www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/dmd/access/testverl.htm http://www.prodworks.com/pwwovw.htm Developed by the Diversity Management Directorate, Public pwWebSpeak was designed and developed by The Service Commission of Canada. You should be able to "score" Productivity Works, Inc. in conjunction with De Witt and a Web page's Accessibility Quotient and make the necessary Associates, who act as accessibility consultants to the project, corrections, using this simple self-evaluation test. and Thomas Edison State College. pwWebSpeak is a trademark of The Productivity Works, Inc. Copyright © 1996-98. What does your HTML look like without graphics? http://www.slcc.edu/webguide/lynxit.html This page is provided by Salt Lake Community College to Cascading Style Sheets help HTML programmers get an idea of how non-graphics Cascading Style Sheets browsers, such as Lynx, would see their page. Lynx is a http://www.w3.org/Sty1e/CSSI text-based hypertext browser with full World Wide Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) is a simple mechanism for adding Web capabilities. style (e.g. fonts, colors, spacing) to Web documents. Many resources for understanding and applying CSS are provided. Browser Software Cascading Style Sheets Browser Watch http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/css/ http://browserwatch.internet.com/ Change the appearance of hundreds of Web pages by Browser Watch was founded and is still maintained by changing just one file. Influence presentation without losing Dave Garaffa for Internet.com, Mecklermeclia's source for visitors. All with the power and flexibility of Web style sheets, Internet news and resources. from the Web Design Group.

Can I run Lynx on my OS? Practical style sheets http://www.crl.com/subielynx/platforms.html http://builder.com/Authoring/CCSToday/ A text-based browser, Lynx is one of the early products Joseph Schmuller's article (11/10/98) on how to take still in use today. advantage of CSS without abandoning older browsers, from CNET's Builder.com. Home Page Reader http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/hpr.html By teaming up IBM's Via Voice OutLoudmi text-to-speech, SAPI- Chat/Conferencing Technology compliant speech synthesizer and Netscape 'Navigator', IBM's Chat Server Home Page Reader orally communicates web-based informa- http://www.microsoft.com/ie/chat/ tion just as it is presented on the computer screen. The Microsoft Chat family home page, where you can explore links to information about Microsoft Chat 2.5 and Microsoft Internet Explorer http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/default.htm Microsoft V-Chat 2.0. Internet Explorer, the browser developed by Microsoft. The Chat at Internet User newest Internet Explorer beta is designed to be simpler, more http://www.zdnet.com/products/chatuser.html automated, and more flexible than any other browser. ZDNet's resources including tools, software, how to, etc.

NCSA Mosaic Conference Room http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/SDG/Software/Mosaic/ http://www.webmaster.com/ Mosaic is one of the first Internet information browsers and Conference Room, the Web Master Chat/Conferencing client WWW clients. NCSA Mosaic was developed at the National and server software for Windows. Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Forum One http://www.forumone.com/ Netscape The Web's search engine for online forums http://home.netscape.com/browsers/ combines Netscape Navigator, the ichat ROOMS world's most popular browser, with a suite of Internet tools http://www.ichat.com/products/rooms.html for high-performance Internet mail, web page creation, and ichat ROOMS serves as on online forum to add real-time instant messaging. interaction to your Web site.

12"rti continued on page 18 17 Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

Annotated WWW Resource List:Chat/Conferencing Technology continued from page 17

IRCHelp Home Page Government Policies http://www.irchelp.org/ Center for Information Technology Accommodation #IRCHelp.org is operated by volunteers from the #IRCHelp http://www.gsa.gov/coca/ channel on the EFnet (IRC network) and provides over CITA (formerly the Clearinghouse on Computer 800 help files, such as FAQ, tutorials, server lists, and others AccommodationCOCA) is located in the General Services to support Internet Relay Chat. Administration. Links are provided to policies and guidelines. Make Your Web Pages Accessible Liszt's IRC Chat Directory http://www.liszt.com/chat/ http://m.itpolicy.gsa.gov/cita/wpa.htm The only place you can search for 37871 IRC channels Numerous links to government and other sources on 27 IRC networks. World Wide Web Home Page Guidelines and Best Practices Ultimate Bulletin Board http://www.itpolicy.gsa.gov/cita/guidelines.htm http://www.ultimatebb.com/ The guidelines from the World Wide Web (WWW) Federal What sets the UBB apart from other online bulletin board Consortium (founded in 1994) now include policy consider- systems is its unique interface, extensive administrative ations which Federal Agencies should review as they update features, and easy customization. and/or make new use of the Internet and expand WWW sites to conduct agency business.

General Design and Policy Statement on Making Materials and Information Related Issues Available and Accessible to Individuals with Disabilities http://www.ed.gov/pubs/Sec504/append-d.html CNET Builder.com This policy clarifies the obligations of the United States http://builder.com/ Department of Education under Section 504 of the This resource provides information in the following areas: Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, to make its materials Authoring, Programming, Graphics, Servers, Business, accessible and available to its disabled customers. Builder Buzz, Buildet News, Builder Downloads, Resources, and Conferences. World Wide Web Server Policy and Procedures http://www.ed.gov/internal/wwwstds.html Computers and the Disabled Defines the specific standards and general guidelines which http://www.pctv.com/pctv/shows/chronicles/ the U.S. Department of Education uses to make information 96-97/1424/1424.html available on the World Wide Web (revised--March 1998). This issue of Computer Chronicles highlights various perspectives from different authors on computers and World Wide Webserver of the City of San Jose people with disabilities. http://www.ipac.net/csj/ The Web site of San Jose, California, was selected as a HTML Writers Guild model City link by the federal CITA. http://www.hwg.org/ Web Page Disability Access Design Standard The HWG exists to assist our members in developing and http://www.ipac.net/csj/oaacc/disacces.html enhancing their capabilities as web authors, to compile and Standards are presented and serve as a model for publicize information about standards, practices, techniques, other site developers (Rev. August 12, 1998). competency, and ethics as applied to web authoring, and to contribute to the development of the web and web technical standards and guidelines. Hardware/Software Internet World Developers http://www.internetworld.com/ Accessibility and Disabilities Site Internet World, published monthly by Mecklermedia in http://www.microsoft.com/enablel Westport, Conn. began as a newsletter and became a Welcome to Microsoft's Accessibility and Disabilities site, where full-color newsstand magazine in September 1993. we provide information and tools that can help you remove Good, Bad, and Ugly Pages barriers and make the world more accessible. http://www.internetworld.com/print/ monthly/1996/04/bottom.html This article from Internet World 7 (4) April, 1996, by Joel Snyder looks at planning before launching a Web site and errors to avoid.

18 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 3

Disability Resources from Apple Computer Increasing Awareness http://www.apple.comieducation/k12/disability/ Apple is deeply committed to helping persons with special of Web Sites needs attain an unparalleled level of independence through Found It On the Net a personal computer. http://www.internetworld.com/prinemonth47/ 1996/01/found.html IBM Special Needs Systems Linda Engelman's column in the Internet World (1996, January) http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/ discusses how to attract visitors to your Web site. Make your IBM technology can open doors for achievement and presence knOwn; promote without offending. independence and enhance the employability, education, and quality of life of people who have disabilities. How works (FAQ) http://www.sangfroid.com/charter.html The purpose of this moderated newsgroup is to publicize non- HTML Information commercial Web-based resources of potentially world-wide interest. Beginner's Guide to HTML http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/General/Internet/WWW/ Promote Assist HTMLPrimer.html http://online-biz.com/promote/assist.shtml The NCSA Beginner's Guide is still the most frequently An aid' to submitting your Web site to some of the more popular requested file on NCSA's Web site. indices, catalogs, spiders and "What's New" lists on the WWW.

HTML 4.0 Reference Submit It! http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/htm140/ http://www.submit-it.com/ The Web Design Group's reference for the new A popular free or paid service for sending URLs to search HTML standard. engines and directories. HTML 4.0 Specification Web Promote Free Submit http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-htm140/ http://freesubmit.webpromote.com/freesubmit_intro.html W3C Recommendation, revised on 24-Apr-1998. This Now Web Promote, a leader in Directory Listing Services brings specification defines the Hyper Text Markup Language (HTML), you a quick, easy and free way to submit your web site to nine version 4.0, the publishing language of the World Wide Web. of the most popular search engines on the Internet. Introduction to HTML http://www.cwru.edu/help/introHTML/toc.html Internet/WWW General With this tutorial, you can pick up the basics of the Hyper Text All Things Web Markup Language (HTML) in a few short hours. You will not http://www.pantos.orglatw/ know everything there is to know about HTML when you The primary focus of ATW is to help Web designers and reach the end of the tutorial, but you will know enough to authors create usable, "reader-friendly" Web pages. Usable create a perfectly respectable Web page. Developed by Case means many things: structurally sound, long-lived, syntactically Western Reserve University, this tutorial includes two sequels: correct, broadly accessible, easily navigable. H7ML2.0: Forms and Obscurities and 11771IL3.2: Here's Wilbur! International World Wide Web Conferences Spotlight on HTML! Sixth International World Wide Web Conference http://builder.com/Authoring/Html/ http://access.www6conLorg/ CNET Builder.com's complete collection of HTML tips, tutori- The theme of the Sixth International World Wide Web als, and trade secrets fof beginners to experts, and everyone Conference, held April 7-11, 1997 in Santa Clara, California in-between. was accessibility: Everyone-Everything-Connected. Seventh International World Wide Web Conference Twenty Questions about HTML 4.0 http://www7.scu.edu.au/ http://builder.com/Authoring/Htm140/ Held in Brisbane, Australia, April 14-18, 1998. By Dan Schafer (9/16/97), the questions cover "What is HTML Eighth International World Wide Web Conference 4.0" to "What's Next for HTML?" http://www8.org/ Toronto, Ontario, Canada, May 11-14, 1999. This conference will bring together leaders from academia, research organizations, government and industry, offering delegates a chance to gain a global perspective of the issues facing the Web community. 131 continued on page 20 19 Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

Annotated WWW Resource List:Internet/WWWGeneral continued from page 19 Web Design Group News Groups http://www.htmlhelp.com/ DejaNews The Web Design Group was founded to promote the develop- http://www.dejanews.com/ ment of non-browser-specific, non-resolution-specific, creative Welcome to Deja News, The Discussion Network! You've and informative sites that are accessible to all users worldwide. discovered the only Web site where you can read, search, World Wide Web Primer participate in and subscribe to more than 80,000 discussion http://www.vuw.ac.nz/gnat/ideas/www-primer.html forums, including Usenet newsgroups. Written in 1994 by Nathan Torkington, this primer still Forte's Free Agent provides a good general overview of the Web. http://www.forteinc.com/agent/ WWW Tools and Places A simple but reliable offline newsreader to help you navigate http://mambo.ucsc.edu/psl/wwwtp.html through the newsgroups, Free Agent offers the basic features A listing of links about the WWW, search engines, and functionality you need, it's easy to use, and it's free! Agent government and other interesting sites. is a commercial version of Forte's newsreader. MT-Newswatcher Web Developer's Virtual Library http://www.stars.com/ http://www.best.com/smfr/mtnw/mtnewswatcher.html MT-NewsWatcher is a Usenet news reading application for the The Webmaster's Illustrated Encyclopedia of web technologies Macintosh, based on John Norstad's NewsWatcher application. and design principles. Includes tutorials, examples, and links MT-NewsWatcher adds to the basic NewsWatcher a number to resources. It's for webrnasters, web designers and Internet of useful features, including multi-threading, filtering, spell developers. The WDVL is one of the oldest web developer checking, and speech recognition. web sites, dating from 1994. Newsguy Listserv/Mailing Lists http://www.newsguy.com/ Newsguy News Service is a membership based news server Directory of Scholarly and Professional E-Conferences that provides access to over 7500+ newsgroups. Members can http://www.n2h2.com/KOVACSI access the newsgroups through either a newsreader (NNTP), or The Directory of Scholarly and Professional E-conferences through our website interface by using a standard web browser. screens, evaluates and organizes discussion lists, newsgroups, MUDs, MOOs, Mucks, Mushes, mailing lists, interactive Web chat groups etc. (e-conferences) on topics of interest to NIDRR Grantee Resources scholars and professionals for use in their scholarly, This section highlights a sampling of NIDRR grantees with pedagogical and professional activities. Copyright 1998 information available on the WWW focusing on aspects of by Diane K. Kovacs and The Directory Team. computer communication accessibility. Liszt, the mailing list directory Access to Disability Data (InfoUse) http://www.liszt.com/ http://www.infouse.com/disabilitydata/ Liszt is a directory of Internet discussion groups: mailing lists, InfoUse specializes in the development of health, disability newsgroups, and IRC chat channels. and rehabilitation information using computer technology. Accessibility Issues, Access to Disability Data ONElist http://www.onelist.com/ http://www.infouse.com/disabilitydata/addaccess.html InfoUse and other key national sources have developed A free e-mail community service where you can start and materials on principles of accessible design, along with manage new e-mail communities, subscribe to existing e-mail some specific guidelines. communities and view archives of old messages. RESNA Technical Assistance (TA) Project TileNet Discussion Lists on the Internet http://tile.net/lists/ http://www.resna.org/hometal.html RESNA Technical Assistance Project activities are aimed at This WWW site is a reference to all the LISTSERV, ListProc facilitating efforts of the nationwide assistive technology and Majordomo email discussion and announcement lists on programs to reduce barriers to the acquisition of assistive the Internet. technology devices and services by individuals with disabilities.

20 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 3

ADA Technical Assistance Coordinator (ADA-TAC) Add an Engine http://www.adata.org/ http://www.iw.com/1996/05/engine.html This contract addresses the needs of businesses, the disability Eric Richardson describes how to add a search engine to a site community, and state and local governments in implementing and provides links to a number of free and commercial search the ADA by utilizing state-of-the-art electronic communication engines, Internet World (May, 1996). media as well as traditional media outreach. Search Engines Center for Universal Design http://webreference.com/content/search/ http://www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/ What they are, how they work, and practical suggestions for The Center for Universal Design, part of the School of getting the most out of them, by Bruce Grossan (Feb. 1997). Design at North Carolina State University, is a national research, information, and technical assistance center that Search Engine Watch evaluates, develops, and promotes accessible and universal http://www.SearchEngineWatch.com/ design in housing, buildings, and related products. Most visitors to Search Engine Watch fall into one of two groups. There are webmasters, web marketers and others CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media involved with creating and promoting web sites. Then there (NCAM) are search engine users, everyone from researchers, librarians http://www.wgbh.org/wgbh/pages/ncam/ and general web surfers who want to know how to find things NCAM develops strategies and technologies to make media better using search engines. accessible to millions of Americans, including people with disabilities, minority language users, and those with low literacy skills. Universal Design The Benton Foundation Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on http://www.benton.org/ Technology Transfer The Benton Foundation promotes public interest values http://wings.buffalo.edu/ot/cat/rerc-t2.htm and non-commercial services for the National Information The Tech Transfer RERC at the Center for Assistive Infrastructure through research and policy analysis, outreach Technology, the University at Buffalo, will facilitate and to nonprofits and foundations, and print, video, and improve the process of moving new, improved and useful online publishing. assistive technology devices to the marketplace, to benefit Universal Service and the Information Superhighway people with disabilities. http://www.benton.org/Library/Universal/ brief1.html 'Race Center, University of Wisconsin http://www.tracecenter.org/ (briefing paper) Universal Service and Universal Access Virtual Library The Trace Center is an interdisciplinary research, http://www.benton.org/Policy/Uniserv/ development and resource center on technology and (extensive listing of publications) disability. It is part of the College of Engineering at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Designing a More Usable World for All http://www.tracecenter.org/world/ Search Engines The Trace Center has developed a number of papers, guidelines, and resources in the broad area of accessibility Alta Vista http://www.altavista.com/ and universal design. CNET Search.Com http://search.cnet.com/ Universal AccessibilityA Matter of Design Excite http://www.excite.com/ http://www.prodworks.com/ua_9606.htm HotBot http://www.hotbot.com/ Copy of presentation materials by Ray Ingram, June, 1996. Infoseek http://infoseek.go.com/ Copyright © 1996, The Productivity Works, Inc. Live link Pinstripe http://pinstripe.opentext.com/ Universal Design Lycos http://www.lycos.com/ http://www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/ud/ud.htnal Universal Design is the design of products and environments to Magellan (directory) http://magellan.excite.com/ be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without Webcrawler. http://webcrawler.com/ the need for adaptation or specialized design. Yahoo (directory) http://www.yahoo.com/ 133 21 Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

NIDRR Grantees The RRTC in Secondary the School of Education, University of Complications in Spinal Cord Injury Kansas, for The Perspective of Five of the University of Alabama at Stakeholder Groups on the Challenging and Staff Receive Birmingham's Spain Rehabilitation Behavior of Individuals with Mental Center, received the AMA International Retardation and/or Autism. An article Health and Medical Film Festival from this dissertation is published in Recognition Finalist Award in 1997. The American the premier issue of the Journal of Medical Association conferred the award Positive Behavior Intervention. for excellence in the film "Reproductive Drs. Ann and Rud Turnbull are the The NCDDR congratulates each of Health for Women with Spinal Cord Co-Principal Investigators of the project. the following NIDRR grantees and staff Injury: Part 1, The Gynecological For further information, please contact members. All grantees are encouraged to Examination." Dr. Arnie Jackson, Dr. Ruef at (785) 864-7600. contact the NCDDR with information to Medical Director and Principal share in future issues of The Research Investigator, and Ms. Barbara Key, Dr. Marianne Farkas, Co-Principal Exchange. Director of Training, worked on the Investigator of the RTC in "No training project. For additional informa- Rehabilitation for Persons with Dr. Katherine Seeman, Director of tion on these items, please contact Long-Term Mental Illness (Boston NIDRR, was invited to represent the Barbara Key at (205) 934-3283 or University/Sargent College), received U.S. and to be one of three plenary by e-mail: [email protected] the James Beard Award from the speakers at the TIDE III Congress International Association of Psychosocial in Dr. Robert Friedman, Principal Rehabilitation Programs (IAPSRS) in Helsinki, Finland on June 23-25, 1998. Investigator of the RTC for Children's June, 1998 for promoting programs TIDE (Technology Initiative for the Mental Health, University of South in psychosocial rehabilitation. For Integration of Disabled and Elderly Florida, is participating in the develop- additional information, please contact people) is a group of applied research ment of the Report of the Surgeon Dr. Farkas at (617) 353-3549 or projects in Assistive Technology funded General on Mental Health. The Report by e-mail: [email protected] by the European Union. Her speech on was commissioned on September 30, Disability's New Paradigm: Implications 1997. For additional information, contact Mr. Ken Galea'i and the RRTC of the for Assistive Technology and Universal CDR Patricia A. Rye, JD, MSW, Pacific, San Diego State University, Design is available on the NCDDR Managing Editor, Center for Mental participated in the Association of Pacific Web site at . Dr. Seelman Lane, Room 15-105, Rockville, MD Assembly on May 28, 1998. Mr. Galea'i also visited an independent living center 20857. You may also contact Jane was asked to be a staff consultant, and in Helsinki and discussed the social Willis, the RTC's Coordinator of the APIL passed a resolution based on network in Finland, especially the Outreach and Training Programs, the findings of the RRTC's research. range of options for assistance, such at (813) 974-8429 or by e-mail: Dr. Fred McFarlane is the Principal as Personal Assistance Services. [email protected] Investigator of the RRTC. For additional NIDRR has also been honored information, please contact Ken Galea'i in other venues: Ms. Jessica A. Jonikas, Managing or Fred McFarlane at (619) 594-4220 A plaque was awarded to Dr. Director of the National RTC on or by e-mail: [email protected] Seelman at the International Psychiatric Disability, University of Conference on Universal Design on Illinois at Chicago, was competitively 11 June 9, 1998, at Hoftstra University elected to the Board of Directors of the Rowland Hazard, M.D., a Project (Long Island, New York) recognizing International Association of Psychosocial Director at the Vermont RERC for Low NIDRR's commitment to and leader- Rehabilitation Services. Ms. Jonikas is Back Pain, Vermont Back Research ship in universal design. serving a two-year term that began in Center at the University of Vermont, At the Centers for Disease Control June, 1998. Dr. Judith Cook is the and Steven Reinecke, M.S., a Center and Prevention's Tenth Anniversary Director of the National RTC. For Project Director from 1988 to 1993, Commemoration 1988-1998, Office additional information please contact were awarded a patent in Europe in on Disability and Health, NIDRR was Ms. Jonikas at (312) 422-8180 ext. 18 June, 1997, for a new backrest for presented with a plaque which reads: or by e-mail: [email protected] people with chronic or disabling low In recognition of NIDRR support for back pain. A U.S. patent was granted in Promoting Health and Preventing Mike Ruef, PhD, a Doctoral Fellow 1991 for the device, which is based on Secondary Conditions Among Persons with the RTC on Improving the the principle of continuous passive with Disabilities." Functioning of Families Who Have motion (CPM). Commercially known as Members with Disabilities, received The BackCyclerCPM, the device was the 1998 Dissertation of the Year from designed and tested with funding from 22 13 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 3

NIDRR. Commercial production and Award in October 1997 from the Special Lifetime Achievement Award from the distribution have been assumed by Kids Networks, PA Department of American Spinal Injury Association Ergomedics, Inc., of Colchester, Health. The award is given "in recogni- (ASIA) on April 20, 1998 for a lifetime Vermont, (802) 655-2225. For more tion of outstanding services that help of superior work in the field of spinal information, please contact the children with special health care needs cord injury. For additional information, Information Office at the Vermont and their families make connections contact ASIA at (312) 908-1242. Back Research Center, (800) 527-7320 that improve their lives." or send an e-mail query to: PIAT also received one of five Two papers presented by the Regional [email protected] Development Grant 1998 awards from Spinal Cord Injury Center of the National Council on Aging/Pfizer Delaware Valley at Thomas Jefferson Staff members from the RERC on Innovations in Caregiving Program. University, headed by Principal Accessible and Universal Design The $25,000 award will fund a train- Investigator Dr. John F. Ditunno, Jr., in Housing at North Carolina State the-trainers program which goes received top honors at the 24th Annual University received the 1998 Pin Pot hand-in-hand with Pennsylvania's Scientific Meeting of the American Award sponsored by the Pin Dot state-funded AT Lending Library. Spinal Injury AssoCiation (ASIA) held Corporation at the RESNA Conference Through the lending library, trainers April 20-22, 1998. Acorda Therapeutics in June, 1998. The award was for the can borrow equipment for their conferred only two awards for excel- best paper published this past year in demonstrations to caregivers of lence in research in SCI at the annual RESNA's Assistive Technology Journal. older Pennsylvanians. For additional meeting. The first paper entitled "Early "An Analysis of the Effects of Ramp information, please contact Amy Prediction of Upper Extremity Motor Slope on People with Mobility Goldman, Project Director, at Recovery in Tetraplegia: Results of a 10 Impairments," was written by Jon (215) 204-3862 or by e-mail: Year Multicenter Study" was written by Sanford, Molly Story, and Mike Jones [email protected] John F. Ditunno, Jr., MD; Michelle and appeared in Volume 9.1/1997 of Cohen, PhD; and Walter Hauk, PhD. Assistive Technology Journal. Mr. Kenneth Knorr, Principal The second paper, "Bladder Smooth In April, 1998, the late Ron Mace Investigator of the Virginia Assistive Muscle Isoactin Gene Expression in the and Mary Story of the RERC staff also Technology System, received a recog- Rat Model of Spinal Cord Injury," was received the 1997-98 Faculty Research nition award from the Virginia Council written by David Rivas, MD; Michael Award from the School of Design, on Assistive Technology in 1998. The Chancellor, MD; and Patrick Shenot, NCSU. The award for overall excellence award is for Mr. Knorr's "dedicated MD. For additional information, please in design research was for their work work in the successful passage of contact Mary Call at Thomas Jefferson on developing the Principles of Virginia's Lemon Law." For futher University Hospital; 132 S. 10th Street, Universal Design under a NIDRR-funded information please contact Mr. Joey 375 Main Building; Philadelphia, PA Research and Development project. Wallace at (804) 662-9990 or by 19107. Contact Mr. Larry Trachtman, e-mail: [email protected] Principal Investigator, at (919) Dr. Kristjan T. Ragnarsson, Principal 515-3082 or [email protected] Investigator of the Mount Sinai Spinal for additional information. Dr. Stanley Ducharme, Co-Director Cord Injury Model System, was named as one of "The Best Doctors in 110 of the Special Projects and Demonstrations for Spinal Cord New York" by New York Magazine in its The Maryland Technology Assistance Injuries, New England Regional June 8, 1998 issue. To put together a Program (MD TAP) headed by Mr. Spinal Cord Injury System of the new list of the city's best doctors, New Paul Rasinski, Executive Director, Boston University School. of Medicine, York teamed up with Castle Connolly received the Print Media Award from was elected President of the American Medical, a research and publishing firm the Maryland Governor's Committee Association of Spinal Cord Injury that annually surveys the New York on Employment for Individuals with Psychologists and Social Workers in medical community and publishes a Disabilities on April 24, 1998. The June, 1998. Dr. Ducharme will hold the popular guide, How to Find the Best recognition was for the program's position for a one-year term that ends Doctors: New York Metro Area. newsletter Tapping Technology. in September, 1999. For additional Dr. Ragnarsson was identified For more information, please contact information please contact under the "Rehabilitation" heading. Louise Calderan at (410) 485-9486 Dr. Ducharme at (617) 638-7358 The article is available online at or by e-mail: [email protected] or by e-mail: [email protected] New York Magazine's Web site: Contact Technology (PIM) headed by Dr. Investigator of the Midwest Regional Dr. Ragnarsson at (212) 241-9654. Diane Bryen, Principal Investigator, Spinal Cord Injury Care System at 110 received the Provider Recognition Northwestern University, received the continued on page 24 2313' Volume 3, Number 3 The Research Exchange

NIDRR Grantees and Staff rehabilitation of persons with severe Receive Recognition psychiatric disabilities. For more infor- How To Contact continued from page 23 mation, please contact Mary Huggins, Chair, IAPSRS Awards Committee, The National Dr. Susanne Bruyere, Principal at (410) 730-7190 or by fax at Center For The Investigator of Cornell University's (410) 730-5965. Four-Year Research and Dissemination Of Demonstration Project to Address Ways to Improve the Employment Denise Poston, a Doctoral student Disability Research Practices Covered by Title I of the and Research Assistant with the Americans with Disabilities Act Rehabilitation Research Training (ADA) received the George N. Program at the University of Kansas, Wright Distinguished Contribution received the 1997-1998 Dahlke to Rehabilitation Psychology Award. Memorial Scholarship from the The University of Wisconsin-Madison Department of Education/Special a Call Us Alumni Association of the Rehabilitation Education for furthering inclusion 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 V/TF Psychology Department conferred the and quality of life for students with 8 A.M.NOON and 1 p.m.-5 P.M. C.T. award in March, 1998 for her lifetime disabilities. Dr. Ann Turnbull is the Mon.Fri. contributions to the field. Dr. Bruyere Principal Investigator of the project. (except holidays) or record is also a Co-Principal Investigator for the Please contact Denise Poston at a message 24 hr./day recently-funded RRTC on Employment (785) 864-7603 for more information. and Disability Policy. For additional information, contact Dr. Bruyere at Two Predoctoral Fellows from the (607) 255-7727 or by e-mail: Rehabilitation Research Training Explore Our Web Site [email protected] in Physical Therapy project at Texas http://www.ncddr.org/ Women's University were recognized E-mail Us by the American Physical Therapy [email protected] Dr. David Krebs, Principal Investigator Association (APTA) for their research of the Quantitative Assessment of efforts. Dr. Elizabeth J. Protas served Rehabilitation for Patients with as the Principal Investigator of the Cerebellar Dysfunction project, training project. Write Us Massachusetts General Hospital Denise M. Fredette, MS, PT, National Center for the Corporation, received the Marian received the Geriatric Fellowship Dissemination of Disability Research Southwest Educational Development Williams Award in June, 1998. The Award from the Geriatric Section Laboratory American Physical Therapy Association of the APTA for Research in Health 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 presented the award for Dr. Krebs' Promotion with Seniors in 1998. Austin, Texas 78701-3281 "sustained and outstanding physical For further information about the therapy research that made a meaning- Fellowship, contact the Geriatric ful contribution to the scientific basis Section of APTA at (800) 999-2782. of physical therapy." For further Deborah Roberts-Warrior received Visit Us information please contact Dr. Krebs the Mary McMillan Doctoral In downtown Austin, Texas 4th floor, at (617) 726-8016 or by e-mail: Scholarship Award from the APTA for Southwest Tower, Brazos at 7th St. [email protected] outstanding doctoral students on May 8A.M.NOONand I P.m.-5 P.M. C.T. 31, 1998. For more information about Mon.Fri. (except holidays) Dr. Alexis Davis Henry, ScD, ORT/L, the award, please contact the APTA Co-Principal Investigator of the at (800) 999-2782. Parenting Options Project A Julie Pauls, also a Predoctoral Fellow 11171 Development Project for Parents from the Rehabilitation Research Fax Us with Psychiatric Disabilities Training in Physical Therapy pro- 512-476-2286 (University of Massachusetts Medical ject, received the 1998-99 Fellowship School), received the 1998 Early Career in Women's Health from TWU to Research Award from the International develop research on woman's health Association of Psychosocial related to physical therapy. Please Rehabilitation Services (IAPSRS) contact Dr. Carolyn K. Rozier, Dean on June 18, 1998. The award recognizes of the School of Physical Therapy, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory her outstanding recent efforts and at (940) 898-2460 for additional tePAINIDRR National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research anticipates her future contributions to information. research, promoting the psychosocial 13b VOLUME 3, NUMBER 4 1 9 9 8

The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request.

At a Glance ll'brd _limn the Director The Unemployment The tvnemployment of Americans with Disabilities 1 The Employment Emphasis in IVIDRRS Proposed Long-Range Plan . . 3 of Americans The Federal Initiatiiv to Increase Employmentof People with Disabilities 4 The New Employment-FocusedRRTC's ..6 The Dissemination and Utilization with Disabilities Process and Employment Research NIDRRGrantees and Staff Recent, Recognition 1 2 On the eve of the new millennium, labor market consists of low-skilled, the Dow Jones average has topped low-paying service industry jobs A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR 10,000 points, the nation's February where people with disabilities are 1999 unemployment rate for labor force most likely to find employment Collaboration participants (those working or actively (Hayward & Tashjian, 1996). Seeking employment) was 4.4 percent The Americans with Disabilities in NIDDR's (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1999), and Act of 1990 (ADA) was initially U.S. business faces a general shortage Employment welcomed as a vehicle through which of qualified workers. Yet, 69.6 percent people with disabilities would be able Research of the 17.2 million Americans of work- to access employment opportunities, ing age with work disabilities do not Employment isan important factor in the yet people with disabilities continue participate in the labor force, and 12.3 lives of many people. While much has to report widespread discrimination percent of labor force participants with been known about employment, limited when seeking employment (DiLeo, work disabilities are unemployed and ability to significantly and permanently 1998). However, the Equal Employ- actively seeking employment (Stoddard, improve employment opportunities for ment Opportunity Commission Jans, Ripple & Kraus, 1998). A number America's community of people with (EEOC) reported only 79 cases of of issues impact the continued unem- disabilities has been demonstrated over litigation in the area of employment ployment of Americans with disabilities. time. Research has been funded by hiring discrimination under Title I of NIDRR to study, develop new concepts, The current business climate has the ADA during the period from 1993 and propose improvements in selected created the need for educated, to March 1998 (EEOC, 1998). areas influencing employment, including highly skilled workers and has policy, assessment, services, assistive introduced technological advances Title I of the ADA requires employers technology, and medical rehabilitation. that may improve employment to provide reasonable workplace In 1998, as described in the priorities prospects for some adults with accommodations for employees with for several new Rehabilitation Research disabilities through work arrange- disabilities to perform essential job and Training Centers (RRTCs), NIDRR ments such as telecommuting and functions. In response to this require- implemented a new initiative addressing small business entrepreneurships. ment, and to enhance productivity, employment-related issues. Nevertheless, a large section of the employers are developing an array of continued on page 2 continued on page 2 Volume 3, Number 4 The Research Exchange

A WORD FROM THE DIRECTOR The Unemployment of Americans There are nearly 7,000 Community continued from page 1 with Disabilities Rehabilitation Programs (CRPs) NIDRR embraced a "new" paradigm continued from page 1 serving approximately 800,000 adults of disability by focusing on the role of with disabilities per day with funding the built and social environments in workplace supports to maintain adults from State vocational rehabilitation the creation of barriers to the full and with disabilities on their jobs, support agencies, often in combination with free participation of individuals with them on new jobs, or return them to other sources (Menz, 1995). The disabilities in their communities. In work following their accident or functions of CRPs are likely to terms of NIDRR-supported employMent injury. Positive examples of workplace change as the Rehabilitation Act research, analysis of this interaction supports need to be further devel- Amendments of 1998 and new targets potential barriers to employment, oped and shared across employers if Department of Labor Welfare-to- such as transportation, accommodations, job opportunities are to be expanded Work programs are initiated. These attitudes, or social policies and programs. (Federal Register, 1998a). and other legislative and policy This focus on employment research During the past decade the number changes, such as the proposed Work was further expanded in the draft of of persons receiving cash benefits Incentives Improvement Act of 1999, NIDRR's Long-Range Plan for 1999-2004, from Social Security Disability may result in the reimbursement of which promotes the impact of research Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental CRPs for individual employment in improving employment outcomes Security Income (SSI) has increased outcomes rather than payment for for persons with disabilities. The by 67 percent. The Social Security services that may or may not lead to major directions of future employment- Administration (SSA) has paid approx- employment. Additionally, expanded related research highlighted in the draft imately $72 billion annually to eight consumer choice of employment services and outcomes may lead Long-Range Plan address employment million recipients (Coelho, 1997). The economic policy, community-based structure of SSA benefits and work CRPs to develop new service employment services, state service incentives is often perceived as delivery models with the ensuing systems, workplace supports, and inadequate to address concerns about school-to-work transition. These serve income security and the potential loss as the bases of priorities for six newly- of medical coverage (T.A. Alliance, funded employment-focused RRTCs. 1998). The issue of medical coverage We need jobs as much as is particularly important because John D. Westbrook, Ph.D. anybodymore, when you Director, NCDDR fewer than half of all adults with a severe disability have private health insurance (McNeil, 1997). consider how expensive disability is. We need to be

The. Research Exchange, a newsletter to promote the effective dissemination and utilization of needed, and we definitely disability research outcomes, is published quarterly by the National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR) which is operated by the Southwest Educational Development want to prove that we are Laboratory (SEDL). Neither SEDL nor the NCDDR discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, marital or veteran status, or the presence of a disability. SEDL is an Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer and is as productive as anyone. committed to affording equal employment opportunities for all individuals in all employment matters. The contents of this newsletter were developed under a grant (#H133050016) of $559,986 Still, we're one of the great from.the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of Education (ED). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of SEDL, NIDRR, or the ED; do not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. unemployed minorities. Copyright 1998 by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory In some disabilities, the An electronic version of The Research Exchange, Vol. 3, No. 4 unemployment rate is as is available on the Internet at URL high as 75 percent. Not The Research Exchange is available in alternate formats upon request. because we're not looking John Westbrook, Director Lin Harris, Information Assistant for jobs, but because Joann Starks, Program Associate we're not getting them. Woody Woolcock, Program Specialist John Middleton, Web Administrator Braunstein, 1998 Jane Thurmond, Graphic Design CUTCcpy AVAILA2LE The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 4 need to evaluate the efficacy of various models to maximize employment outcomes. Together, The Employment these changes are likely to promote competition and innovation in employment service delivery. Emphasis in Many people with disabilities are enrolled in vocational and non- vocational day services that are primarily funded by State mental NIDRR's Proposed health and developmental disabilities agencies using State, Medicaid, and other sources (Wehman, Revell & Long-Range Plan Kregel, 1998). In a national projection of over one million people enrolled in State developmental disabilities- funded day services (including many In the Notice of Proposed Long-Range Future NIDRR-funded employment at CRPs) approximately 20 percent of Plan for Fiscal Years 1999-2004 (Federal research will depart from a previous the people were in individual com- Register, 1998b) NIDRR provides a vision emphasis on specific disabilities, service munity competitive and supported for research activities in the next five systems and service quality to focus employment, while 80 percent were years. This Long-Range Plan is based on on labor market, environmental, and enrolled in traditional group employ- a "New Paradigm of Disability" where economic issues that impact the rnent, sheltered workshops, and disability lies not solely with the person's employment of people with disabilities. nonvocational adult day programs physical/mental status or limitations but This research focus will address: (McGaughey, Kiernan, McNally, with: "an interaction between characteris- Gilmore & Keith, 1995). These and Labor market issues including "SSA tics (e.g. conditions or impairments, reform; restructured funding and other data (Kregel & Wehman, 1989; functional status, or personal and social Wehman, Revell & Kregel, 1998) payment mechanisms, including qualities) of the individual and character- identified an increase in the number the use of vouchers; the impact of istics of the natural, built, cultural, and of people in individual community workforce consolidation; radical social environments. The construct of employment since the Federal initia- restructuring of employment training disability is located on a continuum from services at State and local levels; tion of supported employment in enablement to disablement. Personal 1984. However, there also has been employment-related needs of characteristics, as well as environmental continued growth in the number of unserved and underserved groups; ones, may be enabling or disabling, and people enrolled in traditional services linkage of health insurance to either the relative degree fluctuates, depending (Wehman & West, 1996), with jobs or benefit programs; and transi- on condition, time and setting." (p. 57192) approximately 65,000 people with tion from school to work among Consistent with the "New Paradigm" developmental disabilities on waiting youth with disabilities." (p. 57200); is NIDRR's purpose in supporting lists for vocational and nonvocational employment research to: Environmental concerns by investi- day services (Di Leo, 1998). gating individual workplace supports 1. Assess the impact of economic policy that make work more accessible Changes in the labor market have and labor market trends on the through designing and adapting built increased the importance of post- employment outcomes of persons high school education. The nation's environments, material adaptations, with disabilities; postsecondary institutions have human supports (employment experienced a tripling of the 2. Improve the effectiveness of specialist and coworker supports), percentage of students reporting a community-based employment and through strategies for assisting disability in recent years (the largest service programs; individuals in acquiring work skills growth is in students with learning and improved job flexibility; and 3. Improve the effectiveness of State disabilities). The academic and employment service systems; Economic issues through research subsequent career success of these on a variety of busihess and students may depend on the 4. Evaluate the contribution of business employee incentive plans, labor educational and personal supports practices and workplace supports force projections and analyses, to the employment outcomes of they receive in two and four year and analyses of business practices, persons with disabilities; and colleges, adult literacy programs, business roles and perspectives, General Equivalency Diploma 5. Improve school-to-work transition and motivational systems. preparation, and trade schools outcomes. (p. 57201) (Federal Register: 1998a). 1 113 Volume 3, Number 4 The Research Exchange The Federal Initiative to Increase Employment of People with Disabilities

The Federal government has These include: to a rate that is as close as possible to launched a multifaceted initiative 1. The Presidential Task Force on the employment rate of the general to deal with the discrepancies in Employment of Adults with adult population" (Clinton, 1998). employment levels among workforce Disabilities, initiated in March The Task Force is Chaired by Alexis participants overall, those with disabili- of 1998 (Clinton, 1998) Herman, Secretary of Labor. Tony ties, and all working age people with Coelho, Chair of the President's 2. The Workforce Investment Act of disabilities. A combination of new Committee on Employment of People legislation and programs will address 1998 including The Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1998 with Disabilities, serves as Vice Chair. issues in the employment of adults Members include: Secretaries from the with disabilities. 3. Social Security Administration Departments of Treasury, Commerce, This initiative takes place in an Demonstration Projects Transportation, Health and Human environment where American business 4. Department of Labor Services, Education, and Veteran's is experiencing an economic surge, jobs Welfare-to-Work Grants Affairs; Administrators of the Small in a variety of fields are available, and Business Administration, Social Security the employment abilities of people with Administration, and the Office of disabilities have been well-documented Personnel Management; and Chairs of over the past three decades (e.g. The puipose of the program the National Council on Disability and Williams, Brown & Certo, 1975; Gold, the Equal Employment Opportunity 1980; Wehman & Hill, 1980; Wehman, is to put people to work. Commission (Clinton, 1998). Kregel & Seyfarth, 1985; Wehman, Hill, The Task Force will focus on ten Wood & Parent, 1987; Wehman & West, Not get ready to work; not tasks that directly coincide with the 1996). These factors provide opportuni- priorities of the new employment- ties to revise and renew employment talk about work, going to focused RRTCs. In discussing this efforts, take new directions, and form connection, Becky Ogle, Executive positive partnerships in addressing work or think about work; Director of the Presidential Task Force, employment opportunities for people described the RRTCs as "extremely with disabilities. not services, but work. timely research programs that will One component of the Federal provide the Presidential Task Force State Vocational Rehabilitation employment initiative is the funding with scientific information supporting of six new employment-focused Administrator current and future federal policies Rehabilitation Research and (Whitney-Thomas & Thomas, 1996) in the employment of adults with Training Centers (RRTCs) by the disabilities" (B. Ogle, personal National Institute on Disability and communication, October 28, 1998). Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). The new employment-focused RRTCs will For more information contact address NIDRR research priorities in Presidential Presidential Task Force on the Disability and Employment Policy, Taskforce on Employment of Adults with Disabilities State Service Systems, Community U.S. Department of Labor Rehabilitation Programs, Workplace Employment of Adults 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Supports, and Postsecondary with Disabilities Suite S-2312 Educational Supports. Washington, D.C. 20210 In March of 1998, President Clinton The new employment-focused Telephone numbers: announced the Presidential Task RRTCs will work cooperatively with (202) 219-6081 X 154 Force on Employment of Adults with new and existing Federally-sponsored ITY (202) 219-0012 Disabilities "in order to increase the efforts to positively impact the E-mail address: employment of adults with disabilities employment of people with disabilities. 4 The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 4

Workforce Social Security Funds million will be available through these Investment Act 12 Demonstration grants to fund projects that will typically Projects range from $1 million to $5 million dur- o f 1998 ing a maximum 36 month period. The In September, 1998, President Clinton The Social Security Administration has grants will be provided to employment signed the Workforce Investment Act. awarded a total of $5.8 million to 12 services for people with disabilities, vic- This legislation consolidates a large states to develop innovative projects for tims of domestic violence, persons with number of Federally-funded programs assisting people with disabilities in their limited English proficiency, noncustodial into three State block grants including efforts to reenter the work force. The parents, and persons with substance Adult Employment and Training, competitive grants are the first of a abuse problems. Grantees are to work Disadvantaged Youth Employment five-year $25 million program designed with Private Industry Councils (PICs) or and Training, and Adult Education and to provide coordinated approaches to political subdivisions of State govern- Family Literacy. Under these block increase work opportunities for people ment to provide a set of employment grants "one-stop shops" or Workforce with disabilities. The grant projects placement, training, and support Development Centers will be established target SSI and SSDI recipients with activities to achieve unsubsidized to provide job seekers with a wide emphasis on persons with psychiatric employment. The closing date for range of services previously provided by disabilities and other populations that applications is April 30, 1999 separate agencies. A major portion of experience barriers to employment. (Federal RegLster 1999). the Workforce Investment Act includes States receiving grants are California, Several of the new employment- the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, New focused RRTCs are researching the 1998 which: (a) continue vocational Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, impact of DOL programs on employ- rehabilitation as a separate State agency; North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, ment of people with disabilities, (13) provide for the development of an . Vermont, and Wisconsin. particularly the Welfare-to-Work Individual Plan of Employment (IPE) For additional information, contact: Initiative (WtW), Temporary Assistance to replace the IWRP for each eligible for Needy Families (TANF), and DOL Social Security Administration person with a disability; (c) presume programs at one-stop centers. Funding Altmeyer Bldg. eligibility for all persons who receive under WtW Round Three will potentially 6401 Security Blvd. SSI or SSDI; and (d) require that all expand the RRTCs' studies to programs Baltimore, MD 21235 eligible individuals receive information that provide employment opportunities 800-772-1213/V and referral services to the one-stop for people with disabilities funded by 800-325-0778/1 I I) State Workforce Development System this competition. to help them prepare for, secure, retain, For additional information, contact: or regain a job. Source: Regional Department of Labor offices: The new employment-focused President's Committee for the RRTCs will conduct research on the Employment of People with Boston 617-565-2270 impact of this legislation on State Disabilities, 1998 New York 212-337-2145 vocational rehabilitation services and Atlanta 404-562-2109 (CRPs). They also will be developing Chicago 312-353-1937 research-based training materials for Dallas 214-767-2154 Rehabilitation Continuing Education Department of Labor Kansas City 816-416-3796, ext. 226 Programs (RCEPs) and disseminating research information to the Council of Announces New San Francisco 415-975-4655 State Administrators of Vocational Welfare-to-Work Seattle 206-553-5642, ext. 8031 Rehabilitation (CSAVR). Grants More information: The DOL Employment and For additional information contact: On January 26, 1999 the U.S. Depart- Training Administration Web Site Rehabilitation Services Administration ment of Labor (DOL), Employment provides 600 Independence Ave., SW and Training Administration (ETA) access to the Welfare-to-Work Washington, D.C. 20202 announced Round Three in a series of Competitive Grants Notice (1/26/99): (202) 205-5482/TDD 5538 grant competitions to provide employ- (text version) Workforce Investment Act: recipients of Temporary Assistance for (PDF version) nara005.html> custodial parents, to move into lasting unsubsidized jobs. Approximately $240

.5 Volume 3, Number 4 The Research Exchange

Security Administration to identify The New Employment- barriers and facilitators to improved work status of persons with disabilities and the critical linkage to access to affordable health care. Focused RRTCs 4. Analysis of policy-based implications of outcome-based reimbursement and customer direction and control The new employment-focused 5. Identification and analysis of policies on the delivery of employment and Rehabilitation Research and Training that foster or impede the participa- rehabilitation services to persons Centers are undertaking a variety of tion Of transitioning students in with disabilities. research projects that are consistent rehabilitation or employment 5. Analysis of case studies of small with the "New Paradigm of Disability" service programs. and large businesses of the effect of and NIDRR's purpose and focus Dr. Susanne Bruyere, Project Director, civil rights protections and multiple for research on the employment of environmental factors on promoting people with disabilities. Following said "the Cornell center will study the role of the economy, public policies, or depressing the employment status are brief introductions to the six new of persons with disabilities. employment-focused RRTCs and and other environmental factors on their research projects. the employment and economic self- Director Michael Morris states that the sufficiency of persons with disabilities" RRTC "will analyze public policies that Rehabilitation Research and (S. Bruyere, personal communication, increase or decrease the employment Training Center for Economic October 29, 1998). of people with disabilities" (M. Morris, Research on Employment Policy personal communication, October 14, for Persons with Disabilities Rehabilitation Research and 1998). ($700,000 per year) Training Center on Workforce Investinent and Employment Policy Rehabilitation Research and Cornell University for Persons with Disabilities Training Center on State Program on Employment and ($450,000 per year) Systems and Employment Disability ($700,000 per year) School of Industrial and Labor Community Options, Inc. Relations 1130 17th Street, NW, Suite 430 Children's Hospital 106 ILR Extension Building Washington, DC 20036 Institute for Community Inclusion Ithaca, NY 14853-3901 PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR 300 Longwood Ave. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS Michael Morris Boston, MA 02115 Susanne Bruyere, Ph.D. and Richard CONTACT PERSON PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Burkhauser, Ph.D. at Cornell University, Michael Morris, (202) 721-0120 William E. Kiernan, Ph.D. and David Stapleton, Ph.D. at The CONTACT PERSON Lewin Group, Fairfax, VA John Butterworth, Ph.D. (617)355-7074 CONTACT PERSON RESEARCH PROJECTS INCLUDE Susanne Bruyere, Ph.D., (607)255-7727 1. Development of a policy matrix with critical variables in a post-ADA envi- programs/research/mc/> ronment to analyze the relationship RESEARCH PROJECTS INCLUDE RESEARCH PROJECTS INCLUDE between select State and Federal 1.Survey of State systems, survey of 1. Analysis of the current employment policies upon the employment of business experiences with state status of persons with disabilities persons with disabilities. systems, study of local workforce using existing longitudinal data. 2. Analysis of targeted State policies and consolidation efforts, study of training 2. Longitudinal analysis of the effects practices regarding the implementa- intervention focused on building of labor market change on the tion of the Temporary Assistance interagency collaboration. employment and earnings of for Needy Families (TANF) program 2. Case studies of innovative state people with disabilities. and the Workforce Investment Act practices in collaboration, inclusion consistent with ADA and Section of people with disabilities in systems 3. Longitudinal analysis of return to 504 requirements of equal access work after the onset of a disability. planning, and access to career and opportunity. centers. Study of local service policies 4. Longitudinal analysis of the impact 3. Analysis of selected State efforts to related to outcomes and study of of civil rights protections on the implement work incentive systems training intervention on access to employment and earnings of people change grants from the Social career centers. with disabilities. 6 1464.", The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 4

3. Survey of state management informa- of CRPs to serve rehabilitation and employment, measurement of the tion systems, study of individual out- employment needs of people with effectiveness of a coordinated comes, profile of state employment disabilities. information program. outcomes, development of predictive 5. Measurement and estimation of 6. Study of the elimination of disincen- modeling of employment outcomes, the extent to which CRPs yield tives to employment, study of the and secondary analysis concerning important rehabilitation and quality application of decision support return to work for SSI and SSDI employment outcomes. principles to benefits counseling, recipients. study of the application of decision Associate Director Dr. Fred Menz 4. Study of individual consumer experi- support technology to the employment states that the RRTC will "conduct ences with employment services, of people with disabilitiesa model field-based research to investigate study of networking intervention in for small business. community iehabilitation efforts job search, longitudinal study of SSI designed to help people with disabilities Mr. Mike Barcus, Director of Training, and SSDI recipients. obtain and maintain employment" describes the RRTC's work as "building Dr. William Kiernan, Director, states (F. Menz, personal communication, bridges between people with disabilities that the RRTC will study "how national, October 13, 1998). and business by developing the supports State, and local service systems can necessary to obtain and maintain success- work more effectively together to Rehabilitation Research and ful employment" (M. Barcus, personal support a disabled person's choices in Training Center on Workplace communication, October 13, 1998). their employment options" (W. Kiernan, Supports ($699,992 per year) National Center on the Study of personal communication, October 14, Virginia Commonwealth University 1998). Postsecondary Educational Supports P.O. Box 980568 ($595,000 yr. 1: $600,000 yrs. 2-5) Richmond, VA 23284-0568 Rehabilitation Research and University of Hawaii Training Center on Community PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR UA 4-6, 1776 University Ave. Rehabilitation Programs (CRPs) to Paul Wehman, Ph.D. Honolulu, HI 96822 Improve Employment Outcomes CONTACT PERSON ($700,000 per year) Mike Barcus, (804) 828-1851 PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Robert Stodden, Ph.D. University of Wisconsin-Stout CONTACT PERSON Research and Training Center/SVRI Atidray Holm, (808) 956-3975 Menomonie, WI 54751 RESEARCH PROJECTS INCLUDE 1. Analysis of workplace supports and PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Daniel C. McAlees, Ph.D. business profitability, determination of the progression of disability RESEARCH PROJECTS INCLUDE CONTACT PERSON benefits, measurement of the cost 1. Study of the current status of Frederick E. Menz, Ph.D., (715)232-2236 of workplace supports. educational supports. 2. Determination of the effectiveness 2. Identification of effective support of disability management, analysis of practices and models of delivery RESEARCH PROJECTS INCLUDE the differential impact of disability that contribute to successful access. 1. Determination of the scope, capacity, management strategies. 3. Identification of specific barriers to and resources available through CRPs 3. Analysis of the longitudinal impact the provision of disability-related nationally and as these programs may of workplace supports, evaluation services, including policy and funding systematically serve the rehabilitation of supported employment as a requirements. needs and employment outcome workplace support, determination of 4. Assessment of the effectiveness of needs of persons with disabilities. the long-term effects of workplace promising educational practices and 2. Determination of differential interventions. disability-related services that are benefits for consumers served 4. Analysis of structural changes in the important to career mobility and through alternate funding sources in American economy, evaluation of success in the workplace. terms of services, choice, costs, and self-employment for persons with Dr. Bob Stodden, Director, states outcomes achieved. disabilities, analysis of the impact of that the RRTC will "investigate ways to 3. Determination of current practices economic trends on persons with and increasing capacity of CRPs to strengthen the educational supports that disabilities. students with disabilities need to attain provide services in keeping with 5. Analysis of employer perspectives informed consumer choice. success in their employment goals" on obstacles to employment, (R. Stodden, personal communication, 4. Determination of how Federal and identification of obstacles to October 15, 1998). State legislation affects the capacity 7143 continued on pdge 8 Volume 3, Number 4 The Research Exchange The New Employment-Focused RRTCs, continued Collaborative with supporting information for new Activities legislation and will provide the The Presidential Task Force on Employment The new employment-focused RRTCs of Adults with Disabilities and its have identified a variety of stakeholders constituent agencies with informational including policy makers, government support for new employment Dissemination officials, funding agencies, service policies. Business leaders from such providers, disability organizations, organizations as the U.S. Chambers of educators, business organizations, and Commerce and the Society of Human and individual adults with disabilities. Resource Managers (SHRM) are Partnerships with key stakeholders are participating in research activities and taking shape through initial planning will be reviewing research results for meetings, development of participatory inclusion in their publications. Disability Utilization action research (PAR) strategies, collabo- organizations such as PACER Center, the rative research and data gathering, eval- Association for Persons in Supported uation of results, and through develop- Employment, and the National Process and ing channels for distribution and use of Association for the Deaf are also research results. Several of the RRTCs participating in RRTC research will use stakeholder focus groups in and dissemination efforts. designing dissemination strategies and Some research areas, such as Employment formats. The RRTCs are also working transition from school to work, are with stakeholders in developing an addressed by more than one RRTC array of electronic communication using differing research methods and Research mechanisms to assist collaboration perspectives. These common areas and dissemination activities. provide opportunities for collaboration These partnerships provide the new among RRTCs to gain a broader picture employment-focused RRTCs with readily of employment issues, such as research accessible audiences for dissemination on transition policy changes and activities and products. The RRTCs will individual transition outcomes. To provide Federal and State legislators facilitate this collaboration, and avoid The NCDDR has previously duplication, the RRTCs are planning a presented a model for illustrating the number of forums and conferences to key elements of dissemination and The new Rehabilitation share research information. knowledge utilization (Westbrook & On December 16, 1998 representa- Boethel, 1996; Westbrook, 1998). Research and Training tives from the six employment-focused The new employment-focused RRTCs' RRTC's, plus the American Indian dissemination activities and products, Centers will be national Rehabilitation Research and Training described in their proposals, are Center (AIRRTC), met in Washington, discussed in relation to this model. centers of excellence D.C. This meeting also included NIDRR staff and representatives from the where collaborative Source Rehabilitation Services Administration, The new employment-focused RRTCs the Presidential Task Force on interdisciplinary studies and their organizations have extensive Employment of Adults with Disabilities, experience in providing high quality the Social Security Administration, address the current and research and/or services in the employ- the Office of Special Education and ment of people with disabilities. They emerging employment design Rehabilitation Services (OSERS), the are increasing their credibility through U.S. Department of Education, the U.S. collaboration with other RRTCs, universi- Department of Labor, and the NCDDR. needs of policy makers, ties, business organizations, and private Presentations by the RRTCs and others sector research organizations such as the employers, people with were followed by a discussion about Lewin Group. Their previous efforts have collaboration, coordination, access to added considerable new knowledge to disabilities and their families. data, and future meetings. The next the field in such areas as customer- meeting of the employment-focused driven supported employment, accessing Dr. Katherine D. Seelm:m RRTCs was tentatively planned for April, Social Security Work Incentives, commu- 1999, with the potential for developing NIDRR Director nity job development strategies, and personal commu n ica t i on regularly scheduled meetings through- employment models for community out the five year grant period. October 21, 1998 rehabilitation programs (CRPs). 8

-1 A The Research Exchange Volume 3, Number 4

variety of disability publications and information resources such as disability Web Sites, agency publications, and inter-agency correspondence. Submissions to popular print and electronic media, and to major disability publications such as We, Ena'ble, Ability, New Mobility, and Dissemination Ragged Edge magazines, should elicit the interest of the editor and achieve the perception of immediate relevance to readers. Although and Knowledge such media may present disability research (especially medical research) as stand-alone articles, they are more likely to include research information Utilization to support points within human interest-oriented stories. RRTC staff may find themselves working with journalists seeking to clarify key points about research information for their articles or stories. Refereed journats, monographs, books. Articles in professional journals will provide supporting information for Figure 1. Relationship of Key Elements of Dissemination Leading to Knowledge stakeholders as they improve employ- Utilization (Westbrook, 1998, p. 14) ment policies, services, and practices. Of interest is the extent to which RRTCs submit research information to nondisability publications focusing on business areas, public policy, labor economics, human resources, and Content stakeholders to the new labor statistics. The new employment-focused RRTCs employment-focused RRTCs The new employment-focused will be developing a variety of content by emphasizing research needs, RRTCs will independently publish intended to support new legislation, activities, and results. They may also monographs to present their research support new Federal and State provide ongoing information about activities and results. These will be policies, influence service designs, and research and training events, with distributed via surface mail, and promote the employment of people commentary about issues and similar through text and downloads on the with disabilities. Their dissemination research/training. One Center will be RRTCs' Web Sites. Easy, free access to plans include systematic attempts to providing policy notes on data that complete research information in the design research content for specific follows ongoing improvements in the monographs will serve as a means of applications and audiences with the employment status of a group of getting timely information to other objective of achieving utility and adults with disabilities. researchers and stakeholders. relevance to the informational needs Popular, professional, and disability Several of the new employment- of a variety of stakeholders. media. Several of the new employ- focused RRTCs will be developing ment-focused RRTCs will submit books about their research topic. If information to popular print media such texts are presented on multiple Medium for distribution to the general public. levels, or perhaps with interpretive The new employment-focused RRTCs will frequently provide guides, both academic and RRTCs will be presenting their research information for inclusion in the non-academic readers will use information using a variety of media newsletters of professional organiza- the information in improving including: tions. One Center will be highlighted employment policy, services, Brochures, newsletters, and brief on the national radio talk show "On and practices. reports. The widespread mailing a Roll" (Smith, 1998). Also, RRTCs of these publications introduces will submit research information to a continued on page 10 914 5 Volume 3, Number 4 The Research Exchange

The Dissemination and Utilization Process and Employment Research, continued

Topical conferences. Each of the new employment-focused RRTCs will sponsor one or more conferences on their particular research topic to bring together top researchers and stake- holders to share research information. Electronic information. The new employment-focused RRTCs are using Internet technology to promote their efforts and share information. RRTCs are making extensive improvements to their Web sites, offering brief reports, articles, monographs, etc. in text and downloads. Some of the Web sites will provide message boards, chat rooms, listservs, and other interactive functions. These developments provide opportunities for stakeholders to immediately that responds to competing priorities, access research information, such as waiting lists for day services; A Look to including data and databases, conflicting knowledge and practices in via electronic media. traditional or disability specific programs; the social, political, and economic the Future climates of stakeholders; and stakeholder User skills in understanding and applying The new employment-focused RRTCs the research information with varying The new employment-focused RRTCs have identified a variety of potential settings and individuals. The new will conduct their research within a users of research information among employment-focused RRTCs will respond multifaceted Federal initiative to stakeholders. For some of these groups to contextual factors through coordinated improve employment outcomes for and individuals the employment of research efforts that: people with disabilities. It is unlikely people with disabilities continues to be Facilitate collaboration among the that individual components of this a controversial issue (Wehman & West, RRTCs, NIDRR funded programs, initiative can adequately approach 1996). To address the varying "readiness other researchers, and stakeholders; this goal by working in isolation. By to change" (Westbrook & Boethel, 1996) Work closely with Federal, State, providing a variety of freely accessible of stakeholders the RRTCs will provide and community policy makers, and media and content tailored to the research information in a variety of funding sources, in developing new preferences of specific stakeholders, media and will tailor its content to employment policies and funding and relevant to their needs, the RRTCs will serve a valued role in providing the informational needs of specific strategies, particularly outcome- stakeholders. Much of this targeted based funding; coordinated research information across information will include the context for all components of the initiative. its use, such as research conducted with Address a full range of issues such The open exchange of research CRPs, where the information fits the as consumer choice in programs information, including data and needs of stakeholders at similar CRPs. and employment, health benefits, databases, is vital to information- and conflicting purposes of programs sharing and collaboration among the funded by Federal, State, and local new employment-focused RRTCs and Context sources; and other researchers. Research programs The new employment-focused RRTCs Utilize a variety of dissemination have unique opportunities to use are addressing differing knowledge, media and content designed to reach current and emerging electronic values, and environmental contexts by specific stakeholders. Research infor- and traditional media to provide partnering with a variety of stakeholders mation will have a strong relationship stakeholders with timely research in research development, implementation, to current issues/needs in the field. information. Thus, free and easy and dissemination. Successful utilization This information will be freely accessi- access to such information should of their research information depends ble through electronic and print be viewed by all researchers as a upon the RRTCs providing targeted and media, and through interactions valuable dissemination tool to improve freely accessible research information between RRTC staff and stakeholders. the lives of people with disabilities.

10 1 4 The Research Exchrnge Volume 3, Number 4

Hayward, B. & Tashjian, M. (1996). Journal of the Association for Persons References A longitudinal study of the vocational with Severe Handicaps, 12, 11-17. rehabilitation service program: Second Wehman, P. & Hill, M. (1980). Americans with Disabilities Act of interim report. Characteristics and 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. § 12101 et seq. Vocational training and placement Perspectives of Vocational Rehabilitation of severely disabled persons, vol. 2, (West 1993). Consumers. Raleigh, NC: Research Richmond, VA: Virginia Commonwealth Bureau of Labor Statistics. (1999). Triangle Institute. University. Economy at a glance. Retrieved March Kregel, J. & Wehman, P. (1989). Wehman, P., Kregel, J., & Seyfarth, F. 16, 1999 from the World Wide Web: Supported employment: Promises (1985). Employment outlook for young deferred for persons with severe adults with mental retardation. Braunstein, M. (1998). Finding a job. disabilities. Journal of the Association Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, New Mobility Magazine, May 1998. for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 29(2), 90-99. Retrieved January 28, 1999 from the 14(4), 293-303. Wehman, P., Revell, G. & Kregel, J. World Wide Web: G.R. (1995). Beyond the workshop: American Rehabilitation, 24(1), 31-43. Clinton, W.J. (1998, March 13). National trends in integrated and segre- Executive Order Number 13078: gated day and employment services. Wehman, P. & West, M. (1996). Increasing Employment of Adults Journal of the Association for Persons Expanding supported employment With Disabilities, Washington, D.C.: with Severe Handicaps, 20(4), 270-285. opportunities for persons with severe White House Office of the Press disabilities. TASH Newsletter, 22(6), McNeil, J. (1997). Americans with 24-27. Secretary. Retrieved January 28, disabilities. Current Population Reports, 1999 from the World Wide Web: 61-70. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Westbrook, J. (1998). Rehabilitation research: Areas of accountability issues. Switzer Fellowship Paper. Austin, TX: Menz, F. E. (1995). Vocational SEDL. Coelho, T. (1997). Keynote speech: rehabilitation research in the United Employment post the Americans with States of America. In M. Floyd & E. Blair Westbrook, J. & Boethel, M. (1996). Disabilities Act. Conference sponsored (Eds.), Vocational rehabilitation and the General characteristics of effective by the Social Security Administration, European community. : Jessica dissemination and utilization. Austin, Washington, D.C. Kingsley Publishers. TX: NCDDR. Retrieved January 28, DiLeo, D. (1998). Attitudinal and 1999 from the World Wide Web: President's Committee for the Supported Employment InfoLines, (1998). Washington fax. Retrieved .9(2), 3. January 28, 1999 from the World W.-le Whitney-Thomas, J. & Thomas, D. Equal Employment Opportunity Web. implementing the Rehabilitation Act and Litigation. Retrieved January 28, Amendments of 1992. Research to Smith, G. (1998, December 20). Practice. Boston: RRTC on State Systems 1999 from the World Wide Web: On-A-Roll. Talk America Radio and Employment. Retrieved February Networks. Retrieved January 28, 1999 11, 1999 from the World Wide Web: Federal Register. (1998a). from the World Wide Web: ici/publications2/research-practice/ 34225-34254. Retrieved January 28, Stoddard, S., Jans, L., Ripple, J. & rp7-96.html> 1999 from the World Wide Web: Kraus, L. (1998). Chartbook on Work Williams, W., Brown, L., & Certo, N. (1975). Basic components of An InfoUse Report. Washington, D.C.: instructional programs. Theory into Federal Register. (1998b). NIDRR. Available Online. Retrieved practice, 11(2), 123-136. (Volume 63, Number 206, October 26), March 5, 1999 from the World Wide 57190-57219. Retrieved January 28, Web: Act of 1999, Senate Bill 331. (1999). 1999 from the World Wide Web: Individuals Making Transition from Number 16, January 26), 4010-4023. 28, 1999 from the World Wide Web: Retrieved January 28, 1999 from the World puspring94.htm> 1998, Public Law 105-220. (1998). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Gold, M.W. (1980). Did I say that?: Wehman, P., Hill, J.W., Wood, W., & Printing Office. Retrieved January 28, Articles and commentary on the try Parent, W. (1987). A report on the com- 1999 from the World Wide Web: another way system. Champaign, IL: petitive employment histories of persons Research Press. labeled severely mentallrorded.

1 1 Volume 3, Number 4 TheResearch Exchange

The RRTC on Supported How To Contact NIDRR Employment, (1993-1998, completed and replaced by the RRTC on The National Workplace Supports), was named Center For The Grantees and to the 1998-99 CASE National Media Fellowship Program of the Council for Dissemination Of Advancement and Support of Education (CASE). The Fellowship was awarded for Disability Research Staff Receive the proposal "Supported Employment: A Model for Moving Individuals with Disabilities into the Workforce." The Recognition fellowship, conferred in 1998, is one of 27 awarded for the coming academic year in a variety of disciplines. VCU's Call Us fellowship will allow interested 1-800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 V/TT The NCDDR congratulates each of reporters to come onto campus to learn 8 A.M.NOON and 1 P.M.-5 P.M. C.T. the following NIDRR grantees and staff more about supported employment. Mon.Fri. members. All grantees are encouraged to Dr. Paul H. Wehman is the Principal (except holidays) or record contact the NCDDR with information to Investigator. For additional information, a message 24 hr./day share in future issues of The Research please contact Teri Blankenship at Exchange. (804) 828-1851.

010410 1440 Explore Our Web Site Staff members of the RRTC on Dr. Sylvia Walker, Principal Investigator http://www.ncddr.org/ Secondary Complications of Spinal of the Howard University RTC for E-mail Us Cord Injury of the University of Access to Rehabilitation and [email protected] Alabama at Birmingham's Spain Economic Opportunity (HURTC), Rehabilitation Center received awards received the Distinguished Alumni and recognition this past year. Dr. Arnie Award from Queens College, City Jackson is Principal Investigator of the University of New York, on July 23, Write Us RRTC. For additional information on 1998, for her contributions to the field National Center for the these items, please contact Barbara Key of disability research. For additional Dissemination of Disability Research Southwest Educational at (205) 934-3283 or by e-mail: information, please contact Development Laboratory Dr. Walker at (202) 806-8086 or by 211 East Seventh Street, Suite 400 Ken B. Waites, MD, microbiologist, e-mail: Austin, Texas 78701-3281 was installed as Secretary-General and Member of the Board of Directors of the linternational Organization for Dr. Steven J. Taylor, PhD, Principal Mycoplasmology (I0M). The IOM Investigator of the National Resource Visit Us is composed of more than 500 micro- Center on Supported Living and In downtown Austin, Texas biologists representing 48 nations, Choice (Syracuse University, Center on 4th floor, Southwest Tower and was founded in 1974 to promote Human Policy), received a 1998-1999 Brazos at 7th St. 8 A.M.NOON and 1 P.M.-5 P.M. C.T. cooperative study of the smallest Visiting Professorship at Keio University, Mon.Fri. (except holidays) free-living organisms, dissemination Tokyo, Japan. Dr. Taylor taught a of information useful to the study summer course on Disability Policy of mycoplasmal disease, and and U.S. Trends, based on NIDRR- support of mycoplasmal research. funded projects. A monograph based on the course is scheduled for publication Fax Us Dr. Waites started his two-year 512-476-2286 term in July, 1998. (in Japanese). For additional informa- Michael J. DeVivo, DrPH, received tion, please contact Dr. Taylor at the Distinguished Service Award from (315) 443-3851 or by e-mail: the American Association of Spinal

Cord Injury Psychologists and Social Southwest Educational Development Laboratory Workers at their annual meeting in 3MINIDRR Las Vegas on September 9, 1998. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

14S U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) E IC National Library of Education (NLE) Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) rATES

NOTICE

REPRODUCTION BASIS

This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release (Blanket) form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing all or classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore, does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission to i2( reproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, may be reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Release form (either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").

EFF-089 (9/97)