Executive Summary

The United States Architecture and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (better known as the Access Board) commissioned this study on the state of progress of telecommunications access in September, 1998.  Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 had established a mandate for manufacturers to make products accessible and usable, and the Access Board had developed a set of Guidelines to show companies specifically what functional limitations needed to be addressed.  But there was no clear baseline, no picture of how consumers with disabilities are experiencing  telecommunications products right now.  Specifically, the Board wanted to know what products and features are currently available on the market that address the needs of telecommunications customers with disabilities.

This Report consists of the results of a year-long research effort into consumer experiences and product features.  We studied 15 different types of equipment:

Residential Wireline Telephones

Business Wireline Telephones

Cordless Telephones

Adjuncts

Public (Pay) Telephones

Fax Machines

Computer Modems

Videotelephones

PBX/Key systems/LAN telephony

Pagers

Wireless telephones

Specialized CPE

Telecommunications Equipment (Network-based)

Interactive Voice Response (IVR, or Audiotext) and Automated Attendant Systems

Cable Telephony

For each of the types of products, we found both significant access barriers and solutions.  The Report details these in its discussion of each type of product.

There were also several general findings that cover all the product types:

  • There is a relatively short list of features currently providing improved accessibility.  Some features are found on many products, some on few, and some (such as speech technology) are just beginning to show up in the market.
  • Consumers with disabilities cannot assume that all telecommunications products contain the access features they need.
  • Models with particular common features often serve to meet the needs of people with mild or moderate impairments.
  • People with more severe disabilities may require either uncommon features or compatibility with assistive technology to use telecommunications products; these solutions are not always available.
  • Getting information about the presence or absence of access features, especially in retail environments, is often difficult.

The Report contains 22 Recommendations:

Stimulating Industry

A1. Encourage Pre-Competitive Market Studies

A2. Assist Market Research Through Federal Disability Statistics Programs

Informing Consumers

B1. Improve the Understanding of Underutilization of Telecommunications by People with Disabilities

B2. Support the Dissemination of Information About Accessible Telecommunications

Refining the Guidelines

C1. Harmonize Architectural Access and Section 255 Guidelines Regarding Public Phones

C2. Clarify and Correct Certain Errors in the Guidelines

C3. Group and Index the Guidelines for Different Audiences

C4. Develop Guidelines That Differentiate Among Cognitive Impairments

C5. Develop Guidelines That Cover Production and Transmission of Content

Coordinating Industry

D1. Support Standards Work

D2. Help Develop Testing Protocols

D3. Encourage Industry Forums and Industry Participation in Accessibility Research and Awareness Activities

Future Market Monitoring

E1. MMR Activity Should Be Continuous

E2. Integrate MMR with Manufacturers’ and Trade Associations’ Information Systems

E3. Future MMRs Should Anticipate New Products

E4. Future MMRs Should Use a “Market-basket” Approach

E5. Future MMRs Should Solicit Expert Articles

Other Recommendations

F1.Harmonize Access Considerations to Include the Interactions Between CPE and Network Services

F2. Explore the Regulatory Impact on Manufacturers of SCPE and Access-oriented Adjuncts

F3. Explore the Role of State Equipment Distribution Programs

F4. Identify “commonly used peripheral devices and specialized customer premises equipment”

F5. Develop a TTY Migration Path