THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT: ENSURING EQUAL ACCESS TO 
THE AMERICAN DREAM


















National Council on Disability
                         January 26, 1995














National Council on Disability

The Americans with Disabilities Act:
Ensuring Equal Access to the American Dream

Publication date: January 26, 1995

National Council on Disability
1331 F Street N.W.
Suite 1050
Washington, D.C.  20004-1107

(202)  272-2004 Voice
(202)  272-2074 TT
(202)  272-2022 Fax












The views contained in the report do not necessarily represent 
those of the Administration, as this document has not been 
subjected to the A-19 Executive Branch review process.




                       LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL


January 26, 1995

The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

The National Council on Disability is pleased to submit to you 
this report entitled, The Americans with Disabilities Act:  
Ensuring Equal Access to the American Dream.  Under its 
Congressional mandate, the National Council on Disability is 
charged with the responsibility to gather information on the 
implementation, effectiveness, and impact of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act.  This report measures progress to date in the 
implementation of this landmark civil rights legislation from the 
perspectives of people with disabilities, private sector 
representatives, local, State, and Federal government officials, 
and national experts in the field of disability policy.

Overall, impressive progress has occurred in the implementation 
of the Americans with Disabilities Act.  However, given the many 
areas where compliance has not yet been achieved and in 
recognition of the relatively brief time in which the law has 
been in effect, it is clear that further efforts are necessary in 
order to increase public awareness of the Act, provide education 
and clarification regarding the provisions of the Act to covered 
entities, and provide resources necessary to both encourage 
voluntary compliance and to ensure effective enforcement.

Today, as we observe - and celebrate - further progress in the 
full implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, I 
would once again pledge our unwavering commitment to ensuring 
that equality of opportunity, full participation, independent 
living, and economic self-sufficiency become realities in the 
lives of Americans with disabilities.  Under your leadership I 
remain confident that we can continue to build an America where 
all citizens have equal access to the American dream.

Sincerely,


Marca Bristo
Chairperson

(This same letter was sent to the President Pro Tempore of the 
Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.) 




NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY MEMBERS AND STAFF

Members

Marca Bristo, Chairperson
John A. Gannon, Vice Chairperson
Linda W. Allison
Ellis B. Bodron
Larry Brown, Jr.
Mary Ann Mobley Collins
Anthony H. Flack
Robert S. Muller
Bonnie O'Day
Mary M. Raether
Shirley W. Ryan
Anne C. Seggerman
Michael B. Unhjem
Kate Pew Wolters

Staff

Speed Davis, Acting Executive Director
Billie Jean Hill, Program Specialist
Mark S. Quigley, Public Affairs Specialist
Brenda Bratton, Executive Secretary
Stacey S. Brown, Staff Assistant
Janice Mack, Administrative Officer

Ramona Lessen, Assistant to the Chairperson



This report was prepared under contract by Edward P. Burke
Acknowledgements

The National Council on Disability wishes to thank the many 
government officials who participated in its meetings on the 
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and provided data regarding 
their efforts to implement the ADA.  Most of all, the Council 
wishes to thank the many consumers, advocates, and 
representatives of both public and private sector agencies who 
shared their experiences, suggestions and valuable time with us 
in order to assist us in our ongoing efforts to assesss the 
implementation, effectiveness, and impact of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act.  Finally, the Council wishes to express its 
appreciation to the staff, and Edward P. Burke whose hard work 
made this report possible.


                            TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction..........................................................1

The Americans with Disabilities Act: Values We Can Agree On...........3

The Americans with Disabilities Act: Early Signs of Success...........7

The Americans with Disabilities Act: Where We Are Today..............11

     National Meeting of Experts on the Americans with 
Disabilities Act.....................................................11
          Correct Current Misunderstandings Regarding the 
Americans with                                                        
Disabilities Act.....................................................12
          Improve Educational Efforts Regarding the Americans 
with Disabilities Act................................................13
          Clarify and Strengthen the Legal Framework Surrounding 
the Americans                                                         
with Disabilities Act................................................14
          Provide Resources and Coordinate Federal Efforts to 
Enforce the                                                           
Americans with Disabilities Act......................................15
          Provide More Technical Assistance..........................16
          Summary of the National Meeting of Experts on the 
Americans with Disabilities                                           
Act..................................................................16
     Roundtable Discussion on the Implementation of the Americans 
with Disabilities Act................................................17
          Title I - Employment.......................................17
          Title II - Public Services.................................18
          Title III - Public Accommodations and Services Operated 
by Private Entities..................................................19
          Title IV - Telecommunications..............................20
          Transportation.............................................21
          Seattle and the State of Washington:  Progress in 
Implementing the                                                      
Americans with Disabilities Act......................................22
          Summary of the Americans with Disabilities Act 
Roundtable Discussion................................................27

Conclusions..........................................................29

                               APPENDICES

Appendix A:  A Brief Description of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act.....................................................31

Appendix B:  List of Participants in the National Meeting of 
Experts
          on the Americans with Disabilities Act.....................35

Appendix C:  ADA Roundtable Agenda...................................39

Appendix D:  Statistical Information on the ADA as of September 
30, 1994.............................................................41

Appendix E:  A Brief Description of the National Council on 
Disability...........................................................45

                           INTRODUCTION

The National Council on Disability is the Federal agency which 
first proposed what was to later become the Americans with 
Disabilities Act to the President and Congress of the United 
States.  In 1986, the Council issued a landmark report entitled 
Toward Independence: An Assessment of Federal Laws and Programs 
Affecting Persons with Disabilities -- With Legislative 
Recommendations.  The first recommendation made in this report 
was as follows:

     Congress should enact a comprehensive law requiring equal 
     opportunity for individuals with disabilities, with broad 
     coverage and setting clear, consistent, and enforceable 
     standards prohibiting discrimination on the basis of 
     handicap. (p.18).[1]

Since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the 
National Council on Disability has been charged with gathering 
information regarding the implementation, effectiveness, and 
impact of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).[2]  In 
response to this mandate, in April of 1993 the Council provided 
the Administration, the Congress, and the public with an early 
assessment of the implementation of the ADA.  ADA Watch --Year 
One: A Report to the President and the Congress on Progress in 
Implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act detailed initial 
progress in the implementation of the law and provided many 
recommendations for increasing and improving compliance with the 
law. 

Since the publication of this report, the Council has continued 
its ADA-related monitoring activities.  In February of 1994 the 
Council sponsored a national meeting of experts regarding 
progress in ADA implementation at the United States Senate.  In 
August of 1994 the Council sponsored an ADA Roundtable in 
Seattle, Washington, that provided a local perspective on the 
law's impact to date.  The present report summarizes the findings 
and recommendations emanating from these two events and is 
intended to provide the Administration, the Congress, and the 
public with an updated assessment of the ADA's effectiveness.  
Over the course of the next year, the Council intends to continue 
its ADA monitoring activities in order to assist the Nation in 
creating a society in which every citizen has equal access to the 
American Dream.

               THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT:
                      VALUES WE CAN AGREE ON

     Together we've begun to shift disability in America away 
     from exclusion, towards inclusion; away from dependence, 
     towards independence; away from paternalism, towards 
     empowerment...And we have made a commitment - a real 
     commitment - to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act, 
     until all citizens with disabilities receive equal treatment 
     under the law, whether in the workplace, or school, in 
     government or in the courts.

                                   - President William J. Clinton


On July 12, 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act passed the 
U.S. House of Representatives on a vote of 377-28.  The next day, 
it passed the Senate on a vote of 91-6.  Shortly thereafter, on 
July 26, 1990, the Act was signed by President George Bush on the 
South Lawn of the White House in front of over 3,000 disability 
advocates, the largest bill-signing ceremony that had ever taken 
place at the White House.  Clearly, the ADA was passed in an 
atmosphere of great support from the Congress, the 
Administration, and the community at large.

     It's been the work of a true coalition.  A strong and 
     inspiring coalition of people who have shared both a dream 
     and a passionate determination to make that dream come true.  
     It's been a coalition in the finest spirit.  A joining of 
     Democrats and Republicans.  Of the Legislative and the 
     Executive branches.  Of public officials and private 
     citizens.  Of people with disabilities and without.

                                   - President George Bush

At the time of the Act's passage, other elected officials noted 
both the importance and the anticipated results of the Act:


     The ADA is now the law of the land.  From now on, Americans 
     with disabilities will be treated as first-class citizens.  
     Today, we say "no" to ignorance, and "no" to prejudice.  
     Segregation is finished!  Today, we say "yes" to dignity and 
     respect for disabled people; "yes" to empowerment; and "yes" 
     to judging people on abilities, not disabilities.  The ADA 
     truly is the 20th century emancipation proclamation for 
     people with disabilities.

                                   - Senator Tom Harkin

     For too long Americans with disabilities have had to face 
     subtle and pervasive discrimination.  As a nation, 
     discrimination deprives us of our dignity and
     suppresses our strength.  The disability community 
     recognized this striking fact and the President and Congress 
     responded with the enactment of the Americans with 
     Disabilities Act.

                                   - Senator Bob Dole

     The Americans with Disabilities Act represents America at 
     its best.  Few, if any, pieces of legislation in the two 
     centuries of our history have offered greater promise for so 
     many of our fellow citizens...And America will be better, 
     fairer, and a stronger nation because of it.

                                   - Senator Edward M. Kennedy

     The time has come.  Congress has sent a loud, clear message 
     across this country - individuals with disabilities, no less 
     than other Americans, are entitled to an equal opportunity 
     to participate in the American dream.  That dream can now 
     become reality.

                                   - Senator Orrin Hatch

     Dependency increases the costs of entitlements, lowers our 
     gross national product, and reduces revenue to the Federal 
     government...People with disabilities want to work...to be 
     productive, self-supporting and tax paying participants in 
     society.  The Americans with Disabilities Act grants us that 
     dignity and that right.

                                   - Former Congressman Tony 
Coelho
 
     This is important legislation that will extend to 
     individuals with disabilities full civil rights - in the 
     public and private sector...The final vote in Committee was 
     35 to 0, a reflection of the true bipartisan spirit for the 
     legislation. 

                                   - Congressman Newt Gingrich

     ADA will empower people to control their own lives.  It will 
     result in a cost savings to the Federal government.  As we 
     empower people to be independent, to control their own 
     lives, to gain their own employment, their own income, their 
     own housing, their own transportation, taxpayers will save 
     substantial sums from the alternatives.

                                   - Former Congressman Steve 
Bartlett

In passing the ADA four years ago, the Congress stated the 
following facts concerning the life experiences of people with 
disabilities in America:

      43,000,000 Americans have one or more disabilities;

      historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate 
     individuals with disabilities;

      discrimination against individuals with disabilities 
     negatively affected areas such as employment, housing, 
     public accommodations, education, transportation, 
     communication, etc.;

       individuals with disabilities have no legal recourse to 
     redress such discrimination;

      individuals with disabilities continually encounter 
     various forms of discrimination, including outright 
     intentional exclusion as well as the negative effects of 
     discrimination such as relegation to lesser services, 
     programs, activities, benefits, jobs, or other 
     opportunities;

      national data indicate that individuals with disabilities 
     occupy an inferior status in society and are severely 
     disadvantaged socially, vocationally, economically, and 
     educationally;

      as a group, individuals with disabilities have been faced 
     with restrictions and limitations, subjected to a history of 
     purposeful unequal treatment, and relegated to a position of 
     political powerlessness; and

      the continuing existence of unfair and unnecessary 
     discrimination and prejudice denies people with disabilities 
     the opportunity to compete on an equal basis and to pursue 
     opportunities, costing the United States billions of dollars 
     in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and 
     nonproductivity.

Given these realities, the Congress determined that the Nation's 
proper goals regarding individuals with disabilities are to 
assure equality of opportunity, full participation, independent 
living, and economic self-sufficiency for such individuals.[3]  
Thus, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)[4] was passed in 
order to:

      provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the 
     elimination of discrimination against individuals with 
     disabilities;

      provide clear, strong, consistent, enforceable standards 
     addressing discrimination;

      ensure that the Federal government plays a central role in 
     enforcing the standards against discrimination; and

      invoke the sweep of congressional authority, including the 
     power to enforce the fourteenth amendment and to regulate 
     commerce.[5]

Over the course of the past four years, the Federal government 
has issued regulations to implement the ADA; provided technical 
assistance to States, local governments, and the private sector; 
and has begun to bring other Federal laws regarding disability 
policy and programs into harmony with the ADA.[6]  In this 
regard, the Federal government has demonstrated a firm commitment 
to not only enforcing the law, but in effectively targeting 
resources to encourage voluntary compliance on the part of all 
concerned parties.

The values embodied in the Americans with Disabilities Act - 
equal protection under the law, individual empowerment, freedom 
of association, economic opportunity, etc. - are important to and 
for all Americans.  Indeed, as Congress has since found that 
disability is a natural part of the human experience, all 
citizens have an interest in ensuring that the values that form 
the basis for the Americans with Disabilities Act pervade our 
national life.  It is for this reason that the Americans with 
Disabilities Act has enjoyed such broad bipartisan support. 


               THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT:
                      EARLY SIGNS OF SUCCESS

When the National Council on Disability published its first 
report on the implementation of the ADA[7], it offered the 
following findings:

     1.        The Federal government has, overall, performed 
               well in its ADA implementation responsibilities.

     2.        The disability community has generally, in these 
               early days of the ADA, taken an ADA implementation 
               strategy of "educate and negotiate, and litigate 
               as a last resort."

     3.        Many organizations serving covered entities, such 
               as trade associations, have initiated significant 
               efforts to assist their members with ADA 
               implementation.

     4.        The projections that ADA implementation would not 
               be unduly burdensome to businesses appear to have 
               been well founded.

     5.        The ADA has opened up new opportunities for 
               disability-related activities in the nonprofit 
               community.

     6.        Entrepreneurial activities stimulated by the ADA 
               have had very mixed results: some have been 
               helpful, others highly counterproductive.

     7.        Early efforts by covered entities to implement the 
               ADA's employment provisions have helped to remove 
               formal barriers to employment of people with 
               disabilities, but many barriers still exist.

     8.        Some of the most productive ADA implementation 
               activities have involved cooperative efforts 
               between and among government agencies, businesses 
               and business organizations, and the disability 
               community.

     9.        The need for information and technical assistance 
               continues to grow, outstripping Federal and State 
               resources.

     10.       While efforts to inform people with disabilities 
               and covered entities about the ADA have been 
               substantial, many large gaps still exist.

     11.       Covered entities are looking for the greatest 
               degree of certainty of being in compliance with 
               the ADA that the Federal government can offer.

     12.       Numerous technical issues involving the 
               interpretation and application of the ADA and its 
               regulations have been raised, including the use of 
               edge warning devices on transit platforms and 
               accessibility standards for recreation areas.

Thus, as of April 1993, the National Council on Disability 
expressed optimism regarding ADA implementation efforts to date 
and urged further action through a detailed set of 
recommendations for the President and the Congress.  Some of the 
more pertinent recommendations included the following:

     1.        To sustain the substantial progress achieved in 
               implementing the ADA during its early stages, no 
               amendments to the law should be made at this time.

     2.        The Federal government should plan, coordinate, 
               and fund a media campaign to disseminate accurate 
               information about the ADA through public service 
               announcements on radio and television.

     3.        Systematic outreach and technical assistance 
               efforts should be initiated that focus on small 
               businesses and communities outside major 
               metropolitan areas.

     4.        The next generation of technical assistance 
               materials should be more industry- and 
               profession-specific.

     5.        More technical assistance should be provided to 
               State and local government entities.

     6.        The Federal government should cultivate and 
               coordinate ADA leadership in the private sector 
               and the disability community and thereby become 
               more a catalyst than the provider of technical 
               assistance.

     7.        The Department of Justice, the Equal Employment 
               Opportunity Commission, the Department of 
               Transportation, the Federal Communications 
               Commission, and the Access Board should prepare 
               and disseminate regular technical guidance 
               memoranda regarding ADA policy decisions.

     8.        Congress should authorize and fund a large-scale 
               longitudinal study to determine how the needs of 
               people with disabilities are being met over time 
               as the ADA is implemented.

In the short space of three years, the Americans with 
Disabilities Act had earned a positive review.  Since the 
publication of this first report, some progress has been made in 
implementing the recommendations detailed above.  However, the 
National Council on Disability continues to pursue the full 
adoption of these recommendations.  As will be evident in the 
next few pages, the need for attention to these recommendations 
remains to this day.

               THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT:
                        WHERE WE ARE TODAY

In the year and one-half since the Council's first report was 
published, implementation of the ADA has gone forward and new 
issues have emerged.  In order to gain a better understanding of 
these issues, the Council held two information gathering events 
during 1994.  In February of 1994 the Council sponsored a 
national meeting of experts regarding progress in ADA 
implementation at the United States Senate.  In August of 1994 
the Council sponsored an ADA Roundtable in Seattle, Washington, 
that provided a wide variety of individuals at the local level 
with an opportunity to engage in a frank discussion of the law's 
impact to date.

                  National Meeting of Experts on 
the Americans with Disabilities Act

At the national meeting of experts in February, participants 
asserted that the ADA has been a substantive success.  ADA is 
taken seriously in America and throughout the world.  However, 
throughout the day participants noted that accompanying this 
initial general success was a growing theme of "backlash", 
similar to that which occurred during the initial implementation 
of the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s.  The principal expression 
of this backlash has been found in the charge of some opponents 
of the ADA that the Act constitutes an "unfunded mandate."  This, 
of course, reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature 
of the ADA.  The ADA is, at its core, a civil rights law, 
grounded in the freedoms guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.  As 
such, the rights and freedoms codified in the ADA should not be 
subject to a debate on their cost, any more than the rights of 
women, minorities, or religious groups.  This fact was recognized 
in 1994 in the debate regarding "unfunded mandates" in the United 
States Senate.  In the Committee Report accompanying S.993, The 
Federal Mandate Accountability and Reform Act of 1994, the 
Committee on Governmental Affairs stated the following:

     The Committee believes that a number of areas should be 
     properly excluded from the requirements of this Act.  They 
     include Federal legislation or regulation that: enforces 
     individual Constitutional rights; establishes or enforces 
     statutory rights to prohibit discrimination on the basis of 
     race, religion, gender, national origin, or handicapped or 
     disability status...The Committee recognizes the special 
     circumstances and history surrounding the enactment and 
     enforcement of Federal civil rights (including disability 
     rights) laws.  During the middle part of the 20th century, 
     the arguments of those who opposed the national extension of 
     basic equal rights, protection, and opportunity to all 
     individuals were based primarily on States' rights 
     philosophy or contention.  With the passage of the Civil 
     Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 
     1965, Congress rejected that argument as false reasoning 
     designed to thwart equal opportunity and to protect 
     discriminatory,
     unjust and unfair practices in certain parts of the country.  
     The Committee therefore exempts Federal civil rights laws 
     from the requirements of this Act.[8]

While this report language would seem to provide an appropriate 
analysis of the legal reasoning which would prohibit the 
consideration of cost as a fundamental determinant of the 
endowment and expression of civil rights, this legislation was 
not passed by the 103rd Congress prior to its adjournment.  
However, this in no way detracts from the validity of the 
analysis and it is important that this analysis be incorporated 
into future debate on this issue.  Otherwise, it is likely that 
the future impact of the Americans with Disabilities Act will be 
dramatically diminished, thereby severely compromising the status 
of people with disabilities in society.

Throughout the day leaders from the disability rights community 
offered valuable insights regarding the implementation of the ADA 
and suggestions for the Council's future effort's in monitoring 
the ADA.  Five major themes emerged from these spirited 
discussions:

            Correct Current Misunderstandings Regarding
the Americans with Disabilities Act

There is currently a considerable amount of misunderstanding 
regarding the ADA. Perhaps the greatest single area of 
misunderstanding regarding the ADA is in the area of cost.  The 
law itself requires that covered entities incur the costs of 
"reasonable accommodations" to make their facilities, programs, 
and services accessible to individuals with disabilities unless 
such accommodations pose an "undue hardship" on the entity.  
Given this two-part test, there is obviously room for discussion 
regarding both what is "reasonable" and what constitutes an 
"undue hardship".  Thus, there is no concrete requirement that 
covered entities must absolutely make every accommodation 
requested by every individual with a disability.  Furthermore, it 
has been found that reasonable accommodations often do not 
require a great deal of expense.  For example, the Job 
Accommodation Network sponsored by the President's Committee on 
Employment of People with Disabilities reports that based on its 
national data bank, using the average (mean) cumulative figures, 
for every dollar spent to make an accommodation, the company got 
$15.34.[9]  In addition, a recent study based on the experience 
of Sears, Roebuck, and Company in making reasonable 
accommodations reported that the average accommodation cost the 
company $121.00.  The study also reported that 69% of 
accommodations cost nothing, 28% cost less than $1,000, and only
3% exceeded $1,000.[10]  These data are in general agreement with 
the overall data reported by the President's Committee on 
Employment of People with Disabilities.  Thus, the idea that 
compliance with the ADA will cause great financial burdens to 
covered entities is not supported by either the provisions of the 
law itself or by practical experience to date in implementing the 
law.

Improve Educational Efforts Regarding the Americans with Disabilities Act

There is a need for improved public relations and education 
regarding the ADA and its actual requirements.  During the 
national meeting of experts, participants noted that there is a 
lack of information both within the general public and the 
disability community itself regarding the ADA.  A recent Harris 
poll indicated that only 40% of people with disabilities had any 
substantial knowledge of the ADA.  Given this fact, it is not 
surprising that the early implementation of the ADA has been 
somewhat uneven.  

During the meeting, experts noted several key points in the area 
of public relations and education.  Primary among these was the 
fact that ADA "success stories" need to be widely publicized.  
Persons with disabilities, covered entities, and the general 
public need to know how to successfully implement the ADA in 
their own local communities and industries.  Fortunately, there 
are a great number of success stories to draw upon.  
Unfortunately, few of these stories are ever communicated to 
those who could benefit from this knowledge.  Many potential 
fears regarding compliance could be greatly reduced through the 
communication of this often common-sense information.  As Justin 
Dart, Jr. observed:  An architect might tell a company that they 
need to tear out their plumbing and install a new drinking 
fountain to accommodate a worker with a disability.  But the 
person with a disability might respond by asking the company to 
install a five-dollar cup dispenser instead.  Clearly, the 
dissemination of information regarding positive examples of ADA 
implementation would hold much promise in speeding up the process 
of compliance and in reducing the number of complaints under the 
Act.  In this regard, participants had several suggestions:

     (a).  There should be an on-going, national effort to 
     disseminate ADA success stories.

     (b).  Examples of successful compliance should be 
     disseminated by enforcement agencies such as the Department 
     of Justice in order to encourage voluntary compliance. 

     (c).  There is a particular need to provide persons with 
     disabilities and the general public with basic information 
     regarding the ADA.

     (d).  This basic information campaign as well as other 
     ADA-related information efforts should be produced in 
     accessible formats and should also be available in several 
     languages.

     (e).  Particular outreach efforts should be made to ensure 
     that individuals from racial, cultural, and ethnic 
     minorities and youth are informed of the ADA's provisions.  
     There is a national need for outreach to minority 
     communities, people with low incidence disabilities, and 
     people living in rural areas.

     In its 1993 report, Meeting the Unique Needs of Minorities 
     with Disabilities: A Report to the President and the 
     Congress[11], the National Council on Disability detailed 
     the difficulties experienced by members of minority groups 
     who had disabilities in receiving information and services.  
     More specifically, the Council found:

     The ADA holds great promise for minority persons with 
     disabilities, but the promise will be realized only if 
     specific efforts are made for outreach, education, and 
     removal of barriers in minority communities. (p.4).

     Unfortunately, this outreach has yet to occur to any great 
     extent.  Participants also noted that persons with 
     low-incidence disabilities and persons who live in rural 
     areas also had significant informational needs regarding the 
     ADA.  Once again, a possible solution in this area might be 
     through providing resources to grassroots organizations 
     which serve minority communities, organizations of and for 
     persons with low-incidence disabilities, and to 
     organizations serving rural areas.

     (f).  The education of philanthropic organizations could 
     yield support for continued public education regarding the 
     successful implementation of the Act.


    Clarify and Strengthen the Legal Framework Surrounding the 
                  Americans with Disabilities Act

Meeting participants stressed that at present legal actions 
involving the Americans with Disabilities Act remain largely 
uncoordinated.  Better coordination of legal activities in order 
to establish a clear framework for interpretation of the ADA 
through case law.  As there is no specific clearinghouse for the 
dissemination of information on legal activities regarding the 
ADA, there is a danger that the development of an authoritative 
body of case law regarding the Act will be slowed.  Several 
suggestions were offered to remedy this situation, including the 
establishment of a national clearinghouse or other
information bank regarding ADA cases or a national conference 
which would present information and training in the area of case 
law on the ADA.

Participants noted that the ADA was too big to be implemented 
solely from Washington, DC, but no consensus was reached as to 
the best strategy for ensuring evenness in implementation across 
the nation.  The continuing lack of affordable legal resources 
for people with disabilities was cited as one of the major 
factors impeding the proper implementation of the ADA.

    Provide Resources and Coordinate Federal Efforts to Enforce
                the Americans with Disabilities Act

While participants were generally supportive of the intent of 
various Federal agencies to enforce the provisions of the ADA to 
date, they noted that there was a significant frustration in the 
disability community regarding the backlog of complaint 
processing at the Federal level.  While certain agencies such as 
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have since begun to 
explore methods by which they might streamline their processing 
of complaints, it is clear that additional resources are needed, 
if the law is to be effectively enforced.  

Participants expressed particular concern with the Department of 
Transportation, stating that it had bypassed the usual rulemaking 
process in issuing its definition of "unduly burdensome" 
accommodations, that it had missed deadlines in the law, and that 
it gave the appearance of being extremely lenient in issuing 
waivers to covered entities in order to effectively exempt these 
entities from various provisions in the Act.  In addition, 
participants expressed concern as to whether the Department would 
utilize the findings and recommendations of the 
Congressionally-mandated independent study on the accessibility 
of Over the Road Buses conducted by the Congressional Office of 
Technology Assessment as the actual basis for its upcoming Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking concerning the accessibility of Over the 
Road Buses.

On a more positive note, participants stated that the Federal 
Communications Commission had been effective in implementing the 
regulations under its jurisdiction in a timely and effective 
manner.  The next challenge in this area will be ensuring that 
people with disabilities have access to the "information 
superhighway" which will revolutionize the field of 
telecommunications.




                 Provide More Technical Assistance

Technical assistance efforts designed to promote ADA 
implementation need to be more targeted and directed toward a 
wide variety of entities.  Participants stated that the best
way to increase knowledge of the Americans with Disabilities Act 
among people with disabilities would be to target this 
information toward grassroots organizations of and for people 
with disabilities.  In many instances, it might be feasible to 
provide these organizations with resources to educate their 
membership and the community at large.

Participants also stated that technical assistance was needed in 
the education of architects and design professionals so that they 
might be able to include accessibility features from the earliest 
possible phases of their work, thereby obviating the need for 
costly retrofitting later.

Finally, meeting participants suggested that better coordination 
was needed in the area of technical assistance both among 
government agencies involved in these activities and private 
sector entities involved in the delivery of technical assistance.  
Several participants suggested that, given the marked variability 
in the quality of technical assistance materials which have been 
developed in the private sector in response to the ADA, some form 
of certification or approval by agencies charged with enforcement 
of the ADA might be advisable.  This would help to ensure the 
accuracy of these materials and to build trust among covered 
entities.

        Summary of the National Meeting of Experts on the 
                  Americans with Disabilities Act

The overriding message emanating from the national meeting of 
experts was that the Americans with Disabilities Act was a law of 
vital importance to Americans with disabilities and that its 
overall implementation was proceeding well.  However, there were 
significant informational gaps concerning the Act, its 
lower-than-predicted costs, and emerging case law.  These 
informational gaps were particularly wide in minority 
communities, among people with low-incidence disabilities, and in 
rural areas.  Efforts to streamline the processing of complaints 
and to direct sufficient resources to respond in a timely fashion 
to these complaints need to be undertaken.  In addition, more 
resources need to be devoted to legal services in order to ensure 
that people with disabilities can access the rights and 
protections of the Act.  Finally, further technical assistance is 
needed to enable people with disabilities and covered entities to 
implement the law in an effective manner.
        Roundtable Discussion on the Implementation of the 
                  Americans with Disabilities Act

On August 23, 1994, the National Council on Disability sponsored 
a roundtable discussion on the implementation of the Americans 
with Disabilities Act as part of its quarterly meeting in 
Seattle, Washington.  At the beginning of the day, leaders from 
Federal agencies with ADA implementation responsibilities 
presented data on specific areas under their purview to the 
Council and to approximately 200 individuals in attendance.  
After this, individuals representing various local and State 
agencies as well as employers from Seattle and throughout the 
State of Washington described their efforts to take a positive 
approach to the implementation of the ADA.  Attendees were then 
invited to share their views regarding the implementation of the 
ADA to date.[12]

During the course of the day, information was gathered on Title I 
- Employment, Title II - Public Services, Title III - Public 
Accommodations and Services Operated by Private Entities, Title 
IV - Telecommunications.  In addition, the area of Transportation 
was given specific attention.  Finally, information regarding 
strategies to implement the ADA at the local and State level were 
described.  Information from each of these areas will be 
summarized below.

                       Title I - Employment

As of August, 1994, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
(EEOC) had received almost 30,000 complaints regarding employment 
discrimination under the ADA.  Of these, the largest percentages 
by disability category were as follows: approximately 20% were 
from individuals with back impairments, 13% from individuals with 
neurological impairments, and 10% from individuals with emotional 
or psychiatric impairments.  Half of the complaints alleged 
discharge based on discrimination, 25% alleged failure to provide 
reasonable accommodations, and 11% alleged failure to hire based 
on discrimination.  Of the total number of charges, approximately 
46% have been resolved in some fashion, 34% through a finding of 
"no cause".  As of August, 1994, 26 cases were in court, with 
approximately 200 others headed to court.

During the Roundtable, participants identified the following 
issues as needing attention in order to better implement Title I:

 More resources are necessary for enforcement.

 More guidance is needed regarding the relationship of Title I 
to Worker's Compensation provisions.

 Clarification is needed regarding the relationship of the ADA 
to union contracts.  For example, if job reassignment constitutes 
a "reasonable accommodation" yet conflicts with seniority 
provisions in a collective bargaining agreement, which takes 
precedence?

 More information is needed regarding chemical sensitivity and 
environmental illness issues.

 More information is needed on accommodating people with mental 
health issues and cognitive disabilities in the workplace.

 Medical professionals need to learn more about "essential job 
functions" when evaluating individuals' ability to perform work.

 The private sector needs more education regarding the 
provisions of Title I.

 Consideration should be given to using Medicaid to pay for 
diagnostic testing.

 A more precise definition is needed for "specific learning 
disabilities".

 The relationship of the ADA to the Family Medical Leave Act 
should be explored.


                    Title II - Public Services

As of August 1994, the Justice Department had received 
approximately 2,400 complaints under Title II of the ADA.  
Slightly over half of these complaints were referred to seven 
other Federal agencies for investigation by programs under their 
jurisdiction, while 1,100 involving issues such as law 
enforcement, courts, and city and town buildings were retained by 
the Justice Department for investigation.  To date, most of the 
complaint investigations have led to informal settlements 
involving voluntary compliance by covered entities.

Participants at the Roundtable made the following suggestions for 
improving compliance with Title II:

 More exploration needs to take place on meeting the needs of 
individuals with "invisible" disabilities.

 More resources need to be directed at providing legal services 
to low- and middle-income people with disabilities.

 Police departments should make greater use of sign language 
interpreters during arrest processes with deaf individuals.

 Procedures for obtaining interpretative services for 
non-English language deaf people or those who require tactile 
interpreters need to be improved.

 More "front-end" planning needs to take place in order to avoid 
the costs of retrofitting facilities for access.

 Training needs to occur at the highest levels of an 
organization, if real change is to occur.


Title III - Public Accommodations and Services Operated by Private Entities

As of August 1994, the Justice Department had received 
approximately 2,600 complaints regarding Title III of the ADA.  
Of these, approximately 63% involved the alleged failure to 
remove barriers in existing facilities which were "readily 
achievable", 20% involved the failure to provide "auxiliary 
aids", and another 10% involved the failure to modify policies 
that precluded or impaired the participation of people with 
disabilities in programs.  Thus far, there have not been a 
significant number of complaints regarding new construction and 
alterations.

Participants in the Roundtable offered the following suggestions 
for improving compliance with Title III:

 Clarification is needed over the number of van parking spaces 
that should be provided at existing facilities.

 Clarification is also needed between the requirements of the 
law for barrier removal versus new construction.

 Building officials need basic training regarding Title III 
requirements.

 Businesses need to provide consistent accommodations such as 
materials in alternative formats for people who are blind, 
interpreters for people who are deaf, etc., rather than the 
present situation in which either no accommodations are
readily available or the quality varies widely from one setting 
to another.

 Businesses should hire sign language interpreters on their 
regular staff, just as they hire a certain number of Spanish 
speaking individuals (etc.) to meet customers' needs.

 Doctor's offices and clinics need to utilize assistive 
listening devices.

 Clarification is needed in order to ensure that covered 
entities understand that they are required to make reasonable 
accommodations under Title III, no matter how large or small 
their business is or how many employees they have.

  There should be a qualification standard uniformly applied to 
sign language interpreters.

 Consideration should be given to the development of a 
certification program for ADA consultants in order to improve 
quality in these services.

 People with disabilities themselves should be included in 
judgments concerning what constitutes compliance.


                   Title IV - Telecommunications

Participants in the Roundtable concerning Title IV expressed 
general satisfaction with progress to date in implementing the 
requirements of the ADA related to the provision of relay 
services.  They also discussed broader telecommunications and 
information access issues, such as access to the "information 
superhighway".  Noting that, in general, there is a tremendous 
gap between the State of technology and the State of access 
standards to technology, they offered the following suggestions:


 Software developers need to ensure that new programs and 
products are accessible for people with disabilities.  For 
example, the rapid growth of icon-driven programs (such as 
Windows) is effectively shutting blind and visually impaired 
individuals out of their jobs.

 The growth of voice mail services has far outstripped the 
growth of TDD operators, thus producing significant
barriers to people with hearing and speech impairments.  An 
industry-wide standard for a pause control system is needed.

 Technology is available to allow devices such as automatic 
teller machines (ATMs) to "talk".  This technology needs to be 
used much more extensively than at present.

 The Justice Department or the Access Board should develop 
standards for making information systems kiosks more accessible.

 Long distance telephone carriers should be more flexible in 
allowing TDD callers to transfer from one service to another.

 The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should ensure that 
in selling licenses for communications radio frequencies for 
personal telephones, cellular, telephones, etc. that they do not 
interfere with frequencies reserved for FM loops used by people 
who are hard of hearing.

 The FCC needs to issue rules regarding hearing aid 
compatibility telephones.

 Consideration should be given to the development of rules 
governing the confidentiality of information resulting from 
communication via message relay systems.


                          Transportation

As of August, 1994, the Department of Transportation had received 
over 500 complaints regarding the transportation requirements of 
the ADA.  The most common complaints come from people with 
disabilities who have been refused transportation, people who 
experience discrimination in receiving transportation services, a 
lack of accessible key stations, and a lack of curb cuts.  
Department officials have been informed by covered entities that 
timelines have been or will be missed in important areas: the 
July 1993 compliance date for accessibility of key stations has 
been missed in many areas, and the July 26, 1994 compliance date 
for one accessible car per train has also been missed in many 
instances.

During the Roundtable, participants offered the following 
suggestions for improving compliance with the ADA:

 The Secretary of Transportation should accept the findings of 
the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment's study 
regarding the accessibility of over-the-road buses and issue 
rules consistent with this Congressionally mandated study.

 Clarification is needed on whether repaving roads constitutes 
an alteration which triggers the requirement to install curb 
cuts.

 Extensive training is required for the staff of paratransit 
systems regarding the accurate and timely processing of requests 
for services.

 Federal standards for access to ferries and other vessels 
should be developed.

 Clarification is needed regarding which entities are 
responsible for the accessibility of bus stops.


               Seattle and the State of Washington:
   Progress in Implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act

     Washington State has moved to fully implement the Americans 
     with Disabilities Act because we acknowledge the right of 
     each citizen to participate in state services, programs and 
     opportunities free from discrimination.  We have found that 
     implementation costs little and can result in dramatic 
     improvements in the lives of people with disabilities.  
     Further, by enabling people with disabilities to be 
     self-sufficient and to obtain gainful employment, ADA can 
     result in reduced welfare and other program expenditures.

                                   - Governor Mike Lowry

During the ADA Roundtable, Members of the National Council on 
Disability as well as nearly 200 attendees had the opportunity to 
hear from a number of individuals who were involved with ensuring 
the successful implementation of the Americans with Disabilities 
Act in Seattle and throughout the State of Washington.

In the opening session, Mayor Norman Rice of Seattle spoke 
eloquently regarding the City of Seattle's efforts to adopt a 
positive approach to the full implementation of the ADA:

     As everyone in this room knows, the Americans with 
     Disabilities Act is the long awaited and long overdue 
     legislation that finally gives Americans with disabilities a
     guarantee of the most basic civil rights.  As I'm sure you 
     are also aware, passing the ADA was only the beginning. The 
     real work lies in implementing and enforcing and tearing 
     down myths and the stereotypes so prevalent in our society.  
     We in Seattle...can...take pride in our city's efforts to 
     make itself accessible to people with disabilities.  Our 
     overall goal is to go beyond simply making access.  We want 
     people to have a truly comfortable, barrier-free 
     environment.

Noting that the City of Seattle had established ordinance 
prohibiting discrimination based on disabilities prior to the 
passage of the ADA,  Mayor Rice discussed several efforts the 
City had made toward the active implementation of the ADA and 
some of the results of these efforts.

         The city has taken steps to begin increase the hiring 
          of qualified workers with disabilities.

         The Mayor appointed two city-wide ADA coordinators.  
          One of these coordinators works specifically on 
          implementation and the other addresses public 
          accommodations. 

         Seattle has established an ADA Citizens Advisory 
          Committee to evaluate and  prioritize access issues. 
        
         The Seattle Public Library has opened its entire 
          collection to patrons who have visual impairments by 
          providing assistive technology.  The library also has a 
          coordinator for services for patrons who are deaf or 
          hard of hearing. 

         The city has hired advocates for disability-related 
          concerns within the city government to provide a link 
          to the community at large.

         As part of its approach to the issue of managing growth 
          and maintaining a high quality of life for its 
          citizens, the city has included accessibility features 
          in its plans to increase and improve housing and public 
          transportation.

Mayor Rice noted that there is still much work to do.  However, 
he stated his belief that Seattle is up to the challenge, and 
welcomed the future involvement of all organizations in making 
the ADA work in Seattle.  In his concluding remarks, Mayor Rice 
offered the following observation:

     The true test of a just society is whether everyone is able 
     to participate. Everyone has the right to be heard, and each 
     of us must be empowered to give a voice to our particular 
     needs and concerns. 

Later in the day, representatives from various State agencies 
involved in the implementation of the ADA as well as employers 
had the opportunity to share information regarding efforts to 
positively implement the ADA in the State of Washington and in 
the State's employment sector.

Mary McKnew, ADA coordinator in the Governor's Office, discussed 
Statewide compliance activities under Title II of the ADA and the 
role that the Governor's Office had played in that area.  One of 
the first steps taken in response to the ADA in the Governor's 
Office was the issuance of Executive Order 9303, which clarified 
the implications of the ADA to State agency directors in such 
diverse agencies as Fisheries and Wildlife, Agriculture, 
Transportation, etc.  An ADA coordinator was appointed within 
each State agency to serve as the central point of contact, to 
perform agency self-evaluations, and to develop transition plans 
for submission to the Office of Financial Management.  In 
addition, agency directors were required to hold meetings in 
barrier-free locations, provide meeting materials in alternative 
formats, and ensure that assistive listening devices and 
interpreters were available.  The Executive Order also required 
that public transportation should be made available (in effective 
alternative means as necessary), and that nondiscrimination be 
the rule in employment.

In order to increase public awareness of the ADA, the Governor's 
Office ran advertisements, put up posters, and established a 
telephone line and point of contact for written inquiries.  In 
addition to the objective of increasing public awareness, these 
activities also provided a vehicle for the public to inform the 
Governor's Office of difficulties they might be having in trying 
to access State services.

A Statewide ADA Task Force was established, with 75 percent of 
the members being people with disabilities, whether citizens or 
State employees.  The Task Force, which also included 
representatives of different key State agencies, organized itself 
around various issues such as communication barriers, employment, 
facilities access, etc.  The Task Force identified broad barriers 
that people were experiencing across the 135 State agencies as 
well as the higher education programs supported by the State 
government and also considered the best means of educating the 
over 40,000 employees of the State of Washington.

One example of how the State has used information arising from 
this education and outreach effort is found in the State's 
establishment of a braille center that contracts with the State 
printer's office.  Previous to the establishment of this braille 
center, State agencies were often bewildered when citizens 
requested information in braille.  Today, the turnaround time for 
such a request is often 24 hours.  At the time of the roundtable, 
the State was in the process of developing a guidebook listing 
each State agency, its central contact for requests for materials 
in alternate formats, tape or braille.

The State legislature appropriated funds for operating expenses 
and capital improvements in response to the ADA.  Some of these 
funds were used by the Department of Personnel to hire a 
"reasonable accommodations" expert who is available
to agency managers to answer questions, identify and locate 
sources for acquiring accommodations, etc.  The Department of 
Personnel also hired a staff trainer knowledgeable of the 
provisions of the ADA.  This trainer works in coordination with 
other ADA trainers located in various key departments in order to 
promote compliance with the ADA.  State employees are provided 
training on topics such as disability awareness, how to use 
accessible telephone equipment such as a TDDs, and a wide variety 
of other disability-related topics.  Within the Department of 
General Administration, there is a coordinator for ensuring that 
State agencies have accessible services and equipment.  Equipment 
such as assistive listening devices can be loaned out to State 
agencies requiring their use, thereby leading to the most 
cost-effective use of this equipment.  Through another effort, 
the Department of General Administration is attempting to 
increase access to public meetings, hearings, and conferences 
sponsored by the State.  This involves training State employees 
involved in planning for such events in areas such as 
architectural access.  

In the State of Washington, the Governor's Committee on 
Disability Issues and Employment is the recipient of a grant from 
the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitative Research 
establishing the Northwest Disability Business Technical 
Assistance Center.  The Center provides information and referral, 
technical assistance, and training on the ADA to people with 
disabilities, businesses, public accommodations, and the public.  
The Center is one of 10 regional centers that cover the country 
for this purpose.  Its region includes Alaska, Washington, Idaho 
and Oregon.  Toby Olson, who directs both the Governor's 
Committee on Disability Issues and Employment as well as the 
Center, reported that early on, the Center developed a cadre of 
Statewide networks, organizations, and broad-based coalitions of 
organizations interested in the ADA.  Resources were deployed in 
order to develop capacities for effective ADA implementation 
throughout the region.  As training was conducted in the States, 
other efforts were launched in order to build capacity at the 
local level.  

For example, in Alaska the Center has fostered a regional mentor 
approach.  Beginning with an initial intensive training program 
for 24 individuals, 12 were recruited to establish a network 
across the State.  This network accomplishes its work through 
monthly telephone conference calls to share technical 
information, new developments in the application of the Act.  
Members then recruit apprentices in their communities who can 
share this information with others all across the State.  In 
Washington State, the State network has a Rural Concerns 
Subcommittee that has traveled to rural communities throughout 
the State.  Through advance publicity, the subcommittee has been 
able to attract the participation of people in rural areas who 
are interested in disability issues, bring them together in 
meetings, and develop strategies for ADA implementation.

Finally, roundtable participants heard from employers in the 
State of Washington who had taken proactive steps to implement 
increased access to employment for persons with disabilities.  
Ms. Annella Zamora of McCaw Cellular Communications reported that 
her company had developed a broad base of employees with 
disabilities.  She stated that
McCaw had developed a diverse group of employees, as it has 
always been part of the McCaw culture to go into the community 
and employ persons with different disabilities, looking at 
person's skills first.  The ADA had proven helpful in lending 
more support and accelerating the pace of this process.

Mr. Danny Delcambre, owner of the Ragin' Cajun Restaurant in 
Seattle, reported that he had established his restaurant in 1993.  
Given his own hearing disability, he chose to hire people skilled 
in sign language.  In this effort, he was provided with 
assistance from the State Department of Vocational 
Rehabilitation.  He was also able to obtain tax credits for his 
business.

Mr. Joey Vigil, of the Naval Undersea Warfare Division, reported 
that his Division had embarked upon an aggressive program to hire 
people with disabilities eight years ago.  At that time, there 
were over 4,000 employees, 95 of whom had disabilities.  The 
hiring effort received guidance from an Advisory Committee for 
Employees with Disabilities, which provided direct access to the 
commanding officer.  Fifty percent of the Committee was made up 
of disabled employees, and other members included top level 
managers, as well as a facility engineer (for advice on 
reasonable accommodation).  Deaf employees formed a Deaf 
Employees Advisory Forum.  At that time, the Division worked with 
approximately 47 different State and private agencies.  Members 
of the Committee participated in recruiting trips, through which 
the Division hired engineers and scientists, and other 
professionals.  As a result of this and related efforts, the 
number of employees with disabilities rose from 95 to 578.  
Currently, employees with disabilities make up 17% of the 
workforce.  The current average hourly wage for employees with 
disabilities at the Division is $14.00/hour.

Mr. Vigil credited the Division's adoption of a Total Quality 
Leadership approach to management as one of the key factors 
contributing to the success of employees with disabilities.  
Training and upgrading of skills are constantly emphasized in 
order to ensure that employees not only maintain their skills, 
but develop new ones to meet new challenges in the workplace.

Mr. Norm Tate, of the Auburn office of the Teleservice Center for 
the Social Security Administration described his office's success 
in hiring and retaining employees with disabilities.  Mr. Tate 
reported that the Center has been in operation for approximately 
five years.  From the beginning, a goal was to hire people with 
disabilities.  At present, the Center employs approximately 500 
employees, 30% of whom have disabilities.  Beyond the hiring 
process, the Center has provided employees with disabilities with 
career development opportunities, so that at present, several are 
moving up the management line.

In this effort, the Center received assistance from the State 
Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, agencies serving people 
who are blind or visually impaired, and many other agencies.  In 
addition to the assistance provided by agencies, Mr. Tate cited 
true commitment at the top as a key factor in leading to these 
positive outcomes.

The Council was encouraged by the efforts both within the City of 
Seattle and the State of Washington to adopt a positive approach 
to the implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.  
Beyond the impressive gains that have been made in access to the 
physical, communications, and employment environments, the 
strength of the partnerships that have been formed will greatly 
assist in the continued smooth implementation of the Act. 

Summary of the Americans with Disabilities Act Roundtable Discussion

The general conclusion from the Roundtable was that 
implementation of the ADA was proceeding reasonably well.  
Several speakers stressed the fact that while further training, 
clarification, and (in some instances) regulatory actions might 
be required, the ADA itself was sound and should not be amended.  
In spite of initial fears on the part of some that the ADA would 
be very expensive or would take great efforts to implement, early 
implementation has been achieved in many areas in a cost 
effective and efficient manner.  This has been particularly true 
in organizations which have a strong commitment to their 
communities:

     As I've said, it's always been a part of [our company's] 
     culture to go into the community and employ people with 
     disabilities, to look at the skill set first and, 
     secondarily, to look at the disability....What happened with 
     the ADA, I believe, is that we were lent more support in 
     moving more quickly forward....To date, we have not realized 
     any tax breaks or incentives.  I think it was corporate 
     responsibility to move forward with this without any of the 
     incentives.

Another participant put it this way:

     Incentives?  I'll buy you lunch: that's a good incentive!

Finally, another participant described the importance of 
leadership in implementing needed organizational change:

     ...unless you have true commitment at the top, you don't 
     have anything.  I don't think amending the ADA will achieve 
     that...the need is, very simply, for a paradigm shift.

                            CONCLUSIONS

In its early implementation, the Americans with Disabilities Act 
has begun to create this paradigm shift in America.  The goals of 
the ADA - for equality of opportunity, full participation, 
independent living, and economic self-sufficiency - are beginning 
to shape our national culture.  An example of this is found in 
the partnerships which have emerged between public and private 
sector entities in places such as the City of Seattle and the 
State of Washington in order to foster the smooth implementation 
of the Americans with Disabilities Act.  These partnerships 
provide positive examples of how adaptive change is occurring.    

The conclusions of this brief summary report echo those expressed 
in the Council's two earlier reports on the implementation of the 
Americans with Disabilities Act[13].  What is needed to improve 
upon the implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act is 
greater public awareness, further education and clarification 
regarding the provisions of the law, and the appropriate 
resources to both encourage voluntary compliance and to ensure 
effective enforcement. A recent study by the General Accounting 
Office also confirms these conclusions:

     Overall, we observed steady improvement in both 
     accessibility and awareness during the initial 15 months 
     that the ADA was in effect.  However, enough areas of 
     concern remain to suggest a need for continuing educational 
     outreach and technical assistance to businesses and 
     government agencies covered by the act and continued 
     monitoring by the Congress.  (p.2).

     ...while accessibility for persons with disabilities is 
     steadily improving, there remains a need for continuing 
     educational outreach and technical assistance for businesses 
     and government agencies covered by the ADA and therefore the 
     continued attention of a watchful Congress.  (p.15).[14]



The present report contains many suggestions for how the Federal 
government might improve its efforts to ensure that the 
implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act goes 
forward in a manner which guarantees the freedoms established and 
protected
under this landmark civil rights legislation.  Improvements in 
implementation are essential to guaranteeing that the future of 
America is characterized by equality of opportunity, full 
participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency 
for all citizens.  The National Council on Disability remains 
firmly committed to making the Americans with Disabilities Act 
work for all citizens, thereby ensuring equal access to the 
American dream.

                            Appendix A
    A Brief Description of the Americans with Disabilities Act


ADA Requirements

An estimated 49 million Americans with physical or mental 
impairments that substantially limit daily activities are 
protected under the ADA.  These activities include working, 
walking, talking, seeing, hearing, or caring for oneself.  People 
who have a record of such an impairment and those regarded as 
having an impairment are also protected.  The ADA has the 
following five titles:

        ù Title I -  Employment

        ù Title II-  Public Services (including Public 
                     Transportation)

        ù Title III- Public Accommodations and Services Operated 
                     by Private Entities

        ù Title IV-  Telecommunications

        ù Title V -  Miscellaneous Provisions

The following is a brief summary of some of the major 
requirements contained in the ADA statute.  To determine all of 
the requirements that a covered entity must satisfy, it is 
necessary to refer to the regulations, guidelines, and/or 
technical assistance materials that have been developed by the 
Department of Justice (DOJ), the Equal Employment Opportunity 
Commission (EEOC), the Department of Transportation (DOT), the 
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the Architectural 
and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (the Access Board).  
In addition, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has developed 
regulations on the tax relief available for certain costs of 
complying with the ADA, such as small business tax credits.

     Title I - Employment

Title I of the ADA prohibits discrimination in employment against 
people with disabilities.  It requires employers to make 
reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental 
limitations of a qualified applicant or employee, unless such 
accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the employer.  
Reasonable accommodations include such actions as making 
worksites accessible, modifying existing equipment, providing new 
devices, modifying work schedules, restructuring jobs, and 
providing readers or interpreters.

Title I also prohibits the use of employment tests and other 
selection criteria that screen out, or tend to screen out, 
individuals with disabilities, unless such tests or criteria are
shown to be job-related and consistent with business necessity.  
It also bans the use of pre-employment medical examinations or 
inquiries to determine if an applicant has a disability.  It 
does, however, permit the use of medical examinations after a job 
offer has been made if the results are kept confidential, all 
persons offered employment in the same job category are required 
to take them, and the results are not used to discriminate.

Employers are permitted, at any time, to inquire about the 
ability of a job applicant or employee to perform job-related 
functions.  Under the ADA, the employment provisions took effect 
on July 26, 1992, for employers with 25 or more employees, and 
will take effect on July 26, 1994, for employers with 15 or more 
employees.  As required, the EEOC issued its regulations by July 
26, 1991.

     Title II - Public Services

Title II of the ADA requires that the services and programs of 
local and State governments, as well as other non-Federal 
government agencies, are accessible to people with disabilities.  
Regulations from the Attorney General's office at DOJ were issued 
on July 26, 1991, in compliance with the ADA.

In addition, Title II seeks to ensure that people with 
disabilities have access to transportation.  All new buses must 
now be accessible.  Transit authorities must provide 
supplementary paratransit services or other special 
transportation services for individuals with disabilities who 
cannot use fixed-route bus services, unless this would present an 
undue burden.

In the area of rail transportation, the ADA requires that all new 
rail vehicles and all new rail stations must be accessible.  In 
addition, existing rail systems must have one accessible car per 
train within five years of enactment.  Amtrak must make all of 
its existing stations accessible within 20 years.  Key stations 
of subway systems and other commuter rail systems must generally 
be accessible within three years.  Regulations from the Secretary 
of DOT were due on July 26, 1991, but were somewhat delayed.

     Title III - Public Accommodations

Public accommodations include the broad range of entities that 
affect commerce, including sales, rental, and service 
establishments; educational institutions; recreational 
facilities; and social service centers.  The ADA prohibits the 
use of eligibility criteria that screen out or tend to screen out 
individuals with disabilities, unless necessary for the delivery 
of goods and services.  It also requires public accommodations to 
make reasonable modifications to policies, practices, and 
procedures, unless those modifications would fundamentally alter 
the nature of the services provided by the public accommodation.

Title III also requires that public accommodations provide 
auxiliary aids necessary to enable persons who have visual, 
hearing, or sensory impairments to participate in the
program, but only if their provision will not result in an undue 
burden on the business.  Thus, for example, a restaurant would 
not be required to provide menus in braille for blind patrons if 
it requires its waiters to read the menu.  The auxiliary aid 
requirement is flexible.  A public accommodation may choose among 
various alternatives as long as the result is effective 
communication.

With respect to existing facilities of public accommodations, 
physical barriers must be removed when it is "readily achievable" 
to do so (i.e., when it can be accomplished easily and without 
much expense).  Modifications that would be readily achievable in 
most cases include ramping of a few steps.  However, all 
construction of new facilities and alterations of existing 
facilities in public accommodations, as well as in commercial 
facilities such as office buildings, must be accessible to people 
with disabilities (except that elevators generally are not 
required for facilities that are less than three stories high or 
have less than 3,000 square feet per story).

Regulations on public accommodations and commercial facilities 
from the Attorney General's office were issued on July 26, 1991.  
Title III also addresses transportation provided by private 
entities, and regulations on this component were issued by the 
Secretary of DOT on September 6, 1991.

     Title IV - Telecommunications

Title IV of the ADA amends the Communications Act of 1934 to 
require that telephone companies provide telecommunication relay 
services.  The relay services must permit speech-or 
hearing-impaired individuals who use TDDs or other non-voice 
terminal devices opportunities for communication that are 
equivalent to those provided to other customers.  Regulations 
were issued by the FCC on August 1, 1991.

     Title V - Miscellaneous Provisions

This title addresses such issues as the ADA's relationship to 
other laws including the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, requirements 
relating to the provision of insurance, regulations by the Access 
Board, prohibition of State immunity, inclusion of Congress as a 
covered entity, implementation of each title, promotion of 
alternative means of dispute resolution, and provision of 
technical assistance.

                            Appendix B
     List of Participants in the National Meeting of Experts 
              on the Americans with Disabilities Act

          Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC
                         February 10, 1994


Warren Asher, Esq.
Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering
2445 M Street, NW
Washington, DC  20037

Ms. Marca Bristo
Access Living
310 South Peoria - Suite 201
Chicago, IL  60607

Mr. Jack Catlin
LSH Architects
130 East Randolph - Suite 3400
Chicago, IL  60601

Mr. Justin Dart
907 6th Street, SW
Apartment 516C
Washington, DC  20024

Ms. Mary Giliberti
Judge David L. Bazelon Center
   for Mental Health
1101 15th Street, NW
Washington, DC  20005

Mr. Ed Graves
NCIL
2111 Wilson Boulevard - Suite 405
Arlington, VA  22201

Jim Harrington, Esq.
Advocacy, Inc.
7800 Shoal Creek Boulevard, Suite 171-E
Austin, TX  78757-1024

Mr. Dana Jackson
Walcoff Associates
635 Slaters Lane - Suite 400
Alexandria, VA  22314

Mr. Tim Jones
MELE
7428 Westmore Road
Rockville, MD  20850

Mr. Mark Leeper
2123 Lexington Avenue
Moscow, ID  83843

Mr. Paul Marchand
The Arc
1522 K Street, NW - Suite 516
Washington, DC  20036

Mr. Scott Marshall
American Foundation for the Blind
1615 M Street, NW - Suite 250
Washington, DC  20036

Ms. Arlene Mayerson
Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund
2212 6th Street
Berkeley, CA  94710

Ms. Gina McDonald
KACIL
3258 S. Topeka Boulevard
Topeka, KS  66611

Ms. Bonnie O'Day
745 Somerville Avenue
Apartment 2
Somerville, MA  02143

Ms. Karen Peltz-Strauss
National Center for Law and Deafness
800 Florida Avenue, NE
Washington, DC  20002

Ms. Pam Ransom
Issue Dynamics
901 15th Street, NW - Suite 230
Washington, DC  20005-2301

Mr. Sam Simon
Issue Dynamics
901 15th Street, NW - Suite 230
Washington, DC  20005-2301

Ms. Lisa Small
Judge David L. Bazelon Center
   for Mental Health
1101 15th Street, NW
Washington, DC  20005

Mr. Jim Weissman
Eastern Paralyzed Veterans of America
75-20 Astoria Boulevard
Jackson Heights, NY  11370

Ms. Wendy Wilkinson
ILRU
2323 S. Shepherd
Houston, TX  77019

Ms. Pat Wright
Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund
1633 Q Street, NW
Washington, DC  20009

Ms. Kate Yannias
Legal Center for Disability Rights
208 S. LaSalle - Suite 1330
Chicago, IL  60604


National Council on Disability Participants 

Mr. John A. Gannon
NCD Acting Chairperson

Mr. Anthony Flack
NCD Council Member

Mr. Robert Muller
NCD Council Member

Dr. George Oberle
NCD Council Member

Mrs. Mary Raether
NCD Council Member



Mr. Edward P. Burke
NCD Acting Executive Director

Ms. Billie Jean Hill
NCD Staff

Mr. Mark Quigley
NCD Staff


Ms. Ramona Lessen
Assistant to the Chairperson
                            Appendix C
                       ADA Roundtable Agenda


                  National Council on Disability
                          ADA Roundtable
                          August 23, 1994

                           Westin Hotel
                         1900 Fifth Avenue
                        Seattle, WA  98101

                              Agenda

9:00 - 9:15       ) The Administration's Commitment to Furthering 
of the Americans with Disabilities Act - Michela Alioto,  Deputy 
Assistant for Domestic Policy, Office of theVice President
9:15 - 9:30       ) Implementation of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act in                                          the 
Seattle Area - The Honorable Norman Rice,Mayor of Seattle

9:30 - 9:45       ) Summary of Issues from the Council's National 
Meeting of Experts on the ADA - Marca Bristo 

9:45 - 10:30      ) Panel I
                     ) Justice Department - Liz Savage 
                     ) EEOC - Peggy Mastroianni

10:30 - 10:45) Break


10:45 - 11:30) Panel II
                     ) President's Committee on the Employment of 
People                                                            
with Disabilities - Richard Sheppard 
                     ) Department of Transportation - Susan 
                     Schruth

11:30 - 12:00) Overview of ADA-Related Issues in the State 
ofWashington/Northwest Region - Sue Ammeter(Washington State 
Governor's ADA Project)

12:00 - 1:30      Lunch (on your own)


1:30 - 4:30       ADA Implementation: A Local/Regional 
                  Perspective
                  (Introduced by Bonnie O'Day)
1:30 - 2:45       ) Panel III: Examples of Promising 
ADAImplementation Strategies - Sue Ammeter

2:45 - 4:00       ) Working Group Sessions: Improving 
theImplementation of the ADA:
                     ) Employment
                     ) Public Services
                     ) Transportation
                     ) Public Accommodations and Services 
                          Operated by Private Entities
                     ) Telecommunications

4:00 - 4:30       ) Summary of Working Group Sessions

4:30 - 6:00       General Meeting Between Representatives from 
                  the Federal                                 
                  Government and Roundtable Participants 
                  Concerning Future                            
                  ADA Implementation
                            Appendix D
    Statistical Information on the ADA as of September 30, 1994

As part of its follow-up to the ADA Roundtable held in Seattle, 
WA on August 23, 1994, the National Council on Disability 
requested Federal agencies that had participated in the 
Roundtable to provide summary statistics on their ADA-related 
charges and complaints as of September 30, 1994.  This 
information is as follows:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

As of September 30, 1994, the Equal Employment Opportunity 
Commission reported the following data regarding charges it had 
received under the ADA:

           Cumulative Charge Data for 7/26/92 - 9/30/94

Total ADA charges received during reporting period: 34,877.

                  Impairments Cited By Frequency



Impairments Most Often Cited        Number  Percentage of Total

                                                              

Back Impairments                    6,879   20%               

Neurological Impairments            4,314   12%               

Emotional/Psychiatric Impairments   3,913   11%               

Extremities                         2,407    7%               

Heart Impairments                   1,639    5%               

Diabetes                            1,238    4%               

Substance Abuse                     1,233    4%               

Hearing Impairments                 1,094    3%               

Vision Impairments                  1,035    3%               

Blood Disorders                       900    3%               

Cancer                                883    3%               

HIV (Subcategory of Blood Disorders)  636    2%               

Asthma                                612    2%               
Notes:
1. The filing a charge does not indicate whether the charge has 
merit.
2. This lists adds up to more than 100% because individuals can 
allege multiple violations.  
3. Percentages are rounded off.


Number of ADA Lawsuits Filed by EEOC as of Oct. 1, 1994: 37


                  ADA Violations Most Often Cited



ADA Violations Most Often CitedNumberPercentage of Total

                                    

Discharge                  17,525   50%

Failure to Provide Reasonable Accommodation
                            8,777   
                                    25%

Hiring                      3,860   11%

Harassment                  3,665   10%

Discipline                  2,526    7%

Layoff                      1,849    5%

Benefits                    1,330    4%

Promotion                   1,323    4%

Rehire                      1,285    4% 

Wages                       1,195    3%

Suspension                    784    2%


        Americans with Disabilities Act Resolutions of EEOC
                        7/26/92 -  9/30/94




Type of Resolution              Number           Percentage of 
                                                 Total

                                                 

Administrative Closure           7,593            44%

No Reasonable Cause              6,111            36%

Merit Resolutions                3,358            20%

     Settlements                 1,174             7%

     Withdrawal with Benefits    1,723            10%

     Unsuccessful Conciliations    307             2%

     Successful Conciliations      154             1%

TOTAL RESOLUTIONS               17,062           100%

TOTAL MONETARY BENEFITS = $30,391,755            


Department of Justice

As of September 30, 1994, the Department of Justice reported that 
it had 1,400 on-going investigations regarding complaints filed 
under Title II of the ADA and 1,100 ongoing investigations 
regarding complaints filed under Title III of the Act. 

Department of Transportation

Data from the Department of Transportation indicate the 
following:

     Reporting YearNumber of ADA Complaints Received

         1992                124
         1993                234
         1994                460

         TOTAL               818


Federal Communications Commission

The Federal Communications Commission was assigned a very 
specific set of initial activities in the initial phases of the 
implementation of the ADA, most notably ensuring the development 
and deployment of a nationwide system of relay services for 
persons who are hearing or speech impaired by July 26, 1993.  The 
Commission essentially met this deadline.  Since that time, it 
has received five complaints.  One involved interstate issues and 
was resolved by a final order.  However, there is an appeal 
pending.  The other four complaints involved intrastate issues, 
were referred back to the States, and were resolved at the State 
level.
                            APPENDIX E
     A Brief Description of the National Council on Disability

Overview and Purpose

The National Council on Disability is an independent Federal 
agency led by 15 members appointed by the President of the United 
States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.  The National Council 
was initially established in 1978 as an advisory board within the 
Department of Education (Public Law 95-602).  The Rehabilitation 
Act Amendments of 1984 (Public Law 98-221) transformed the 
National Council into an independent agency.
 
The overall purpose of the National Council is to promote 
policies, programs, practices, and procedures that guarantee 
equal opportunity for all individuals with disabilities, 
regardless of the nature or severity of the disability; and to 
empower individuals with disabilities to achieve economic self 
sufficiency, independent living, and inclusion and integration 
into all aspects of society.

Specific Duties

The current statutory mandate of the National Council includes 
the following:

*    Reviewing and evaluating, on a continuing basis, policies, 
     programs, practices, and procedures concerning individuals 
     with disabilities conducted or assisted by Federal 
     departments and agencies, including programs established or 
     assisted under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 
     or under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill 
     of Rights Act; and all statutes and regulations pertaining 
     to Federal programs which assist such individuals with 
     disabilities in order to assess the effectiveness of such 
     policies, programs, practices, procedures, statutes, and 
     regulations in meeting the needs of individuals with 
     disabilities; 

*    Reviewing and evaluating, on a continuing basis, new and 
     emerging disability policy issues affecting individuals with 
     disabilities at the Federal, State, and local levels, and in 
     the private sector, including the need for and coordination 
     of adult services, access to personal assistance services, 
     school reform efforts and the impact of such efforts on 
     individuals with disabilities, access for health care, and 
     policies that operate as disincentives for the individuals 
     to seek and retain employment.

*    Making recommendations to the President, the Congress, the 
     Secretary of Education, the Director of the National 
     Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, and 
     other officials of Federal agencies, respecting ways to 
     better promote equal opportunity, economic self-sufficiency, 
     independent living, and inclusion and integration into all 
     aspects of society for Americans with disabilities.

*    Providing the Congress, on a continuing basis, advice, 
     recommendations, legislative proposals, and any additional 
     information which the Council or the Congress deems 
     appropriate;  

*    Gathering information about the implementation, 
     effectiveness, and impact of the  Americans with 
     Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.);

*    Advising the President, the Congress, the Commissioner of 
     the Rehabilitation Services Administration, the Assistant 
     Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services 
     within the Department of Education, and the Director of the 
     National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research 
     on the development of the programs to be carried out under 
     the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended;

*    Providing advice to the Commissioner with respect to the 
     policies of and conduct of the Rehabilitation Services 
     Administration;

*    Making recommendations to the Director of the National 
     Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research on ways 
     to improve research, service, administration, and the 
     collection, dissemination, and implementation of research 
     findings affecting persons with disabilities;

*    Providing advice regarding priorities for the activities of 
     the Interagency Disability Coordinating Council and 
     reviewing the recommendations of such Council for 
     legislative and administrative changes to ensure that such 
     recommendations are consistent with the purposes of the 
     Council to promote the full integration, independence, and 
     productivity of individuals with disabilities;

*    Preparing and submitting to the President and the Congress a 
     report entitled National Disability Policy: A Progress 
     Report on an annual basis; and 

*    Preparing and submitting to the Congress and the President a 
     report containing a  summary of the activities and 
     accomplishments of the Council on an annual basis.

Population Served and Current Activities

While many government agencies deal with issues and programs 
affecting people with disabilities, the National Council is the 
only Federal agency charged with addressing, analyzing, and 
making recommendations on issues of public policy which affect 
people with disabilities regardless of age, disability type, 
perceived employment potential, economic need, specific 
functional ability, status as a veteran, or other individual 
circumstance.  The National Council recognizes its unique 
opportunity to facilitate independent living, community 
integration, and employment opportunities for people with 
disabilities by assuring an informed and coordinated approach to 
addressing the
concerns of persons with disabilities and eliminating barriers to 
their active participation in community and family life.

The National Council plays a major role in developing disability 
policy in America.  In fact, it was the Council that originally 
proposed what eventually became the Americans with Disabilities 
Act of 1990.  Our present list of key issues includes monitoring 
progress toward the implementation of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act, and the development of a comprehensive national 
disability policy.

Current Members

Marca Bristo, Chairperson
Chicago, IL

John A. Gannon, Vice Chairperson
Washington, DC and Cleveland, OH

Linda W. Allison
New York, NY 

Ellis B. Bodron
Vicksburg, MS 

Larry Brown, Jr.
Potomac, MD

Mary Ann Mobley Collins
Beverly Hills, CA 

Anthony H. Flack
Norwalk, CT 

Robert S. Muller
Grandville, MI

Bonnie O'Day
Somerville, MA

Mary M. Raether
McLean, VA 

Shirley W. Ryan
Kenilworth, IL 


Anne C. Seggerman
Fairfield, CT 

Michael B. Unhjem
Fargo, ND 

Kate Pew Wolters
Grand Rapids, MI

1.  National Council on the Handicapped.  (1986). Toward 
Independence:  An Assessment of Federal Laws and Programs 
Affecting Citizens with Disabilities -- With Legislative 
Recommendations.  Washington, DC:  Author.  Note:  The National 
Council on the Handicapped has since been renamed the National 
Council on Disability.

2. P.L. 102-569 401(a)(7).

3. P.L.101-336, 2(a)(1-9).

4. For a brief summary of the provisions of the ADA, please see 
Appendix A.

5. P.L. 101-336, 2(b)(1-4).

6. See, for example, the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992, 
P.L. 102-569.

7. National Council on Disability. (1993).  ADA Watch--Year One:  
A Report to the President and Congress on Progress in 
Implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act.  Washington, 
DC:  Author.

8. U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs.  (August 10, 
1994).  Report to Accompany S.993, The Federal Mandate 
Accountability and Reform Act of 1994.  103rd Congress, 2nd 
Session.  Calendar No. 551 (Report 103-330).  Section 4. 

9. Job Accommodation Network.  (1994).  Accommodation 
Benefit/Cost Data.  Morgantown, WV:  Author. (p.4).

10. Blanck, P. (1994).  Communicating the Americans with 
Disabilities Act -- Transcending Compliance:  A Case Report on 
Sears, Roebuck, and Co.  Washington, DC:  Annenberg Washington 
Program.

11. National Council on Disability.  (1993).  Meeting the Unique 
Needs of Minorities with Disabilities:  A Report to the President 
and the Congress.  Washington, DC:  Author.

12. Please refer to Appendix B for the Roundtable Agenda.

13.  National Council on Disability.  (1993).  ADA Watch -- Year 
One:  A Report to the President and the Congress on Progress in 
Implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act.  Washington, 
DC: Author.
         National Council on Disability.  (1993).  Furthering the 
Goals of the Americans with Disabilities Act Through Disability 
Policy Research in the 1990s:  Summary of Proceedings.  
Washington, DC:  Author.

14.  General Accounting Office.  (1994).  Americans with 
Disabilities Act:  Effects of the Law on Access to Goods and 
Services.  Washington, DC:  Author.