April 2019 WAPL Transcript

Nate Evans: Hey everybody, Nate Evans, Manager of the Digital Content Accessibility Team within MSU IT, thanks for tuning in to the WAPL cast. We had a great April meeting. Special thanks to Ian, Randy, and everybody in the Advancement Crew for hosting us over in Spartan Stadium. You guys have a beautiful space over there. It's a good opportunity for us to learn about the auditing strategy for web accessibility that Advancement is using. It's really smart, they're using a combination of both manual inspection and automated scanners, so it was cool to learn about that, as well as the program that they're using.

Nate Evans: We also had the opportunity to meet Cherelyn Dunlap, who's an Accommodation Specialist within the office for employee relations. She's working with the staff and faculty, so also cool opportunity to learn from her and meet her, and hear about what's going on within HR. Lastly, this is going to be the last opportunity I get to talk about the IT Next Digital Access and Inclusion Conference that's coming up on May 16th. It's free, did I mention it's May 16th and it's free? Yes, it is, and you should sign up, it's gonna be a good time. And we're doing it in alignment with Global Accessibility and Awareness Day, so that day, we're joining other institutions, other organizations to celebrate digital access and bring awareness on the topic within our own organization. So our focus is gonna be digital access and inclusion, both past, present, and future. So I'm very excited for that.

Nate Evans: Unfortunately, their reception's full, okay, so you can't hang out after, or maybe you'll have to hang out some other place, but if you haven't signed up, there are still spots to sign up for the actual conference. I encourage you to do that, go to webaccess.msu.edu, you can sign up for free there. Again it's free, and it's on May 16th, check it out. Alright, thanks for listening, and we'll see you next month.

Nate Evans: Welcome everyone. WAPL number 42, April 5th, 2018. Thanks for joining us this morning. So excited, we have, check out this awesome space, right? This feels somewhat right based on the timing with the final four and all that, I don't know why. Hashtag sports.

Audience: Hashtag sportsball.

Nate Evans: Sportsball. Thank you guys, Advancement, thank you for having us here today, really appreciate you guys hosting. We've got a great agenda planned for today, I'll just kind of walk through it briefly here. Because University Advancement is hosting us here today I asked them to share a few things about their digital accessibility program, so look forward to that at the start. We also have Cherelyn Dunlap with us today, she's gonna be talking with us about her new role here at the Institution in Employee Relations. I want to talk a little bit more about the IT Next conference, that the registration is now open, May 16th, and I'll point you to the registration page. I want to just give a brief reminder about the WAPL podcast that's now being recorded every month so you can check in on the past meetings. I want to talk a little bit about the inaccessible report content form. Actually, Brooke's gonna share a little bit about that, as a place that you can send your folks in case they find blockers or things that prevent access digitally on campus. And then, we didn't get to this last month, I really had hoped to, but now we're gonna spend some time today, if we have time, retrospective feedback based on the feedback you guys gave in January and February. We'll start to look ahead at how that impacts us going forward. So, does that sound good?

Audience: Yes!

Alright, yay! Alright, so, with that, I will hand it over to Ian.

Ian Gallardo: Thank you very much. So my name is Ian Gallardo, I am a developer here for Web Services and just a couple things, and so I'm gonna talk about one of our, the tools that we use for accessibility. It's a tool called Funnelback. So if you have any questions, feel free to interrupt me, I'll pass this box to you, and we can start a dialogue that way. Alright, so what does University Advancement do?

Ian Gallardo: So up here we execute strategic alumni and donor events and also we work on the communications between donors in the university through the myriad print, digital, and web. So we on the Web Services team, we take care of the alumni.msu.edu website, givingto.msu.edu website, and the Advancement along with our service website, service.msu.edu and a number of other. Giving Day website that takes place in November. So we handle the public-facing websites, and public-facing applications. So what we're gonna do today is we are gonna talk about Funnelback, specifically the accessibility auditor that we've been employing for the last year or so, what my boss calls courting. So we're courting the application. I'll take you through the dashboard, the document view, and kind of how it's broken up. And also, acknowledgements. So creating acknowledgements for this scanning tool that we use, and after that, we'll talk about what is great about it and what we like, and then what is not so great and what our team has found.

Ian Gallardo: Alright, so if you want to check out the website, it's funnelback.com, and specifically, again, the Funnelback Accessibility Auditor is what we've been using for the last year, year and a half or so. And here's what the interface looks like. So this is the typical dashboard, and here it outlines the WCAG levels, and the different opportunities for optimization remediation that we have. Here, what's really interesting is the reports over time. So it will do a daily scan where you can set different intervals for the different scanning, and so, here we just set it for daily, and we are working on here, reducing the number of errors that the Accessibility Tool shows us, kind of reveals to us. And the way that the Accessibility Tool works is that you list a website, and it will employ its crawler, and go through all of our domains.

Ian Gallardo: So here you can see a number of our domains, we have also just kind of threw msu.edu on there as well. And it'll give you an approximate number of confirmed failures. And so, that's a lot of numbers. That's a very, very high number. Because we have a lot of dynamically-generated pages, and so that's why the number is so high. That's one of the drawbacks of the tool is that it's kind of an insurmountable number, if you take a look, just the sheer number, a third of a million failures. But when you take a look at it, oftentimes we will fix one problem, and it'll knock out 10,000 errors, or 20,000 errors. So keep in mind that it is a large number, yes, but it's something that we continually work with, and it's not as bad as it seems, but it helps kind of showcase the efforts that we're putting through.

Ian Gallardo: Alright, so we can drop down into the documents section. So it can drop you into the interface where it'll give you the most number of errors per document section. So here you have the URL section on the left, and then it'll give you what documents, or what set of documents is triggering the failures, and also the failures by level. And these are helpful for us if we want to look at remediating websites by section. So, looking at the top here, we have a lot of errors in our photos section. So we can kind of tailor our strategy for knocking out groups of problems, specifically here in the photos. We have problems here with the lack of alternative text for a lot of the photos.

Ian Gallardo: Sure. Is anyone else having problems? Oh shoot, there we go. Is that a little bit better? Alright, so if we just take, a look here, it will have. So we're looking at the Alumni website, a photo album, and it'll give you the failures here on the left, and you can look at the different WCAG criteria, and it'll also indicate in the code itself where the problem is. So here it's telling us that there's, somehow our skip navigation link is throwing a problem because of here, the Aria landmarks to identify regions of the page, it's not implemented correctly. So it'll give us a little bit more of a drill-down into what the issue is for this particular failure.

Ian Gallardo: So conversely, we can look at it at a document view or we can look at it per WCAG criteria. So we can look at it, where are the failures, for example, multiple IDs, and so you can search and filter if you want to remediate certain content based on the criteria. It'll allow you to do that, and will list it out this way. And so third, the acknowledgements. This is a useful section for us, because for example, if we get a warning, and it's kind of a false flag, where it tells us to review something, but doing a manual audit, we say, we believe that we are doing it correctly, and the error's not really an error, we can add an exception, which will reduce the count of all the errors overall within the tool. So it's nice that we can say, this is implemented correctly, or we will ignore this because it is a non-issue, and that will help kind of filter out, keep the number of errors, lessen the errors more and more. Alright, any questions so far?

Audience: Why is the number so big, and why isn't it zero?

Ian Gallardo: The number is large because, so it scans all of our pages, all of our domains, and the number it's large, the number, why it's so large? Why haven't we gotten it to zero? It's a resource issue. It's a lot of historical content that was inaccessible, so we are working on making that accessible, and the way we are kind of heading off the number getting higher is that we will make sure any new content is accessible, and is thoroughly tested. So the number is high because it's a lot to get through, and the tool demonstrates how much work we have to do, which is very useful.

Ian Gallardo: So what do we like about it? Again, it's an automated scan. Happens once a day, or you can set an interval for us. The interface is pretty nice. You can click around, it's kind of graphical, it has slight animations. The reports that it kicks out is also very, it's a little bit more user friendly, it's a little bit more easier to ingest. It creates an historical record, so you can see progress from the errors remediated, which is good especially to show non-technical people that there's a visual representation of progress being made.

Ian Gallardo: And there's also additional value adds, like it will give you some other value adds, is there's a Content Auditor. And so it'll give you things like, average reading grade for the pages. Also, missing metadata and duplicated titles. So this is something else that's kind of useful to things like content developers and anyone working mainly within content.

Ian Gallardo: Okay, so what's not so great? Not so great is it can't reach our development environment, so anything that's not publicly accessible, it can't touch it, so that's a big problem for us, because we want to integrate accessibility testing into our workflow and everything. If we can't do that, if the development environment, and only when it's in production, that's a big problem for us. Also, the cost, it's based on page limitations, so we have a set number of pages it'll scan, so we have to stay within that limit or it goes higher. The cost, the subscription contract that we have.

Ian Gallardo: Alright, so, what do we think about Funnelback? We think it's a good addition to our toolset and workflow. I think it starts conversations. We think that it helps aid the manual audit process, but long-term usage, we're not sure if we will stick with it or recommend it to other units, because we're still kind of getting a flow for, how the dashboard affects things like perception of accessibility, and how, are the reports that are generated, is it overall helpful, or is it detrimental, to explaining accessibility for people that are not within the code base, or that are not working within the code base. So that is Funnelback, if anyone has any questions, you can always contact us on the web team, and we can answer them that way. Graham?

Graham Pierce: So, one of the slides up there, it said, you know, everything's great?

Ian Gallardo: Right.

Graham Pierce: Are you not evaluating things in a 10 second look, like I can find violations on a page, limitations of off-page scanner there are pretty weak. Are you, when you see this, giving you all the numbers across, does that change your plans in evaluating your websites?

Ian Gallardo: So that specific one is kind of a smaller website, so it's a lot easier to remediate. Within WAPL, we always talk about how often should mediated content be reviewed. And I kind of use the oil change analogy. We should be doing it as often as you change your oil. So it does affect our plans, but also, the nature of the website too. So if we see mostly static website with zero errors, we're gonna leave that alone, because we know that it's good to go for now, at least for the quarter.

Graham Pierce: That's a major problem if that there's the way, 'cause there are problems on that site, I can tell you right now. So the tool is giving you a lot of comments that may not be appropriate. So if you're relying strictly on the tool telling you that stuff, it's gonna result in those problems. So it's one thing to treat it as, maybe it doesn't have as many problems, we'll review it a little less. But to not review it because it's saying it's good is kind of problematic. Automated tools are still very limited, will be within our lifetime, I expect, I mean, just to make sure of them. So I would just be mindful of how much trust you're putting in to make overall decisions.

Ian Gallardo: Right, that's a good point. Something that point out. It's a good addition to our workflow, but we don't center our auditing process on this tool. Like you've said, the auditing tools are good at catching percentage, a lower percentage, but it creates kind of a road map for regular remediation, but it doesn't provide Google directions on how to get there. Big picture! But like you said, sometimes it can be, it can be deceptive if someone sees, okay, hey, our website is green, we'll leave that alone until next fiscal year. That can be very, very dangerous.

Audience: If it's showing green

Audience: That's my job!

Audience: Yeah, that's your job right?

Graham Pierce: Nothing would make me happier than to have automated scanners to take my job away and make this all possible.

Audience: I totally agree with you, I got it, like my boss, he's like, give us the measuring stick and what to hold against. Well, like you said before it would take us, we would be all retired by the time you would even built around the sites to even fix 'em. Not only the change.

Graham Pierce: My example is always, if we had artificial intelligence that could correctly describe perfectly for what we need to do, and tell you whether or not it was correct, you wouldn't be incorrect in the first place, because you would have it doing that. So, we're very far away from those kind of things. There's some things they can check, but it's where you get, the tools always claim to do more than they really should, and we'll have to rely on some others to make sure that's possible, and that need your help for a long time it seems to raise that, I'm sure about that.

Ian Gallardo: Right, any other questions? Stephanie?

Stephanie Motschenbacher: The computer here people making the content.

Ian Gallardo: Oh, I'll officially pass this out to you.

Stephanie Motschenbacher: I'm a communicator, I'm the culprit of making the inaccessible, and we're the ones that say, they do it, why can't we, kind of thing. And so what can communicators do to help this? We're not running Funnelback, we're not looking at this, what do you guys, what do you think?

Danielle Fowler: So you know me, 'cause you were from ISP, and now I'm at ISP. So I'm a communicator in International Studies and Programs and something that you can do as a communicator is to make sure that, so we're right now creating a suite of templates like PowerPoint templates, and Word templates, and other templates, so making sure that those are accessible before you distribute them really helps, because that will help, the more work that you can take off of other people, the more likely they are to make accessible content. So helping that, and then there were some templates released by CABS a few weeks ago that are flyer templates created in PowerPoint, but they're not accessible. So I've held off distributing those until they've been remediated. As a communicator, if you can make sure, not only the stuff that comes out of your shop is remediated, but any kind of help that you provide to other communicators in your area has already been checked. Obviously, if they convert something to a PDF it's gonna not be accessible, so there's training involved there as well. But as much as you can do on the front end is helpful.

Ian Gallardo: Any other questions? If there's nothing else, Randy?

Randy Brown: You stress out approach you know what I mean, we're going to find quarter right now.

Ian Gallardo: Right.

Randy Brown: That's probably do something with that.

Ian Gallardo: Right, so, we talk about, we have a mountain of work, but only a limited number of resources to remediate that. So kind of what we talked about here at the WAPL group is identifying the most, we don't use the word at risk, we use, is it at risk?

Audience: Higher priority.

Ian Gallardo: Higher priority, alright, okay, so. We determine what is higher priority. So is it publicly accessible? Does it fulfill our core business needs? How inaccessible is it in its current state? Those are three things that we use to create kind of an action plan for our apps and for our properties that kind of dictates what needs to be worked on. So outside influences, so for example, like homecoming, we want to make sure homecoming forms and our homecoming content is accessible when that comes around because we know thousands of people are gonna be hitting that website and the pages and the content and everything. So we all take that into account to create a priority that is fluid, and isn't quite set in stone, but does give us kind of an actionable list to work off off. Alright, if that's all, then I'll hand it over back to Nate.

Nate Evans: Thanks, Ian. And I just want to say too, Ian and Randy have done such a fantastic job of proactively kind of jumping in. I mean, Funnelback is not a centrally-supported tool, this is something that they've jumped in and said, you know what, this is something that will help with our workflow, and it's one of the tools, like they said, a good addition to their tool set that's helping them kind of make progress. What you're not seeing here, and I really appreciated that you added, hey, here are the benefits and the limitations of this tool. It's always two sides. You didn't hear that they were saying we're going towards progress and making this perfect, but we are making progress. That whole mantra of progress, not perfection, I think is really important, so appreciate you guys's work on that and being a leader on campus and showing off your work here today, so thanks for that.

Nate Evans: Alright, I am gonna jump back to the other presentation here. So the next thing I wanted to do, which, my slide disappeared for whatever reason, but I wanted to welcome Cherelyn Dunlap from the Office of Employee Relations, just to say hello. So I have to admit, come on up whenever you'd like. So I learned about Cherelyn coming to MSU through a post on LinkedIn that Mike Hudson had made, which was really cool. I always get excited when there are additional resources kind of working in the accessibility space here on campus and Cherelyn's doing that kind of on the staff and employee relations side, so I thought I'd just welcome her to the team, and at least say hello, and talk a little bit about what she's working on.

Cherelyn Dunlap: So, I'm Cherelyn Dunlap, and I work in Central HR, in Employee Relations, and my position is Accommodations Specialist. So individuals who register with RCPD having disabilities and needing workplace accommodations would go to RCPD for those accommodations. Typically, RCPD is work with students and faculty and staff, but because, because of the amount of cases that fall over into HR, a lot of things that fall over into HR, such as a person will register for an accommodation, which it may be a temporary disability that they have, and it's something that they would register for FMLA, or it could be a disability claim. It could be worker's comp, and RCPD's not equipped to handle those types of things because it comes from HR. So they created the position so that HR would have their hand in it, so to speak, and be able to provide some guidance for individuals.

Cherelyn Dunlap: So moving forward, when an individual registers with RCPD as having a disability, I will work in conjunction with them to do a needs assessment, and then once a needs assessment takes place, I would work with that individual one on one to figure out what it is that they need in order to accomplish their job here on campus. I would meet with their supervisor, not sharing any of their medical information, but would meet with their supervisor to determine whether they could be accommodated. Ultimately the decision on what those accommodations would be, would come from the Office of Employee Relations. If an individual doesn't agree with the statement of accommodation that is given to an employee. If the supervisor disagrees, or the employee, they can appeal. I would always ask that you come back to OER first because it could be something that we may be able to amend. But if we're not able to amend it, then the proper place would be to appeal with the Office of the ADA Coordinator here on campus. So pretty much, that's my job in a nutshell, working with individuals who have disabilities and trying to make sure that they have accessibility to the things they need on campus to do their job. Any questions?

Audience: What's your case load look like? 'Cause I know you can't disclose, but what is it, like a thousand people?

Cherelyn Dunlap: So when I interviewed for the position, I asked what the caseload was like for the course of the year, and they told me 70, and I didn't think that was quite accurate. So I got here in December. The new policy came out the beginning of March, and I'm up to 30 cases right now. Just since the beginning of March. So I think it's way more than what they were saying.

Cherelyn Dunlap: Any other questions?

Nate Evans: I'd ask one more question. So under work, should they reach out to you directly if they have questions, or what's the best way to do that?

The intake process hasn't changed, so they would still register with RCPD, they would still provide that medical documentation to RCPD. Once RCPD makes the decision that they do have a disability, they'll reach out to me.

Nate Evans: Okay, great. Thank you Cherelyn.

Cherelyn Dunlap: Thank you. Thanks for having me.

Nate Evans: Appreciate you coming in. Okay, so moving forward with the agenda here, I've been talking a little bit about the IT Next Digital Access and Inclusion Conference, I'm really really excited for this. This is coming up in a little bit over a month. There are a limited number of seats, so I just wanted to give you a little more information about it, since we're kind of firming things up. So the primary invite should be going out early next week. So if you haven't, the registration's open, you can sign up for it now. I'm working within IT to get the communications out, so that'll be out early next week. But feel free to sign up now if you're interested. There is a free reception to follow to if you're interested. That's really intended to be kind of a time to mingle, get together with people who maybe have spoken, or colleagues to just kind of talk about the topic. Kind of at the 30,000 foot view, really, the intended direction of the conference, is to kind of get this idea of digital accessibility inclusion past, present, and future at Michigan State University. So I'm really, really excited.

Nate Evans: Graham Pierce and Mike Hudson are gonna kick us off. They have a presentation to kind of talk about some of the history of accessibility and digital access at MSU. Dr. Jeff Grable is gonna be keynoting the session to talk about current state, and what does access look like in the context of higher ed, and here at Michigan State University. I'm really excited that he's gonna bring sort of that academic side of the conversation to the discussion. And then our last session, I'm gonna be talking a little bit about what does the future like, especially what kind of things that you can expect from MSU IT going forward, and what does that look like? So, really, really excited.

Nate Evans: We're doing this in alignment with Global Accessibility Awareness Day, which is on the same day. So it's cool to partner and do this in conjunction with other institutions, other companies, things like that that are celebrating the same thing, and really focusing on how to build awareness around access and inclusion within their own organizations. That's really the focus of this. So, really encourage you to check that out. Again, it's on webaccess, along the left hand navigation. I'd encourage you. The type of folks this is gonna be good for, anyone here at MSU, really. If you're faculty staff, it really doesn't matter. IT-focused, we're gonna have something for a little bit of everybody there, so really excited for that.

Nate Evans: Moving forward, I'm not gonna show this off in Media Space, 'cause we're a little bit short on time, but one of the things I did want to talk about, I mentioned it last month. We now have a podcast, and what we're working on, basically, is trying to record these meetings. That's why we have this cool Catchbox here today, is to capture as much as we can from this. We kept getting requests for, can you please livestream the meeting? And for a number of reasons, we chose not to do that, because we wanted to be able to make sure we could provide it as accessibly as possible. So this allows us time to record it, kind of work out some of the bugs, all the ifs and ands and things like that in the language. We cut that stuff out, we try to shorten it up, make it a little more digestible, and then we also provide it with transcripts that way so you can listen to it.

Nate Evans: So if there's ever a month that you can't make it, or if you're looking for something that, maybe you have some interest within your own college or department, folks are like, hey I'm kind of interested, where do I get started? This would be a good place to point them towards, especially, like I'm thinking through last month, we talked through a number of different documents and resources that we put out in alignment with Provost U, it's DDC message. There were a number of new resources that we kind of got more granular with during that meeting and we're not gonna be able to spend time to do that in every meeting. So it provides some context to it that I think would be helpful as you're working with your own liaisons. Again, our goal is try to resource you so you can resource the folks within your own college or department. So that's the intent of the new podcast.

Nate Evans: We're really, really working on our RSS feed to try to get that to work with the Google Play Store and Apple Podcast, so stay tuned for that. I believe, actually, it may have been added into the Play Store last week or the week before. So, I am not an Android user, but if you are, and wouldn't mind checking that, I'd be interested to see if it's been added there. So cool stuff.

Nate Evans: Alright, moving forward. I'm gonna invite up Brooke to talk a little bit about the Report Inaccessible Content Form.

Brooke Knapp: For those of you that don't know me, I'll do a really quick introduction. I am Brooke Knapp, I'm a Digital Accessibility Analyst out of the DCAT office. A lot of my job is spent on procurement working with purchases through IT, and also just websites and working with vendors on campus, which is kind of why I want to talk about the Inaccessible Content Form.

Brooke Knapp: So we've been getting questions, some of them from the liaisons, some from just people who are curious about, who do I reach out to for an accessibility question? This is really the best way to do that. It's right on our website, Web Access, it's on our side navigation, it says Report a Problem, and it takes you to a form that you fill out. The thing I want to stress is it does not just get lost in the system. We get an email immediately with that request, we have a way to triage that within our office about whether it's related to courses. Bender handles that, if it's more of a procurement issue, that will come to me, it's more website-focused, Jim White usually handles those. But I just really wanted to stress that's the best way to get in contact with us.

Brooke Knapp: We can't possibly, Nate or I, have a seat at every table or every conversation on campus, but that's why I think the liaisons are so important, because if we're not there, one of you might be there, you might have a colleague that's there, and if they ask that question and they're not sure, this is the best way to get in contact with us. Normally our process for fielding those requests, we try to loop in the liaison for the department that it pertains to to make them aware of the issue and that we're working on it and that we're addressing it. If it's more of a high-risk issue, and we've gotten a lot of complaints about it, we normally have more of a constant communication with the ADA coordinator, general counsel, it's more of a higher priority for our office and it's something that we make sure that we have open communication lines with that. Are there any specific questions on that? Awesome.

Nate Evans: Cool, thanks Brookes. So I wanted to spend a few minutes talking through the retrospective. If you came to the January or February meeting, basically what we wanted to do was kind of a year in review. And we gathered feedback from you all, we broke into small groups and did the meeting a little bit differently. The goal was really to understand some of the trends and feedback based on, where are things at, whether our digital accessibility program as a whole. What are the things that seem to be working well and what are the things that we need to focus on and improve on this year? So I want to just show you some of the feedback as we've kind of aggregated it. These are the things that we've heard. And there are some bits of feedback that we heard on repeat over and over, so we made sure that they were on this list and summarized.

Nate Evans: Okay so if you remember, the metaphor was, there was a ship on a sea, and the first question was, what were the things that pushed the sail forward? Pushed our program forward? And so these were some of the things that were on that list. The first is, you all felt like, the training and open and ongoing communication were good, around our digital accessibility program, and collaboration provided by our team was strong and supported your work, which we felt grateful for that feedback. That was cool to hear, 'cause that's really why we exist, and why we're here at the Institution.

Nate Evans: There were strong conferences available at MSU. Accessible Learning Conference, World Usability Day, were things that were cited, so we're excited about that. There were opportunities and conferences locally that people could get resourced at. They felt like there was good momentum from previous efforts with faculty and staff dating way, way back, which was cool to see, and then also there was good commitment to digital access and inclusion and culture at the grassroots level. So this level here, which is encouraging. To date, I think we have over 125 liaisons from across all the colleges and departments.

Nate Evans: When we started, if you recall, back in 2014, the initial DDC came out from Paulette Granberry Russell to say, every unit on campus needs at least one liaison. And if you do the math on that, there were 43 MAUs plus a few central administrative units, so that number should have been around 50, and initially it was about that number. That's grown and over doubled, and many of your units have more than one representative now, which is great.

Nate Evans: We encourage you to double down on that. Institutional commitment to digital access, which I think makes a lot of sense. If we're not talking about the top, and how it's tied to our mission and vision, is there interest at the top for this topic? It kind of creates a vacuum, so good feedback there. Other things that held us back, an example of the last thing was, why is there no top-down commitment to raising awareness and reiterating why digital access is important, missionally, for us as an institution? Why is that not? That's a good question. The other one is, there are other initiatives like Title IX that are being pushed. Why isn't accessibility pushed maybe in the same way? I thought that was some good feedback as well.

Nate Evans: There's a lack of clarity, felt lack of clarity, around who's going to hold up, who's accountable for accessibility. That's a question mark that we get, oftentimes when we have some of these conversations, that I think is fair feedback. It's also unclear how IT have used their role or reprioritization with the realignment that happened a few months ago. So what is IT's position on digital access and inclusion within alignment of their recentralization. So I think that's a good question, and honestly, in some of the conversations, just to talk directly to this one, Dawn Baker came to me with this idea about, what would it look like to do an IT Next in alignment with Global Accessibility Awareness Day? So I think they're understanding that kind of feedback is real, and it's felt among our liaisons, and this is a way that we can kind of take a moment and move the ball forward, and probably hopefully clarify some things about where IT stands as a unit, and how we intend to move forward.

Nate Evans: And the last one is, there's a lack of human resources to support the effort, a lack of time, is this sustainable? And that's always true, that you've heard threads of that in Ian's conversation about trying to demonstrate this need. There's this much work, and this much time and resource, and how do we handle that? Anybody else feel that way in their role?

Nate Evans: Many of you, you signed up as a liaison, or were voluntold to be a liaison, right? It was just added on. Anybody fit into that? Okay, I see a lot of hands.

Audience: I'm seeing a lot of hands, I can get on the recording!

Nate Evans: That's kind of where we're at, right? So I'm glad that that was mentioned and isn't missed, because demonstrating the need is a way that we can hopefully try to build more resources in this area. So that kind of takes us to the end. I don't know if there's any other anecdotal information or feedback based on that exercise, but that's something that was new for us as a team, and I hope we can kind of get into that groove, then, annually, 'cause it was really, really helpful for us. It's informing the type of content and the conversations that we're having within IT as a unit around how do we address some of these questions, and how do we help become a resource that aligns with the work that you're already doing here on campus, and that's something that works against it. So, anyway, thanks for that.

Nate Evans: I opened that up, and then I didn't ask for any feedback. Was there any feedback, questions, comments, anything like that? Okay, cool. Well, thanks for coming today. Appreciate you guys, have a great weekend, and Go Green!

Audience: Go White!

Nate Evans: Alright, see ya!