The Government of Canada is increasingly seeking the views and participation of Canadians when developing and delivering policies and programs. Engaged citizens read pertinent information on federal websites and they order print copies of publications and brochures. People who are print-disabled are at a serious disadvantage because not all government publications are available in an alternative format, such as Braille or audio. The findings of this review show that it can be frustrating to order a publication in a multiple format, and that people who are print-disabled have less than a 50/50 chance of obtaining the desired publication within a reasonable time. Indeed, out of 50 requested publications, only 22 arrived within a reasonable time. Moreover, the quality of these alternative publications is often unsatisfactory.

A review of the comments recorded on the analysis grids, such as the interactions between consultants and publications officers during the ordering process, shows that some federal institutions do not have a clear policy and established procedures for responding to requests for publications in alternative formats. If such policies and procedures exist, they are not well communicated to publications officers.

In addition, while many publications officers were helpful, others were not aware of the needs and realities of clients who are blind or partially sighted. Awareness training could benefit these employees and enhance the client-centeredness and service delivery of federal institutions.

When comparing the findings and recommendations of the Task Force on Access to Information for Print-Disabled Canadians in 2000 with those of the current review, one can see that the three recommendations listed earlier in this report are still relevant today. As the consultants observed during the review, there remains an apparent lack of standards for and awareness, adoption and promotion of alternative formats—a sign, perhaps, that the situation has not improved much in six years.

This inadequate level of service persists despite the fact the Government of Canada has publicly committed itself to providing, and is legally required to provide, equality of service for all.

• The Treasury Board Policy on the Duty to Accommodate Persons with Disabilities in the Federal Public Service incorporates the principle of the duty to accommodate and the need to remove barriers to the full social and economic integration of persons with disabilities in the federal workforce.
• Results for Canadians: A Management Framework for the Government of Canada commits the Government of Canada to achieving a significant, quantifiable improvement in client service satisfaction.
• The Communications Policy of the Government of Canada commits all federal departments and agencies to providing communications services in an equitable and accessible manner, taking into account the differing needs of the Canadian public.
• The Canadian Human Rights Act and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms prohibit discrimination based on disability and require accommodation of special needs short of undue hardship.

During this study, consultants received comments indicating that demand for publications in alternative formats was low. That is an interesting observation, but it is not a justification for providing inequitable access and inadequate services. The law and jurisprudence on this issue are clear: the number of people requiring accommodation does not determine whether accommodation should be provided. Only undue hardship is recognized as a justification for not accommodating a legitimate need.

Based on the findings of this study and on expert advice from consultants, there appear to be four main reasons for the current situation.

• Lack of awareness of the needs and format requirements of print-disabled people: It appears that federal institutions focus their energies on providing publications in multiple formats on the Web. Several institutions have significantly improved the accessibility of their websites since the introduction of the Common Look and Feel Policy and the Government of Canada Internet Guide. As discussed earlier, although technology is helping Canadians get access to information, many Canadians who are blind, deaf-blind or partially sighted do not have the computer technology or the skills to use this technology. The need still exists for publications in Braille and audio.
• Lack of internal policies and procedures concerning the provision of publications in alternative formats, or lack of promotion of these to the publications staff: In many instances, the publications officer was unaware of multiple format policies or procedures, and had to consult internally before answering the consultant’s enquiry regarding the availability of a publication in an alternative format. Additionally, given the number and type of errors found in the documents, there do not appear to be guidelines regarding the proofreading of documents in Braille.
• Insufficient funds allocated to the production of publications in an alternative format: When some publications officers said a certain publication was not available in an alternative format because the institution lacked the capacity to produce it, they often meant there was a lack of budget to cover the associated production costs.
• Lack of proper personnel training in the provision of publications in alternative formats: The interactions recorded between consultants and publications officers show that the latter are often unaware of the requirements to provide publications in formats other than the online HTML version. Also, the fact that two documents were sent in a different form of Braille than what was ordered point to the fact that some publications officers do not know the difference between the two forms of Braille.

In summary, the problem of inadequate availability and accessibility of services for people who are print-disabled still exists. Since there are no standardized guidelines or best practices, each institution uses its own approach, which creates inconsistency and confusion.

Recommendations

Following are the key recommendations of this study.

1. Provide equal access: All federal institutions that produce publications for public consumption should ensure that their services are accessible, in both official languages, to persons who are print-disabled, by making their publications available in alternative formats.
2. Develop and promote procedures regarding the provision of publications in alternative formats: Each federal institution should develop and promote an internal policy on the provision of publications in alternative formats. This policy should include specific reference to the duty to accommodate short of undue hardship under the Canadian Human Rights Act. This policy should also instruct publications or communications branches to allocate a portion of a publication’s budget to the production of the text in alternative formats when this publication is intended for the general public.
3. Develop standards regarding the quality of alternative formats: Federal institutions should develop standards regarding the quality of publications in alternative formats, and ensure that the companies or individuals selected to produce texts in alternative formats adhere to these standards. In addition, qualified proofreaders should verify the quality and accuracy of their publications in alternative formats.
4. Simplify the process for ordering publications in alternative formats: The Government of Canada should simplify the process for ordering publications in alternative formats to better cater to Canadians with special communications needs. This could be done through a central service such as 1-800-OCanada.
5. Provide training and awareness sessions to publications officers: Federal institutions should ensure that employees dealing directly with the public, such as those who handle orders for publications from members of the public, receive adequate awareness training on the needs of people who are print-disabled, on the alternative formats available, and on relevant departmental or governmental policies and guidelines. Training ought to be frequent, cyclical and incorporated into the culture of workplaces.
6. Consult with experts: In developing policies, procedures and guidelines, and in purchasing equipment, federal institutions should consult experts and stakeholders who manage or provide advice on issues pertaining to people who are print-disabled.