The James McGregor Stewart Society: Accessibility Act Review

The Accessibility Act Review welcomes community initiatives, and who better to initiate something than us. Prof. Katie Aubrecht at StFX is in charge of the review: nsreview@stfx.ca. At the Review website there is a lengthy survey that sticks pretty closely to the Act.

We have our own survey that asks some similar questions about the meat of the Act, but also whether promises have been kept. It's not an easy survey, and it will test your memory of the purpose of The Act. Good data, independently obtained and analyzed is a rarity in legislative reviews - it's up to us once again. It is anonymous, and I intend to release the raw data to anyone who asks after I have a shot at it.

I ask you to take this survey, which offers a chance to evaluate how the Act has affected you personally. It also lets you look at the total results as soon as you finish.

Feel free to forward this....

Best to to you,

Gus Reed

So far we've had a disappointing response rate. I can share a few tidbits about the results. There are 6 responses and there is some consistency when reduced to numbers. The advisory Board and Directorate fare well, specifics of the daily effect are below average. [1 is the most positive rating, ( bright green), 4 the least ( bright red)]

Area	AV Rating
Advisory Board	1.4
Directorate	1.4
Ten achievements	1.6
First Impressions	2.0
Has the Act improved	2.3
Problems	2.4
Timely	2.4
Grand Total	1.9

To get a sense of the patterns, you really need to look at the 36 individual questions:

Rating	Topic	Area	Comment
1.2	[address broad issues to ensure that the concerns of people with disabilities are considered by the Government.]	Directorate	Directorate and Advisory Board do well
1.3	[provide policy support on all aspects of this Act and the regulations;]	Directorate
1.3	[set long-term accessibility objectives]	Advisory Board
1.4	[Too much 'Restorative Justice']	Problems	This is a surprise to me - people seem unfazed.
1.5	[examine measures to improve opportunities for persons with disabilities]	Directorate
1.5	[study issues and recommend action]	Directorate
1.5	[suggest measures that may be implemented by the Government ]	Advisory Board
1.5	[It was worth the fight]	First Impressions	People are glad it happened
1.5	[Access by Design 2030]	Ten achievements	They like the work of the Directorate
1.5	[ReadAbility]	Ten achievements
1.5	[Provincial/Municipal Accessibility Framework Working Group]	Ten achievements
1.5	[Business ACCESS-Ability Grant Program]	Ten achievements
1.5	[Wolfville Accessibility Plan]	Ten achievements
1.6	[conduct research ]	Directorate
1.6	[Grants from Communities, Culture and Heritage]	Ten achievements
1.7	[Nondisclosure agreements]	Problems
1.7	[Partnering with Rick Hansen Foundation on Ce;rtificationR]	Ten achievements
1.7	[A Guide to Planning Accessible Meetings and Events]	Ten achievements
1.7	[Increasing awareness of the rights of persons with disabilities]	Ten achievements
1.8	[Government of Nova Scotia–Leading By Example]	Ten achievements
2.0	[This Act has had a positive effect on my life]	First Impressions	All the ratings after this are below average
2.2	[The Built Environment]	Has the Act improved
2.2	[Communication]	Has the Act improved
2.3	[Employment]	Has the Act improved
2.3	[The delivery of goods and services]	Has the Act improved
2.3	[Education]	Has the Act improved
2.4	[It's made Nova Scotia the accessibility leader in Canada]	First Impressions
2.4	Do you foresee the timely implementation of accessibility standards with a goal of achieving an accessible Nova Scotia by 2030	Timely
2.5	[Transportation]	Has the Act improved	The bottom fifth
2.5	[Slow on Standards]	Problems
2.5	[Underrepresentation of First Voice ]	Problems
2.5	[Lack of coordination with Human Rights Commission]	Problems
2.7	[Missiing Health Standard]	Problems
2.7	[Irregular communication]	Problems
2.7	[Incomplete self-reflection by government]	Problems
2.8	[The housing problem]	Problems