The purpose of this document is to establish a clear and consistent approach for inventorying digital assets to ensure accessibility across our organization. By systematically tracking and improving the accessibility of our digital assets, we aim to create an inclusive environment that meets the needs of all users, including those with disabilities. The inventory will be generated using manual tracking and automated tools. 
  Part of the Task Force’s charge is to develop a thorough inventory identifying applications, websites, and other relevant digital content. Given the complexity and scope of this charge, developing the inventory will be an iterative process, prioritizing critical systems first. The digital accessibility portfolio application will serve as the hub for capturing inventory and tracking remediation efforts. While it is not practical to inventory every system, website, or PDF, this system will help us identify where more granular inventories are located so we can follow up with the owners of those items. 

To ensure the effectiveness of our inventory process, we have outlined several key principles. These guidelines will help prioritize and categorize digital assets, making the task more manageable and focusing initially on high-impact areas: 

  • Prioritize: Focus on essential and high-usage items. 

  • Identify Issues: Prioritize items with known accessibility issues. 

  • Categorize: Use a tiered approach to categorize items into critical, high, medium, and low priority. 

  • Iterate: Capture the highest impact items first and expand from there. If it’s convenient capture noncritical items up sooner rather than l

Types of Content to Inventory in our Application and Level of Detail

To ensure a comprehensive and manageable inventory, we categorize digital assets into the following types and provide guidance on the level of detail required: 

  • Applications: Inventory significant software applications used across the organization, especially those with a large user base or critical functionality. Group similar applications together to maintain a manageable inventory. 

  • Websites: Include main websites and significant subdirectories and subdomains. Avoid listing every individual page unless necessary. Group similar items together to avoid overwhelming the inventory with too much detail. 

  • PDFs/Documents: Focus on important documents, especially those frequently accessed or required by regulations. Archive or exclude outdated or rarely accessed documents. Detailed tracking of individual PDFs will be managed using existing methods, but critical or frequently accessed PDFs should be logged in the inventory system with detailed entries. 

  • Clinical Applications: Include major clinical applications and any associated content that needs to be accessible. Provide detailed entries for critical or frequently accessed clinical applications. 

Digital Accessibility Portfolio

Inventory fields 

Fill out what you can if you don’t know leave it blank.  At a minimum looking for title, link and description, and content type best effort for all other fields.  

  • Title: The name or title of the digital asset. This should be concise and descriptive, making it easy to identify the item. 

  • Link: The URL or direct link to the digital asset. This allows easy access to the item for review and tracking. Must be a valid URL 

  • Description: A summary of the digital asset, including its purpose and key features. This helps provide context and understanding of the item. 

  • Content Type: The category of the digital asset. Choose one from these: Websites and Web Applications, Documents, Multimedia, Software and Applications, Emails and Digital Communications, Digital Signage, Social Media, Mobile Applications, Learning Management Systems 

  • Internal or Vendor: Indicates whether the digital asset is developed internally or provided by an external vendor. Choose one from these: Internal or Vendor 

  • Number of users accessed: The approximate number of users who access the digital asset. This helps in prioritizing items based on usage. 

  • Internal or External Accessible: Indicates whether the digital asset is accessible internally within the organization or externally to the public. Choose one from these: Internal or External 

  • Authentication Method: The method used for user authentication to access the digital asset. This helps in understanding security and access control. Choose one from these: Public, HawkID Login, Other 

  • Authentication Method (Other): Mandatory if "Other" is selected for Authentication Method 

  • Application Owner: The individual responsible for the digital asset. This helps in identifying the point of contact for any issues or updates. 

  • Accessibility Rating: The current accessibility rating of the digital asset, based on predefined criteria. This helps in assessing the accessibility status and identifying areas for improvement. (See below for definitions) 

  • Accessibility Priority: The priority level for addressing accessibility issues, based on usage and impact. This helps in prioritizing remediation efforts. (See below for definitions) 

  • Self-Review Conducted: Indicates whether a self-review of the digital asset's accessibility has been conducted. This helps in tracking review status. 

  • Remediation Plan: The plan for addressing any identified accessibility issues. This helps in tracking progress and ensuring accountability. 

  • Suggestions: Any suggestions or recommendations for improving the accessibility of the digital asset. This provides actionable insights for enhancement. 

Accessibility Ratings Definitions

Excellent 

  • Definition: The system is fully accessible, with no barriers for users with disabilities. It meets or exceeds all accessibility standards and provides an optimal user experience for all users. 

  • Examples: 

  • Websites/Documents: Comprehensive keyboard navigation, all multimedia content has captions and transcripts, system is compatible with all assistive technologies. 

  • Vended/Internal Applications: Comprehensive support for screen readers, all multimedia content has captions and transcripts, full keyboard navigation and shortcuts, real-time accessibility feedback and error correction. 

  • Mobile Applications: Full voice control, perfect screen reader compatibility, fully accessible touch gestures. 

  • Multimedia Content: Perfect captions and transcripts, full audio descriptions. 

  • Interactive Elements: Fully accessible quizzes, surveys, and games with perfect navigation. 

 

Very Good 

  • Definition: The system is highly accessible, with only a few minor issues that do not significantly impact the user experience for individuals with disabilities. The system meets most accessibility standards and provides a positive user experience. 

  • Examples: 

  • Websites/Documents: Consistent use of headings, all images have alternative text, forms are fully accessible. 

  • Vended/Internal Applications: Consistent labeling of form fields, all images and icons have alternative text, comprehensive keyboard shortcuts are available, good support for screen readers. 

  • Mobile Applications: Comprehensive voice control, excellent screen reader compatibility, fully accessible touch gestures. 

  • Multimedia Content: Comprehensive captions and transcripts, excellent audio descriptions. 

  • Interactive Elements: Fully accessible quizzes, surveys, and games with excellent navigation. 

Good 

  • Definition: The system is generally accessible, with most features meeting accessibility standards. There may be minor issues that need addressing, but overall, users with disabilities can use the system effectively. 

  • Examples: 

  • Websites/Documents: Proper use of headings, most images have alternative text, forms are mostly accessible. 

  • Vended/Internal Applications: Proper labeling of form fields, most images and icons have alternative text, basic keyboard shortcuts are available. 

  • Mobile Applications: Basic voice control, good screen reader compatibility, mostly accessible touch gestures. 

  • Multimedia Content: Consistent captions and transcripts, good audio descriptions. 

  • Interactive Elements: Accessible quizzes, surveys, and games with minor navigation issues. 

Fair 

  • Definition: The system has some accessibility features, but there are still notable barriers that hinder full access for users with disabilities. Improvements are needed to meet minimum accessibility standards. 

  • Examples: 

  • Websites/Documents: Inconsistent use of headings, partial keyboard navigation, some images without alternative text. 

  • Vended/Internal Applications: Inconsistent labeling of form fields, partial keyboard navigation, limited support for screen readers. 

  • Mobile Applications: Limited voice control, partial screen reader compatibility, some inaccessible touch gestures. 

  • Multimedia Content: Inconsistent captions or transcripts, partial audio descriptions. 

  • Interactive Elements: Some accessible quizzes, surveys, and games, but with navigation issues. 

Poor 

  • Definition: The system has significant accessibility barriers that prevent users with disabilities from effectively using it. Major issues include lack of support for assistive technologies, poor keyboard navigation, and non-compliance with basic accessibility standards. 

  • Examples: 

  • Websites/Documents: No alternative text for images, missing captions for videos, inaccessible forms. 

  • Vended/Internal Applications: No screen reader support, inaccessible controls, lack of keyboard shortcuts. 

  • Mobile Applications: No voice control, poor screen reader compatibility, inaccessible touch gestures. 

  • Multimedia Content: No captions or transcripts for videos and audio files, lack of audio descriptions. 

  • Interactive Elements: Inaccessible quizzes, surveys, and games, poor navigation. 

Prioritization  

Priority 1: Critical  

Criteria:  

  • Essential for daily operations and used by a large number of users.  

  • Critical for academic, research, administrative, or student services.  

  • Currently non-compliant or has significant accessibility issues.  

Examples:  

  • Main university website and key departmental sites.  

  • Learning management systems (e.g., Canvas, Blackboard).  

  • Online registration and student information systems.  

Priority 2: High  

Criteria:  

  • Frequently used by a significant number of users.  

  • Important for major functions but not critical.  

  • Partially compliant but needs substantial improvements.  

Examples:  

  • Departmental intranet sites.  

  • Research databases and digital libraries.  

  • Internal communication tools (e.g., staff portals).  

Priority 3: Medium  

Criteria:  

  • Moderately used by a broad group of users.  

  • Important for specific functions.  

  • Partially compliant with moderate accessibility issues.  

Examples:  

  • Secondary university websites.  

  • Online forms and surveys.  

  • Digital course materials and resources.  

Priority 4: Low  

Criteria:  

  • Infrequently used or used by a smaller group of users.  

  • Non-critical for daily operations.  

  • Mostly compliant with minor accessibility issues.  

Examples:  

  • Archived content and older documents.  

  • Specialized software used by specific departments.  

  • Event-specific websites and temporary pages.  

Large Scale Inventory Use Case Guide

This section provides practical strategies for handling bulk inventory tasks, ensuring a focused and efficient approach.   

To ensure a thorough and effective inventory process, it is essential to gather as much information as possible about our digital assets. While this document primarily focuses on the digital accessibility portfolio application, we recognize the need for broader guidelines to support comprehensive inventory efforts. For items that are bulked together in the system, it is crucial to reference the actual list of items to maintain accuracy and completeness. 

When items are grouped together, ensure there is a reference to the detailed list of individual items. Maintain an accessible list of these bulked items. For each bulked category, provide a link or contact information to access the detailed list. Ensure this reference is easily accessible and regularly updated. Regularly review and update the inventory to ensure accuracy and implement a process for continuous improvement. 

Applications 

  • Title: CLAS Research Applications 

  • Link: An applicable link provided by person entering the item 

  • Description: CLAS Research Applications are used primarily for conducting various research activities across different departments within the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (CLAS). There are a total of 20 applications focused on Research in CLAS.  These applications are internally focused and have a limited number of individuals who interact with them, averaging 20 users or less per application. Detailed inventory of these servers can be found by contacting John Doe in CLAS IT.   

  • Content Type: Research Applications 

  • Internal or Vendor: Internal 

  • Number of users accessed: 200 

  • Internal or External Accessible: Internal 

  • Authentication Method: University ID 

  • Authentication Method (Other): N/A 

  • Application Owner: Jane Smith 

  • Accessibility Rating: 3 (Good) 

  • Accessibility Priority: Medium 

  • Self-Review Conducted: No 

  • Remediation Plan: To be determined 

  • Suggestions: To be determined 

 

Websites 

  • Title: Libraries Websites 

  • Description: The Libraries' websites provide access to a wide range of resources, including catalogs, databases, research guides, and digital collections. These websites are essential for students, faculty, and researchers to access library services and information. There are multiple websites under the Libraries' umbrella, each serving different purposes and user groups. Collectively, these websites consist of approximately 1,500 web pages. Sample accessibility issues seen in the representative sample include inconsistent use of headings and missing alternative text for images. Detailed inventory of these websites can be found by contacting John Doe in Libraries IT. 

  • Content Type: Websites 

  • Internal or Vendor: Internal 

  • Number of users accessed: 5,000 

  • Internal or External Accessible: Both 

  • Authentication Method: University ID 

  • Authentication Method (Other): N/A 

  • Application Owner: John Librarian 

  • Accessibility Rating: 4 (Very Good) 

  • Accessibility Priority: High 

  • Self-Review Conducted: No 

  • Remediation Plan: To be determined 

  • Suggestions: To be determined 

 

PDFs 

  • Title: HR Department PDFs 

  • Link: HR Department PDFs Documentation 

  • Description: The HR department uses a variety of PDF documents for employee onboarding, policy dissemination, benefits information, and training materials. These PDFs are essential for ensuring employees have access to important information and resources. There are approximately 500 PDF documents in this category. Sample accessibility issues seen in the representative sample include lack of text descriptions for images and poor compatibility with screen readers. Detailed inventory of these PDFs can be found by contacting John Doe in HR IT. 

  • Content Type: Documents 

  • Internal or Vendor: Internal 

  • Number of users accessed: 1,000 

  • Internal or External Accessible: Internal 

  • Authentication Method: University ID 

  • Authentication Method (Other): N/A 

  • Application Owner: John Doe 

  • Accessibility Rating: 2 (Fair) 

  • Accessibility Priority: High 

  • Self-Review Conducted: No 

  • Remediation Plan: To be determined 

  • Suggestions: To be determined