Vol. 18, Iss. 1
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company
All rights reserved
modation, which was the opportunity to complete
his medical degree.
But the court said that accepting Proﬁta’s argu-
ment would allow all employees who had been ﬁred
for misconduct to always claim to be requesting
only prospective relief when seeking to be rehired.
It also explained that the ADA did not require a
disabled person to be given a greater opportunity
for reinstatement than a terminated person who
was not disabled.
The panel afﬁrmed the ruling of the trial judge. ■
Website posed accessibility
concerns, alleges complainant
Case name: Letter to: Baker College of Flint, No.
15-16-2174 (OCR 09/01/16).
Ruling: Volunteering to resolve web accessibility
concerns before the Ofﬁce for Civil Rights can come
to a ﬁnding can help institutions avoid violations
while also ensuring that students with visual im-
pairments are able to access the information they
need to remain successfully enrolled.
What it means: Students with visual impairments
must be provided opportunities to access the same
information, computer-based interactions, and ser-
vices as sighted students.
Summary: A complainant alleged that some of the
Baker College of Flint website pages, including the
homepage, and those hosting information about campus
policies and procedures, admissions, online learning,
and student services, were not accessible to individuals
with certain disabilities, in violation of Section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act. According to her, using a web-
site accessibility checker called PowerMapper yielded
various issues that would render the site inaccessible
to individuals with vision and print disabilities.
The Ofﬁce for Civil Rights used a web acces-
sibility tool to perform a preliminary review of the
institution’s landing page and also found some
areas of concern. Those included a lack of the
skip navigation function, lack of keyboard controls
providing easily visible access to all content and
functions, images and links lacking meaningful
alternate text, insufﬁcient visual contrast, and
video closed captioning that could not be controlled
using a keyboard.
Before OCR could conclude its investigation, the
college asked to enter into a voluntary agreement to
resolve the complaint. In its letter to the college, the
agency noted that while the results of its web ac-
cessibility assessment found some areas of concern,
OCR could not, without conducting further investiga-
tion, determine whether sufﬁcient evidence existed
to support a determination that the institution was
in violation of Section 504. ■
College entered into agreement
to solve online accessibility issues
Case name: Letter to: Bay Mills Community Col-
lege, No. 15-16-2187 (OCR 10/14/16).
Ruling: Before the Ofﬁce for Civil Rights could
issue a decision, Bay Mills Community College en-
tered into a voluntary agreement to resolve online
accessibility concerns identiﬁed by a complainant.
What it means: Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities
Act require that recipient universities ensure acces-
sibility not just to their brick-and-mortar programs,
activities, and services, but also to those offered
electronically, including online communication.
Summary: A complainant alleged that Bay Mills
Community College discriminated by failing to make
all of its webpages accessible to individuals with
certain kinds of disabilities, including visual, print,
physical, and hearing impairments. Speciﬁcally, he
complained the institution’s homepage and disability
services, testing center, academic resources, tutoring
services, and admissions webpages were not acces-
sible, in violation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Ofﬁce for Civil Rights conducted an investiga-
tion that included an accessibility review of several
webpages on the college’s website. It reviewed the
list of “errors” provided by the student to the agency
resulting from her assessment of the webpages listed
in the complaint using an accessibility checker. The
agency used an accessibility tool as well to conduct
a preliminary review of some of the pages listed in
the complaint. Its review raised some red ﬂags, in-
cluding lack of skip navigation, keyboard controls
that did not allow equivalent ease of use, and lack
of meaningful alternate text.
Before OCR could complete its investigation and
issue a ﬁnding, the institution entered into a resolu-
tion agreement to resolve the issues identiﬁed. ■
Lawsuit court records are summarized
by Richard H. Willits, Esq.
OCR rulings are summarized
by Aileen Gelpi, Esq.