SAIF Evaluation
In 2003 one of the tasks we undertook was a thorough independent evaluation of our project.
The research was carried out by Carole Miller Research and the report was presented to the forum at the annual review meeting in February 2004. What follows here is a summary of the findings.
If you would like to obtain a copy of the full report please contact SAIF.
Summary of SAIF evaluation report
- Questionnaire responses
- Regarding SAIF objectives
- Areas of development
- Suggestions for improvements
- Awareness and use of publications
- Networking
- Service from SAIF
- Standards for accessible information
- Accreditation of standards
- UPDATE
- Availability of alternative formats
- IT and accessible information
- More needs for accessible information
Questionnaire responses
34% of those on SAIF’s mailing list returned a questionnaire that had been posted to them to gauge their views on their awareness of SAIF, their knowledge and readership of SAIF’s publications and any effect that these have had on their delivery of service or on the provision of information to disabled people.
The majority of those who responded (81%) was aware of SAIF. Awareness had come about primarily via being on the mailing list (38%) or via the publications that SAIF had produced (38%). Other main sources were through other organisations (14%) or having heard SAIF speak at conferences or seminars (11%).
Regarding SAIF objectives
The majority was clear what SAIF’s objectives were and could state that it was to improve accessibility of information for disabled people.
Other objectives were seen in relation to:
- promoting accessible information
- implementation and support
- standards
- best practice
- networking / co-ordination
Areas of development
Whilst SAIF was seen to be performing well there were a number of areas where they were seen to have the potential to develop further. They were:
- To improve their profile and become an authority on accessible information
- To influence the development of policy in relation to accessible information across both the public and private sectors
- To assist with the practical aspects of implementation
- To develop links and work more closely with existing work of both local authorities and other organisations
- To lead the way in the use of the web as a tool for the provision of accessible information.
Suggestions for improvements
Suggestions for improving the profile of SAIF included:
- Ensuring they were well networked
- Making others aware of their presence at appropriate conferences
- Determining what benefit their services can be to others
- Ensuring that their services are well targeted and tailoring their services for different segments of their market
- Make improved use of their web-site to interact with their audience
- To become a more prominent voice by improving their public relations with the media
Awareness and use of publications
The majority of respondents had read at least one of SAIF’s publications. The newsletter, which is now discontinued, had the highest level of awareness and readership. However, it was not seen as being as useful as many of the other publications. The Making Websites Accessible report was the most useful of the reports that had been distributed.
Whilst publications can be distributed, getting people to read them is a challenge. Not reaching the right person or being put to one side to be read later are two of the problems identified.
An improved profile was thought to benefit readership levels of publications. The web-site could also be used to allow access to publications when they are required. This is also a good means of keeping SAIF and the issues it represents to the fore of people’s minds.
Networking
Most of the organisations in this survey already work with other organisations in the provision of advice and information for disabled people. The majority (55%) feels that co-operation between organisations is improving. Whilst SAIF was rarely mentioned as the catalyst for this improved networking it was suggested as a potential focal point to identify other organisations to encourage networking yet further. Web based solutions were also mentioned in relation to networking solutions.
Networking was seen to be inhibited by:
- Different organisations working to different standards
- Agencies fighting over the same financial resources
- Confidentiality issues
- Having sufficient time and resources
Practical help on how to make links, create web sites and improve personal contacts were all suggested as being useful.
Service from SAIF
Only 14% of those who responded to the survey and 17% of those who were aware of SAIF have sought assistance from them at some time. The great majority (89%) was satisfied with the service that they received.
Standards for accessible information
Of all of the work that SAIF has undertaken, its work on standards has achieved the greatest prominence. Of those aware of SAIF, some 70% had heard of the standards. Of those who have read them, 12% have implemented them and 47% have implemented them in part.
The standards were seen as tried and tested and so gave organisations greater confidence and were praised as a benchmark that organisations could measure their own performance against.
The main barriers to implementing standards were lack of money, time and staff. The sheer diversity of disability and the different means of communicating were also mentioned as barriers. Greater compliance with standards could also be achieved if the standards and indeed SAIF itself had a higher profile.
Accreditation of standards
There were mixed views as to whether organisations could benefit from accreditation schemes for accessibility standards. Whilst there were advantages, there were disadvantages particularly for smaller organisations who could not devote resources into the process of accreditation.
UPDATE
One of SAIF’s early objectives had been to establish UPDATE, a disability information service. It is now established and operating independently of SAIF. 58% of those who were aware of SAIF were also aware of UPDATE.
Availability of alternative formats
Information for disabled people is seen as more readily available in alternative formats than it was five years ago by the majority of survey respondents.
The main barriers to providing information in alternative formats were funding and time. Some thought that a barrier could be the fear of the potential costs involved. SAIF was seen as having a potential role is helping raise awareness of how this could be implemented.
Alternative formats for people with learning disabilities was seen as receiving less attention. There appeared to be a lack of skilled people to provide formats for those with learning disabilities.
IT and accessible information
The majority of respondents make use of IT in the provision of accessible information (83%). Only just over a quarter of those who have a web-site felt that it would be fully accessible with a further 39% saying that it was partially accessible. Whilst technology was seen as providing a way forward, others warned against too much reliance on this route, suggesting that it may be of limited use to some groups such as those with learning disabilities. There also remains the problem of access to computers and appropriate software.
Increasing awareness
Interviewees felt that further improvements in accessibility were likely to come about via increased awareness of the issue. It was suggested that accessibility of information should be seen as a benefit to all organisations and as something that should be built into the processes and not added on at the end.
More need for accessible information
There were gaps in the promotion of accessibility issues to the private sector, as well as to parts of the public sector. There remains a gap in the signposting of disabled people to accessible information. There was also thought to be some geographical gaps in the provision of advice and information for disabled people. Finally some felt that those with learning disabilities had received less attention that those with other disabilities.
Over a third of organisations do not believe they have enough support to enable their organisations to provide information to disabled people.