Accessibility and disability inclusion among top-funded U.S. Undergraduate Institutions
There is limited data to assess, track, or quantify accessibility and disability inclusion across universities. This cross-sectional study assessed disability inclusion and accessibility at the top 50 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded undergraduate programs in the United States. We hypothes...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2022-11, Vol.17 (11), p.e0277249 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 11 |
| container_start_page | e0277249 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 17 |
| creator | Campanile, Jessica Cerilli, Caroline Varadaraj, Varshini Sweeney, Fiona Smith, Jared Zhu, Jiafeng Yenokyan, Gayane Swenor, Bonnielin K |
| description | There is limited data to assess, track, or quantify accessibility and disability inclusion across universities.
This cross-sectional study assessed disability inclusion and accessibility at the top 50 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded undergraduate programs in the United States. We hypothesized that there is no association between NIH funding and the University Disability Inclusion Score.
A novel tool, the University Disability Inclusion Score assessed disability inclusion and accessibility using 10 indicators spanning 4 categories: (1) accessibility of built and virtual environment, (2) public image of disability inclusion, (3) accommodations processes and procedures, and (4) grievance policy. Based upon the total points (out of a total score of 100), each university was assigned a letter grade (A-F).
Of the top 50 NIH-funded institutions, 6% received an A grade on the Score, while 60% received D or F. The mean scores were 15.2 (SD = 5) for accessibility of built and virtual environment (20 points), 10 (SD = 3) for public image of disability inclusion (20 points), 30.6 (SD = 10) for accommodations processes and procedures (50 points), and 8.1 (SD = 3) for grievance policy (10 points).
Our findings suggest room for improvement in disability inclusion and accessibility among top university recipients of NIH funding. To provide an equitable academic experience, universities must prioritize disability inclusion. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0277249 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2739406627</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A727609954</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_5655008eb2464e928b512805ee26073a</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A727609954</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c622t-29572358904162404ed2c13cca214b699d2a232bbdff2aa5c9be1d8656206b833</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkl2L1DAUhoso7jr6D0QLguhFa77b3AjD4sfAwoLr6GVIk7SToZPMNqm4_96M012msheSi3w95z05J2-WvYSghLiCH7Z-HJzsy713pgSoqhDhj7JzyDEqGAL48cn6LHsWwhYAimvGnmZnmBFYYULPs59LpUwItrG9jbe5dDrXNshpa53qx2C9y-XOuy6Pfl-0o9NG5-vyuszXaTl0g9SjjCZfuRBtHGPiw_PsSSv7YF5M8yJbf_70_eJrcXn1ZXWxvCwUQygWiNMKYVpzQCBDBBCjkYJYKYkgaRjnGkmEUdPotkVSUsUbA3XNaKqKNTXGi-z1UXff-yCmngSBKswJYCzNi2x1JLSXW7Ef7E4Ot8JLK_4e-KETcohW9UZQRikAtWkQYcRwVDcUohpQYxADFZZJ6-OUbWx2Rivj4iD7mej8xtmN6PwvwVmNKWNJ4N0kMPib0YQodjYo0_fSGT9O78YIYpTQN_-gD1c3UZ1MBVjX-pRXHUTFskIVA5xTkqjyASoNbXZWJQO1Np3PAt7PAhITze_YyTEEsbr-9v_s1Y85-_aE3RjZx03w_dEzc5AcQTX4EAbT3jcZAnHw_103xMH_YvJ_Cnt1-kH3QXeGx38AbDL-lw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2739406627</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Accessibility and disability inclusion among top-funded U.S. Undergraduate Institutions</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Campanile, Jessica ; Cerilli, Caroline ; Varadaraj, Varshini ; Sweeney, Fiona ; Smith, Jared ; Zhu, Jiafeng ; Yenokyan, Gayane ; Swenor, Bonnielin K</creator><contributor>Kim, Sunghwan</contributor><creatorcontrib>Campanile, Jessica ; Cerilli, Caroline ; Varadaraj, Varshini ; Sweeney, Fiona ; Smith, Jared ; Zhu, Jiafeng ; Yenokyan, Gayane ; Swenor, Bonnielin K ; Kim, Sunghwan</creatorcontrib><description>There is limited data to assess, track, or quantify accessibility and disability inclusion across universities.
This cross-sectional study assessed disability inclusion and accessibility at the top 50 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded undergraduate programs in the United States. We hypothesized that there is no association between NIH funding and the University Disability Inclusion Score.
A novel tool, the University Disability Inclusion Score assessed disability inclusion and accessibility using 10 indicators spanning 4 categories: (1) accessibility of built and virtual environment, (2) public image of disability inclusion, (3) accommodations processes and procedures, and (4) grievance policy. Based upon the total points (out of a total score of 100), each university was assigned a letter grade (A-F).
Of the top 50 NIH-funded institutions, 6% received an A grade on the Score, while 60% received D or F. The mean scores were 15.2 (SD = 5) for accessibility of built and virtual environment (20 points), 10 (SD = 3) for public image of disability inclusion (20 points), 30.6 (SD = 10) for accommodations processes and procedures (50 points), and 8.1 (SD = 3) for grievance policy (10 points).
Our findings suggest room for improvement in disability inclusion and accessibility among top university recipients of NIH funding. To provide an equitable academic experience, universities must prioritize disability inclusion.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277249</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36417345</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Accessibility ; Automation ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Biomedical Research ; College admissions ; College campuses ; College students ; Computer and Information Sciences ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Disability ; Disabled people ; Disabled persons ; Disabled students ; Economic aspects ; Financial Management ; Funding ; Handicapped accessibility ; Higher education ; Humans ; Keyboards ; Language ; Management ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; National Institutes of Health (U.S.) ; People and Places ; People with disabilities ; Quality ; Science Policy ; Social aspects ; Social Sciences ; Students with disabilities ; United States ; Universities ; Virtual environments ; Websites ; Workplace accommodation</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2022-11, Vol.17 (11), p.e0277249</ispartof><rights>Copyright: © 2022 Campanile et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2022 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2022 Campanile et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2022 Campanile et al 2022 Campanile et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c622t-29572358904162404ed2c13cca214b699d2a232bbdff2aa5c9be1d8656206b833</citedby><orcidid>0000-0003-2060-1316 ; 0000-0002-0892-2515 ; 0000-0002-6044-0951 ; 0000-0001-7801-0653 ; 0000-0002-2074-5611</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9683566/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9683566/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2095,2914,23846,27903,27904,53770,53772,79347,79348</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36417345$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Kim, Sunghwan</contributor><creatorcontrib>Campanile, Jessica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cerilli, Caroline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varadaraj, Varshini</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sweeney, Fiona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Jared</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Jiafeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yenokyan, Gayane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Swenor, Bonnielin K</creatorcontrib><title>Accessibility and disability inclusion among top-funded U.S. Undergraduate Institutions</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>There is limited data to assess, track, or quantify accessibility and disability inclusion across universities.
This cross-sectional study assessed disability inclusion and accessibility at the top 50 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded undergraduate programs in the United States. We hypothesized that there is no association between NIH funding and the University Disability Inclusion Score.
A novel tool, the University Disability Inclusion Score assessed disability inclusion and accessibility using 10 indicators spanning 4 categories: (1) accessibility of built and virtual environment, (2) public image of disability inclusion, (3) accommodations processes and procedures, and (4) grievance policy. Based upon the total points (out of a total score of 100), each university was assigned a letter grade (A-F).
Of the top 50 NIH-funded institutions, 6% received an A grade on the Score, while 60% received D or F. The mean scores were 15.2 (SD = 5) for accessibility of built and virtual environment (20 points), 10 (SD = 3) for public image of disability inclusion (20 points), 30.6 (SD = 10) for accommodations processes and procedures (50 points), and 8.1 (SD = 3) for grievance policy (10 points).
Our findings suggest room for improvement in disability inclusion and accessibility among top university recipients of NIH funding. To provide an equitable academic experience, universities must prioritize disability inclusion.</description><subject>Accessibility</subject><subject>Automation</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Biomedical Research</subject><subject>College admissions</subject><subject>College campuses</subject><subject>College students</subject><subject>Computer and Information Sciences</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Disability</subject><subject>Disabled people</subject><subject>Disabled persons</subject><subject>Disabled students</subject><subject>Economic aspects</subject><subject>Financial Management</subject><subject>Funding</subject><subject>Handicapped accessibility</subject><subject>Higher education</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Keyboards</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Management</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>National Institutes of Health (U.S.)</subject><subject>People and Places</subject><subject>People with disabilities</subject><subject>Quality</subject><subject>Science Policy</subject><subject>Social aspects</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Students with disabilities</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>Universities</subject><subject>Virtual environments</subject><subject>Websites</subject><subject>Workplace accommodation</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkl2L1DAUhoso7jr6D0QLguhFa77b3AjD4sfAwoLr6GVIk7SToZPMNqm4_96M012msheSi3w95z05J2-WvYSghLiCH7Z-HJzsy713pgSoqhDhj7JzyDEqGAL48cn6LHsWwhYAimvGnmZnmBFYYULPs59LpUwItrG9jbe5dDrXNshpa53qx2C9y-XOuy6Pfl-0o9NG5-vyuszXaTl0g9SjjCZfuRBtHGPiw_PsSSv7YF5M8yJbf_70_eJrcXn1ZXWxvCwUQygWiNMKYVpzQCBDBBCjkYJYKYkgaRjnGkmEUdPotkVSUsUbA3XNaKqKNTXGi-z1UXff-yCmngSBKswJYCzNi2x1JLSXW7Ef7E4Ot8JLK_4e-KETcohW9UZQRikAtWkQYcRwVDcUohpQYxADFZZJ6-OUbWx2Rivj4iD7mej8xtmN6PwvwVmNKWNJ4N0kMPib0YQodjYo0_fSGT9O78YIYpTQN_-gD1c3UZ1MBVjX-pRXHUTFskIVA5xTkqjyASoNbXZWJQO1Np3PAt7PAhITze_YyTEEsbr-9v_s1Y85-_aE3RjZx03w_dEzc5AcQTX4EAbT3jcZAnHw_103xMH_YvJ_Cnt1-kH3QXeGx38AbDL-lw</recordid><startdate>20221123</startdate><enddate>20221123</enddate><creator>Campanile, Jessica</creator><creator>Cerilli, Caroline</creator><creator>Varadaraj, Varshini</creator><creator>Sweeney, Fiona</creator><creator>Smith, Jared</creator><creator>Zhu, Jiafeng</creator><creator>Yenokyan, Gayane</creator><creator>Swenor, Bonnielin K</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>COVID</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2060-1316</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0892-2515</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6044-0951</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7801-0653</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2074-5611</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221123</creationdate><title>Accessibility and disability inclusion among top-funded U.S. Undergraduate Institutions</title><author>Campanile, Jessica ; Cerilli, Caroline ; Varadaraj, Varshini ; Sweeney, Fiona ; Smith, Jared ; Zhu, Jiafeng ; Yenokyan, Gayane ; Swenor, Bonnielin K</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c622t-29572358904162404ed2c13cca214b699d2a232bbdff2aa5c9be1d8656206b833</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Accessibility</topic><topic>Automation</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Biomedical Research</topic><topic>College admissions</topic><topic>College campuses</topic><topic>College students</topic><topic>Computer and Information Sciences</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Disability</topic><topic>Disabled people</topic><topic>Disabled persons</topic><topic>Disabled students</topic><topic>Economic aspects</topic><topic>Financial Management</topic><topic>Funding</topic><topic>Handicapped accessibility</topic><topic>Higher education</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Keyboards</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Management</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>National Institutes of Health (U.S.)</topic><topic>People and Places</topic><topic>People with disabilities</topic><topic>Quality</topic><topic>Science Policy</topic><topic>Social aspects</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Students with disabilities</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>Universities</topic><topic>Virtual environments</topic><topic>Websites</topic><topic>Workplace accommodation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Campanile, Jessica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cerilli, Caroline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varadaraj, Varshini</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sweeney, Fiona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Jared</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Jiafeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yenokyan, Gayane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Swenor, Bonnielin K</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Coronavirus Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Campanile, Jessica</au><au>Cerilli, Caroline</au><au>Varadaraj, Varshini</au><au>Sweeney, Fiona</au><au>Smith, Jared</au><au>Zhu, Jiafeng</au><au>Yenokyan, Gayane</au><au>Swenor, Bonnielin K</au><au>Kim, Sunghwan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Accessibility and disability inclusion among top-funded U.S. Undergraduate Institutions</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2022-11-23</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>e0277249</spage><pages>e0277249-</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>There is limited data to assess, track, or quantify accessibility and disability inclusion across universities.
This cross-sectional study assessed disability inclusion and accessibility at the top 50 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded undergraduate programs in the United States. We hypothesized that there is no association between NIH funding and the University Disability Inclusion Score.
A novel tool, the University Disability Inclusion Score assessed disability inclusion and accessibility using 10 indicators spanning 4 categories: (1) accessibility of built and virtual environment, (2) public image of disability inclusion, (3) accommodations processes and procedures, and (4) grievance policy. Based upon the total points (out of a total score of 100), each university was assigned a letter grade (A-F).
Of the top 50 NIH-funded institutions, 6% received an A grade on the Score, while 60% received D or F. The mean scores were 15.2 (SD = 5) for accessibility of built and virtual environment (20 points), 10 (SD = 3) for public image of disability inclusion (20 points), 30.6 (SD = 10) for accommodations processes and procedures (50 points), and 8.1 (SD = 3) for grievance policy (10 points).
Our findings suggest room for improvement in disability inclusion and accessibility among top university recipients of NIH funding. To provide an equitable academic experience, universities must prioritize disability inclusion.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>36417345</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0277249</doi><tpages>e0277249</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2060-1316</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0892-2515</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6044-0951</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7801-0653</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2074-5611</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2022-11, Vol.17 (11), p.e0277249 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2739406627 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
| subjects | Accessibility Automation Biology and Life Sciences Biomedical Research College admissions College campuses College students Computer and Information Sciences Cross-Sectional Studies Disability Disabled people Disabled persons Disabled students Economic aspects Financial Management Funding Handicapped accessibility Higher education Humans Keyboards Language Management Medicine and Health Sciences National Institutes of Health (U.S.) People and Places People with disabilities Quality Science Policy Social aspects Social Sciences Students with disabilities United States Universities Virtual environments Websites Workplace accommodation |
| title | Accessibility and disability inclusion among top-funded U.S. Undergraduate Institutions |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T00%3A22%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Accessibility%20and%20disability%20inclusion%20among%20top-funded%20U.S.%20Undergraduate%20Institutions&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Campanile,%20Jessica&rft.date=2022-11-23&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=e0277249&rft.pages=e0277249-&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0277249&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA727609954%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2739406627&rft_id=info:pmid/36417345&rft_galeid=A727609954&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_5655008eb2464e928b512805ee26073a&rfr_iscdi=true |