Preliminary Data from Survey of Accessibility Practices of Performing Arts Organizations
Context for this Town Hall Recording
This town hall was created for the Audience Outlook Monitor (AOM) community as a part of our IDEA (Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility) Study. In its first phase, we conducted a study of audience attitudes towards inclusion, diversity, and equity in 2023. We are dedicating the second phase of the study to the exploration of shifting audience perspectives towards disability and accessibility resources. Please find out more about the second phase of the IDEA Study here.
We’re currently in the process of deploying this second phase of the study, which will be divided into three distinct parts:
Survey of Accessibility Practices at Performing Arts Organizations (preliminary results are discussed in this town hall)
Focus on Accessibility - Ticket Buyer Survey to understand the experiences and accessibility needs of audiences.
Qualitative Focus Groups with audience members to gather deeper insights into their experiences.
The study aims to advance conversations around disability inclusion in the arts, rather than providing definitive answers. The goal is to use the data to inform and inspire further discussion and action.
We invited arts and culture organizations to participate in this one and a half hour virtual Town Hall to explore the data we’ve collected thus far from the Survey of Accessibility Practices of Performing Arts Organizations, the first part of this second phase. Our hope was that this session would both facilitate information sharing among the participants in the survey as well as the broader community and highlight some early data on what we as a field are doing to meet our audiences’ accessibility needs and preferences.
You can find options in the Vimeo recording of the Town Hall to access automated closed captions. Would you like a separate Word version of the automated transcript or a PowerPoint of the presentation? Would you find other accommodations helpful to make these recordings more accessible to you? If so, please write to Annick Odom at annick@wolfbrown.com, so we can do our best to make necessary arrangements to ensure you are able to access these session recordings.
Below, you'll find:
A video recording of the town hall.
Automated closed captions and transcript should be available through Vimeo's platform.
Slides (not used in the video itself, as we were sharing the Dashboard, but we've equipped with Alt Text and descriptions in the PPT version) are available below the video (PDF and PPT format).
Edited Word Transcript is provided as a Word Document.
Key Takeaways from the town hall can be found at the bottom of the page (PDF and Word Document format). These include an introduction and going through WolfBrown Dashboard for the survey.
Video
Below are the presentation slides in PowerPoint format (with alt text and descriptions).
Below are the presentation slides in PDF format.
Below is the edited transcript in Word format.
Detailed Town Hall Notes
August 18, 2024
I. Introduction
Context
This town hall was created for the Audience Outlook Monitor (AOM) community as a part of our research on accessibility.
We conducted a study of audience attitudes towards Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility (IDEA) initiatives in 2023. WolfBrown is dedicating the second phase of the IDEA Study to the exploration of shifting audience perspectives towards disability and accessibility resources. This comes at a moment when, increasingly, arts organizations have realized that audiences (regardless of ability or disability) have a wide range of preferences in terms of the environments in which they experience the arts, formats, amount of contextual information that is provided, and use of technologies in communicating the work. Moreover, new technologies, services, and practices that were initially introduced as accommodations for audiences with disabilities have turned out to enrich the experiences of many audience members, regardless of disability. It will launch in fall 2024. Please find out more about the study here.
We’re currently in the process of deploying this second phase of the survey. We invited arts and culture organizations to participate in this one and a half hour virtual Town Hall to explore the data we’ve collected thus far from the Survey of Accessibility Practices of Performing Arts Organizations, the first part of our phase 2.
This second phase of the study is organized into three distinct parts:
Survey of Accessibility Practices at Performing Arts Organizations.
Focus on Accessibility - Ticket Buyer Survey to understand the experiences and accessibility needs of audiences.
Qualitative Focus Groups with audience members to gather deeper insights into their experiences.
The study aims to advance conversations around disability inclusion in the arts, rather than providing definitive answers. The goal is to use the data to inform and inspire further discussion and action.
Our hope was that this session would both facilitate information sharing among the participants in the survey as well as the broader community and highlight some early data on what we as a field are doing to meet our audiences’ accessibility needs and preferences.
II. Dashboard Access and Usage
Note: The survey is still open and available for any US or Canadian performing arts organization to take. Therefore, those who can see the Dashboard will note that this video recording no longer matches the graphs exactly, as more organizations took part in the survey.
Participants who completed the survey were given access to an online dashboard to explore the data. The session introduced the dashboard’s functionality and highlighted key findings to spark discussion.
The session included discussions with selected respondents and advisory committee members to interpret the data and share insights, laying the groundwork for broader conversations on accessibility in the performing arts. These guests were:
Sarah Hom (Director of Audience Services for Roundabout Theatre Company in New York, who identifies as disabled, having cerebral palsy and a cane user)
Aislinn Gagliardi (Assistant Manager, Patron Services at Chicago Symphony Orchestra)
Debbie Tellez (Audience & Accessibility Services Coordinator at the Hobby Center in Houston, Texas)
Adam Perry (former senior program director at Arts Midwest, who identifies as blind)
III. Exploring the Survey of Accessibility Practices of Performing Arts Organizations Data in the WolfBrown Dashboard
Dashboard Overview
The dashboard compiles survey responses from 63 organizations, categorized by budget size, venue ownership, and the types of services offered.
A diverse range of organizations participated, with different budget sizes and disciplines.
Most organizations offer accessible seating and restrooms on one floor, but fewer have these features across multiple sections or floors.
Mobility Service
Most Widely Available Services:
Chairs in waiting areas, lobbies, and hallways.
Accessible restrooms on one floor of the venue.
Accessible seating in one section of the house. 90% of organizations provide this service.
Accessible pathway from parking into the facility. 84% of organizations provide this service.
Patron drop-off and pickup areas.
Designated parking spaces. 74% of organizations currently provide this service. 3% are considering offering it in the future. 23% do not offer it and are not considering it.
Less Common Services:
Assistance from coat check to seats
Accessible seating in all or most sections of the house. 60% of organizations provide this service.
Wheelchair seating in all or most sections of the house.
Curb-to-seat assistance
Organizations that own their venues tend to offer more mobility-related services, though non-owners are more likely to provide designated parking spaces.
Challenges include long elevator lines on busy days and the need for more diverse seating options for patrons with specific needs.
There is an emphasis on the sufficient availability of services, not just their presence.
Write-in Responses:
Ideas for improving accessibility include adding push buttons for ADA bathrooms, providing courtesy wheelchairs, and offering golf cart transport from parking to the venue entrance.
Filter by Venue Ownership:
Organizations that don't own their venues are more likely to provide designated parking spaces (29% don't provide them vs. 57% that do).
Organizations that own their venues are more likely to offer curb-to-seat assistance (57% offer it vs. 62% of those that don't own their venues who don't offer it).
Wheelchair Seating:
94% of organizations that don’t own their venues have wheelchair seating in at least one section.
42% of these organizations offer wheelchair seating in most sections.
Challenges with Historical Buildings:
Historical venues often have architectural constraints that limit the ability to offer comprehensive accessibility services, such as accessible bathrooms and seating on every floor.
Conclusion:
There is a need for ongoing improvements in accessibility services, especially in older buildings, while balancing legal and liability concerns with the practicalities of providing effective mobility services.
Vision Services
Most Widely Available Services:
Service Animal Accommodations: The most commonly provided service.
Large Print Programs: 52% of organizations provide large print programs, with 59% offering them for all or most performances. 38% provide large print programs only upon request, indicating variability in availability.
Large Print Interior Signage: Common for wayfinding
Less Common Services:
Curb-to-Seat Assistance
Touch Tours: offered by 38% of theaters, but not commonly offered by classical music organizations
Audio Programs: more commonly provided by classical music organizations (21%) but 64% are not considering using them for future implementation
Pre-recorded Audio Descriptions: These are the least frequently available.
Innovative Services:
Some organizations are exploring tactile maps, raised QR codes for audio content, and screen reader-accessible PDFs of programs.
Challenges:
Cost and Timing: These are barriers to consistent service provision, especially for braille programs and live audio descriptions, which require advance preparation.
Hearing Services
Even minor changing—like improving signage for better way finding or updating the signs on the restrooms—into a drawn-out process.
In such instances, how can we be inviting, while also being clear about the limitations of our spaces (as we continue to work to overcome them)?
Common Services:
Assistive Listening Devices: The most commonly provided service, with 84% of organizations offering them. Only 5% are interested in adding this service.
ASL Interpretation: 67% of organizations offer ASL interpretation, but only 7% provide it for all or most performances; the rest offer it infrequently or upon request. The majority offer it infrequently, likely due to cost and resource availability.
Emerging Technologies:
Sound Amplification via Induction Loop/T-Coil Technology: 44% of organizations currently offer this service, with more showing interest in adopting it.
Bluetooth Connectivity: There is growing interest in this with 35% interested in adding this service, but only 16% currently provide it, highlighting a gap between current availability and future interest. Challenges include lag time in hearing aid technology advancements.
Technology Adoption Lag:
Bluetooth and T-Coil Compatibility: There is concern about the slow pace of adoption by hearing aid manufacturers, which is delaying widespread implementation.
Captioning Services:
Open Captioning (37%) is more common than Closed Captioning (20%), but there is significant interest in adopting closed captioning, especially for personal devices like cell phones or tablets.
Sensory Processing Services
Quiet Spaces:
The most common service provided is a quiet space, intended as a break from the performance. 63% of organizations offer this. 24% are considering offering. 13% do not offer.
Sensory guides and kits are available, and sensory-friendly or relaxed performances are also offered.
Social narratives or visual schedules are the least common service (offered by 13% of organizations).
Quality and Accessibility of Quiet Spaces:
Many organizations offer quiet spaces at most performances, not just sensory-friendly ones. There are concerns about the quality and accessibility of these spaces, with some being repurposed areas like storage closets.
Communications Services
Communications & Website Accessibility:
84% of organizations have a webpage dedicated to accessibility services
56% provide high color contrast on their websites.
48% embed alt text for images on their websites.
46% perform periodic tests or audits of website accessibility.
44% ensure their websites are screen reader accessible.
25% include captioning for all videos on their websites.
21% provide image descriptions for all images on their websites.
Requesting Services:
90% of organizations allow audience members to request services via email or phone.
38-46% of organizations provide options to request services during the ticketing process.
Announcing Accessibility Services:
75% publicize services on an accessibility page on their website.
25-40% of organizations use various other methods, such as social media posts, event listings, or promotional emails, to announce accessibility services.
Communication about these services is inconsistent across different channels (social media, emails, print materials), perhaps making it difficult for patrons to find information.
There’s a need for more proactive outreach and consistency in how accessibility information is communicated, especially during the ticketing process.
Staff Training and Accommodations
Training Coverage:
Training on accessibility is uneven, with only 13% of organizations training all staff on disability access and inclusion.
33% offer training relevant to individual staff members' day-to-day roles.
17% provide training to all staff within specific departments.
16% incorporate accessibility training into general training programs.
13% of organizations provide no training on disability access and inclusion.
Departments Receiving Training:
Most training is focused on patron services staff (90%), while other departments, like marketing (30%) and education (40%) receive less attention.
Ushers:
56% of organizations always have trained ushers at performances.
27% sometimes have trained ushers.
Presenters are more likely (77%) to provide trained ushers compared to producing organizations (31%).
This segmented approach may limit the overall accessibility and inclusivity of the organization. Training is often departmental or individualized rather than comprehensive. Presenters are better at providing trained ushers than producers. There is a need for broader training across all departments, including IT and finance, and a focus on not just the "what" but also the "why" and "how" of accessibility.
Accommodations for Staff:
53% of organizations provide accommodations for staff with disabilities.
28% are unsure about the availability of such accommodations.
Backstage Artist Accommodations:
79% of organizations have made some accommodations backstage.
77% provide accessible bathrooms backstage.
65% have accessible pathways to backstage areas and the front of house.
75% offer accessible dressing rooms.
Organization Accessibility Policies:
51% of organizations actively implement accessibility policies across all departments.
17% have accessibility policies but do not consistently meet the standards.
6% have accessibility policies that are not used in day-to-day decision-making.
14% do not have any formal accessibility policies.
Organizational Representation of People with Disabilities:
57% have full-time staff members with disabilities.
9% have part-time staff members with disabilities.
46% include ensemble members with disabilities.
Representation on boards and advisory committees is lower, with only 21% of board members and 14% of advisory committee members having disabilities.
Discipline-Specific Assessments:
Theaters (24%) and multidisciplinary organizations (29%) generally rate their accessibility services and integration into organizational culture higher than classical music organizations.
Only 7% of classical music organizations believe they have fully integrated accessibility into their culture, while 50% acknowledge significant room for improvement.
IV. Partnerships and Next Steps
Partnership
The project is in partnership with the Kennedy Center's Office of Accessibility and VSA. This collaboration is expected to provide valuable input on the ticket buyer survey and assist with interpreting research findings.
The survey remains open to encourage more participation, aiming to increase the sample size and improve the data's comprehensiveness.
The project is now transitioning into the ticket buyer phase, with informational resources available to support ongoing efforts.
V. Timeline for IDEA Study Phase 2: Accessibility
September 6: Registration closes
September 13: Info session on survey logistics
October 8: Focus on Accessibility – Ticket Buyer Survey is deployed by participating organizations
Fall 2024 - Winter 2025: Learning sessions for participating organizations
Winter 2025: Focus groups
From Spring 2025: Town Hall sharing a selection of aggregate results
For the latest updates, visit the IDEA Study Phase 2 website page or join the AOM community by signing up for our newsletter.
Below are the detailed town hall notes described above, in a Word document.
Below are the detailed town hall notes described above, in PDF document.
Comments