The Untapped Accessibility Think Tank model: A rigorous, relatable, and rich way to consult people with disabilities
In recent years, the importance of including people with disabilities in research, policy discussions, and the development of accessible services has become increasingly recognized across both academic and governmental sectors. However, in my own experience working and teaching at post-secondary institutions across the country, the values of trust and rapport that are at the heart of consultation are often seen to be at odds with rigorous and “objective” research. The desire to give disabled people voice in processes that have historically excluded them exists in tension with the outdated idea that to give people voice at all compromises the research in the first place.
This friction also comes with questions of what it means to mix consultation and research in the first place. What questions do we ask? How many participants do we need? What does it mean for organizations to do community engaged consultation and how is it different than community engaged research? Coming to Untapped from the post-secondary sector, these questions were top of mind.
Accessibility Think Tanks, a process we use here at Untapped, offers one way to puzzle through these questions and provide rich meaningful consultation and research, without compromising on the values of either.
What is an Accessibility Think Tank?
The Accessibility Think Tank model brings together a group of 8-12 of Untapped’s Associates to provide their expertise and feedback on a specific selection of a client’s resources. The client can choose to sit in on the meeting if they wish. This is a chance to hear firsthand from accessibility subject matter experts who also have lived experience of disability. Alternatively, clients can choose to watch the recording or review the report Untapped develops. This consultation often includes barrier identification and key data needed for improvements, but can also provide overall project guidance and advice, or technical auditing.
Deliverables from the session include:
- A recording of the Think Tank
- A thematized spreadsheet containing the data analysis from the session
- A comprehensive What We Heard report
Because the Think Tank bridges consultation and more traditional research, clients walk away with a report that includes data on barrier identification or other key data on participant experiences, but also overarching project guidance and advice based in lived experience.
This model is beneficial in multiple ways—it not only meets the legal requirements for consulting persons with disabilities under the Accessible Canada Act but also aligns with meaningful qualitative methods that produce rigorous, impactful research in academia.
Meeting the legal requirements under the Accessible Canada Act
The Accessible Canada Act, implemented to promote inclusivity for people with disabilities, requires federally regulated entities to actively involve persons with disabilities in the development of an Accessibility Plan. The legislation outlines specific consultation requirements to ensure that persons with disabilities have a voice in shaping the policies that impact their lives.
In response to this, the think tank model offers an efficient and impactful way to fulfill these legal obligations. These professionals, who bring first-hand knowledge of their lived and professional experiences, can help identify barriers, offer solutions, and provide feedback that would otherwise require a long process to gather through traditional research methods. Additionally, involving people with disabilities through a think tank ensures that the consultation process is not merely symbolic but instead deeply rooted in authentic engagement and contribution.
Aligning with qualitative research methods
Beyond meeting legal requirements, the think tank model holds immense value for those hoping for feedback more aligned with traditional academic research. The approach is deeply aligned with qualitative research methods and grounded in our team’s educational background and expertise.
The model aligns with best practices around number of participants needed to reach ‘data saturation’ – the point where continuing to collect data won’t produce any new information. Most research argues that data saturation is reached around the 10 participant mark in qualitative settings. We aim to provide 8-12 Associates for every session. Beyond participation rates, we also create strong research guides with questions generated and reviewed by multiple people with lived experience of disability. This approach allows us to create rich sessions with strong participation that meet standards for data rigour.
The think tank model is flexible enough to be applied to various topics of inquiry, ranging from accessibility issues in transportation, housing, and education to employment, healthcare, and social services. By bringing together a diverse group of individuals with disabilities, the model ensures that consultation is representative and broad, addressing the intersectionality of disability with other social factors, such as race, gender, and socioeconomic status. Our approach to handpicking Associates for each session, also known as ‘purposive sampling’ ensures that every Think Tank provides the breadth of experience needed for rich data. This can include balancing geographic representation by province or ensuring rural and urban voices are heard. Additionally, involving accessibility professionals with lived experience helps produce more practical solutions that draw on learned and lived expertise. Their input leads to more actionable recommendations that policymakers and service providers can use to create tangible change.
Conclusion
The think tank model, which brings together individuals with lived experience of disability to consult on a specific topic, offers a range of benefits. It meets the consultation requirements of the Accessible Canada Act by ensuring that persons with disabilities are meaningfully involved in decision-making processes. At the same time, it aligns with qualitative research methods that prioritize lived experience and in-depth analysis.
By combining legal compliance with impactful research practices, this model stands as an effective and powerful approach to shaping policies and advancing social change for persons with disabilities.
Does a Think Tank feel like the solution to the consultative or research questions your organization has? Reach out to learn how we can help!
Meg Ingram (they/them) is a multiply-disabled accessibility advocate with a passion for project management, planning coordination, and equitable education. Drawing from their background working in both higher education and social services, they have a deep passion for carving out accessible processes and building meaningful relationships within and across sectors. Meg holds an M.A. in Sociology, with a focus in disability studies, from Queen’s University, and a B.A. in Sociology from the University of Victoria.