usds / equity_practice

A repository for all equity toolkit items (for now)
1 stars 0 forks source link

Meeting: A11y & Equity Team Sync - Delivery Lifecycle, Roadmap and Quality Criteria #28

Open AlexBornkesselUSDS opened 7 months ago

AlexBornkesselUSDS commented 7 months ago

Description

As a follow-up from the 12/8 meeting w/ the A11y team, we need to sync with them on the delivery process, 3-month project roadmap and quality criteria. Desired outcomes are 1) integrating a more comprehensive view of accessibility x equity moments and potential tools within the lifecycle and quality criteria, 2) expectation-setting on in-scope vs. out-of-scope for the equity team's 3-month roadmap and 3) greater team alignment in prep for meeting with Mina and USDS leadership to discuss USDS's equity definition and project scoping, determination process.

Acceptance Criteria

Tasks

jeremyzitomer-usds commented 6 months ago

Putting this here for posterity: A few key talking points the Equity team will take into our consultations with various teams going forward:

jeremyzitomer-usds commented 6 months ago

From Meg on 12/14:

Overall this hits on all of the right points! Here's something I got out of my head earlier today that might be helpful: Equitable delivery prioritizes accessibility. If there’s a decision to reduce, exclude, or rush the effort that it takes to make something accessible for everyone, then we and our agency partners have to acknowledge and document the risk we're taking on. In this situation we can’t state that we’re practicing inclusivity or equitable delivery. When we, USDS, prioritize accessibility and fail due to things that are truly out of our control, we must:

We'll chat more in the coming weeks about how to define accessibility (encompasses many more people than those who use assistive technology), Louise and I are working on an explanation.

AlexBornkesselUSDS commented 6 months ago

@jeremyzitomer-usds @celestemespinoza I'd like to talk this through as a team at some point, using 0-5 Benefits Bundle as a use case example. Like, to share the decision points and trade-offs we weighed and as a peer review/retro, gain their team's input on what/how was done (or wasn't done).

I worry about putting that 100% aim, all or nothing, on a team - and the effect that could have in teams saying 'yes/no' VERSUS being willing to find what they CAN move forward (now, next, later). I agree with the 100% target, yet sometimes staff are coming into situations where agencies and their systems, structures aren't even at the crawl stage let along a 0. They are at negative 1000. And in those situations, there's still a lot of good accessibility work that can be done even if there's still room for much-needed progress.