[CATO] Get Inclusive Vendor Assessment

Monica Olsson molsson at sbctc.edu
Fri Feb 18 14:32:29 PST 2022

Greetings CATO,

At our last meeting Vicki and I shared about our experiences reviewing a compliance training vendor. Please read on for more information.


SBCTC currently has a contract with Everi. Many colleges have expressed dissatisfaction to the state board about Everfi, notably issues with poor customer service. I asked about the extent to which accessibility was reviewed during the original procurement process with Everfi, and did not learn much.

The contract with Everfi ends soon, which provides the agency with an opportunity to choose what to do next. Options include starting the RFP process, staying with Everfi, or taking advantage of the WIPHE contract that Western Washington University has with Get Inclusive, allowing for a direct buy purchase.

The Vendor

The vendor is Get Inclusive<https://www.getinclusive.com/>. The company launched in 2013 and sells online compliance and prevention training modules to over 300 higher education clients.

When we started talking with their team, the first thing we pointed out was that their website needed a meaningful accessibility statement. Before our work with Get Inclusive concluded, they published this Accessibility Statement<https://www.getinclusive.com/accessibility> to their site. Next Vicki and I reviewed their VPAT document, gained access to their Title IX module for testing, and scheduled several meetings with their team.

Summary of Activities

  *   Reviewed VAT documentation. Documented follow up questions with vendors.

  *   Contacted Western Washington University with questions. Their review was overall favorable.

  *   Interviewed accessibility leads at UMASS, another current customer of Get Inclusive. Again, mostly favorable reviews.

  *   Vicki performed accessibility testing within the Title IX module using NVDA, Jaws, and Dragon. Documented our results with the vendor and discussed during meetings.

     *   Vicki and I need to go back and add Alt Text to the reports, so won’t share these documents until that is done.

  *   Attended several meetings with the vendor, which included watching the company’s new accessibility person use NVDA in front of us on one of the pages in question.

  *   Summarized our key concerns and asked the vendor, which helped lead to an updated Accessibility Roadmap.

Vendor Roadmap

  *   The vendor’s Roadmap is attached for your review. I do not see dates in the Excel document, so I will contact Get Inclusive and request an update with timeline.

  *   The following is Get Inclusive's response about our request for a Higher Ed Focus group.

“We agree with your guidance that we should create a higher-ed accessibility focus group.  We see a lot of value in that.  Here are some preliminary thoughts on this:

- Get Inclusive to lead the focus group discussion

- Cohesive standards-setting

- Incorporate feedback from actual accessibility users into the next rounds of fixes.”


  1.  Get Inclusive demonstrated a high level of customer service with quick response times and an interest in understanding the user experience.

  2.  Get Inclusive is a younger company that is early in their accessibility journey.

  3.  Their dedicated accessibility lead is eager and also appears to be in a steep learning curve.

  4.  Get Inclusive needs to refine their user feedback process and their accessibility remediation process. For example, rather than attempting to respond to each client’s unique feedback or concerns, we advised that they start a higher ed user group. Another example of when their process got sticky was when Vicki and I were in our own learning cursive about what appeared to be image “sliders” on a module page, and we gave slightly inaccurate feedback about focus order. Rather than changing their page as quickly as they did to please us, Get Inclusive should have demonstrated their process for evaluating our feedback against accessibility standards. We told them as much and they are working on their process along with starting the higher ed customer focus group.

  5.  Vicki and I met with UMass about the image “slider” issue and that helped to clarify our own confusion. Really, the page contained a series of buttons that appeared to be a “slider” but weren't. Our UMass contacts agreed with us to suggest that Get Inclusive create a series of simpler HTML pages instead. We documented this feedback with the vendor.

[Title: SBCTC logo - Description: Compass]

Monica M. Olsson (she/her/hers)

Policy Associate – Accessible IT Coordinator

Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges

molsson at sbctc.edu<mailto:molsson at sbctc.edu> • o: 360-704-3922 • c: 206-914-7187

sbctc.edu<https://www.sbctc.edu/> • Twitter: @SBCTCWashington<https://twitter.com/SBCTCWashington> • Facebook: @WASBCTC<https://www.facebook.com/wasbctc/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ctc.edu/pipermail/cato_lists.ctc.edu/attachments/20220218/ab3f74ba/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Outlook-Title_ SBC.png
Type: image/png
Size: 22672 bytes
Desc: Outlook-Title_ SBC.png
URL: <http://lists.ctc.edu/pipermail/cato_lists.ctc.edu/attachments/20220218/ab3f74ba/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Accessibility Roadmap (WA CBC)  (1).xlsx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet
Size: 55450 bytes
Desc: Accessibility Roadmap (WA CBC)  (1).xlsx
URL: <http://lists.ctc.edu/pipermail/cato_lists.ctc.edu/attachments/20220218/ab3f74ba/attachment-0001.xlsx>

More information about the CATO mailing list