I Know What They Said… What Should I DO??? April 21, 2016 Jane E. Jarrow, Ph.D. Disability Access Information & Support (DAIS)

What Seems to Be The Problem? A body of knowledge built over 40+ years The statutes tell us WHAT to do (spirit of the law), but not HOW Unfortunately, the attorneys know WHAT to do, as well, but may have little understanding of “good practice” Their job is to keep the institution “safe” – and that sometimes makes OUR job harder!

The Problem with “SAFE” It often relies on form over function Agreeing now may make it harder to disagree later Everything we do is interconnected – WE understand that, but the attorneys may not “Safe” may cost the institution unnecessary resources – that come from OUR budgets!

Let’s Talk About Talking (to each other!) DSS Providers: How can you get access to the school attorney (chain of command) Why would you WANT access? (before or after!?!) Attorneys Times when they don’t WANT to hear from us Times when they don’t NEED to hear from us! Times when they need to hear from us DIRECTLY!

DSS Needs to Understand the Law AS MUCH IF NOT MORE! To understand the precedents To evaluate the implications in your setting To determine how important it is for your institution To feed the right information to the right people QUICK CHECK – 504/ADA/FHA/508/State statutes

Case-In-Point Florida Atlantic Case She said, “WHAT???” Who reported what, to whom? What REALLY happened? How did the reporting go so wrong? HOW DO YOU KEEP THIS FROM HAPPENING TO YOU???

Trust Yourself ( and Your Information) DSS providers should generally trust their own judgment; if it doesn’t track, ask questions! Even good lawyers who know a lot about our issues can end up giving bad advice if they are working from bad, or limited, information. The institution is best served when the attorneys have all the information they need to help guide decision- making and policy development; when it comes to issues of students with disabilities THAT will come from the DSS folks.

UN-Kearney and Emotional Support Animals THIS is the settlement agreement you want to rely on (NOT Portland State, NOT Kent State) What the attorneys will get out of it: Find a way to muzzle comments that will get you in trouble The FHA does apply to college and university housing When the Feds have you dead to rights – ADMIT IT!

What DSS Folks Can Take Away from UN-Kearney Authority for dealing with animals on campus can (should?) begin with disability services, even if it is about being in the dorm Develop TWO policies – one for Disability Housing Accommodations, one for ESAs; it will work to our benefit in the end We do NOT have to use the term “assistance animals” (AND WE SHOULDN’T – JEJ, not DOJ!)

“Assistance Animals” This is an FHA suit, so they used the FHA terminology. BUT… “Assistance Animals” are a category of animals that may work, provide assistance, or perform physical tasks for an individual with a disability and/or provide necessary emotional support to an individual with a mental or psychiatric disability that alleviates one or more identified symptoms of an individual’s disability, but which are not considered Service Animals under the ADAAA and UNK’s Service Animal Policy. (emphasis added)

(example) WHY You Need To Understand The Law USE the UNK settlement to draft your own policies for Disability Housing Accommodations and for ESAs Put their points into YOUR policy so you can rely on it Draft your policy, turn it over to the powers-that-be WITH EXPLANATION and a copy of the UNK settlement DON’T USE THE UNK POLICY RE: SERVICE ANIMALS

WHY is this still there? Students wishing to utilize a service animal on campus should contact the Disability Services Office at Faculty, staff, and visitors wishing to utilize a service animal on the UNK campus should contact the Affirmation Action Office at for approval. The University of Nebraska at Kearney considers service animals to be an accommodation issue, and therefore requires any individual who intends to have a service animal on campus on a regular basis have a valid accommodation plan. (emphasis added)

A SPECIAL CASE Argenyi vs Creighton What happened here? What do we learn directly? Preference of user must be given primary consideration You cannot ignore/discount accommodation requests on the basis of cost Can’t hide behind “academic deference” Student’s success has nothing to do with need for access

A SPECIAL CASE Argenyi vs Creighton (cont) To suggest that only those accommodations that are “necessary” must be provided is to suggest that students must earn their civil rights What do we learn INDIRECTLY? Accommodations that are “good enough” AREN’T!!! In a round-about way, this decision affirms the idea of the new AHEAD guidance – they discounted what he said about his accommodation needs as self-serving; the court found them to be credible and important To suggest that only those accommodations that are “necessary” must be provided is to suggest that students must earn their civil rights

Let’s Talk About: Lesley University (Food Services) Metro State (Negotiating Accommodations) Harvard/MIT MOOCS (Captioning) The myriad of suits re: accessibility of websites and class materials UNLESS YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE!!!

You know where to find me:

Closer to Reality?