Although occupational therapists try to help their wheelchair-bound clients reenter the community or maintain independence, many facilities' noncompliance with accessibility standards makes such planning difficult. In the present study, a survey was used to investigate the wheelchair accessibility of 20 grocery and convenience stores. The results of the survey indicated that types of stores with greatest accessibility, in descending order, were (a) rural grocery stores, (b) urban grocery stores, (c) urban convenience stores, and (d) rural convenience stores. No overall differences were found between the urban and rural stores. The types of deficiencies found and their effects on clients' shopping are described. A follow-up study was conducted to see if the store managers, who were sent letters notifying them of their stores' deficiencies, would correct these problems. Six months after notification, the survey was repeated. Five of the 20 managers made changes in specific deficient areas, whereas the remaining 15 made no changes. The survey results and the fact that 25% of the stores made changes after receipt of a letter indicate that occupational therapists can be effective advocates for accessibility and thus provide a vital link to productive living for persons in wheelchairs.

No abstract

This study was designed to determine the compliance of restaurants to the wheelchair accessibility standards set forth in the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards. The standards that were operationalized in this study are also found in Title III of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. The data were collected at 120 sites in three midwestern states. For one who uses a wheelchair, parking the car is often an obstacle to eating out. Only 53% of the restaurants surveyed provide handicapped parking. Entering the building may also be a problem. Of the restaurants that required a ramp, only 66% provided them. Inside the restaurant, the key problems were accessible rest-rooms and the height of tables. The study provided comparisons between restaurants in rural and urban settings, as well as comparisons between conventional restaurants and fast food restaurants. No notable differences emerged for these comparisons.

Although the regulations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 were phased in by 1992, monitoring and enforcement continue to be problematic. This study of three large shopping centers in the Southwest included one mall that was opened in the mid-1990s, and two malls that were constructed prior to the law (but have undergone recent renovations). Use of the ADA Accessibility Guidelines Checklist for Buildings and Facilities (Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board [ATBCB], 1992) generated data which were analyzed descriptively to determine the frequency and percent compliance in: parking lots, entrances, ramps, elevators, telephones, restrooms, food courts, and 12 specific store-types. No mall was fully compliant in any area, other than telephone specifications. In other areas, compliance ranged from 0% (ramp slopes in the newer mall) to many areas of 100% compliance (for example, outdoor curb ramps and food court seating spaces and aisles). The implications are that shoppers who are wheelchair mobile cannot count on complete compliance and cannot predict which physical architectural barriers they will find in shopping centers.

Therapists' lack of knowledge and their self-reported inaction with regard to ADA Title III may affect the accessibility of the environment, independence, and empowerment of clients who are wheelchair mobile and, therefore, may impede progress toward fully inclusive communities.