The University of South Dakota Digital Accessibility Committee (stakeholder body) formed a subcommittee in 2023 to look at evaluating digital accessibility conformance across the institution's digital spaces based on the J4P Framework developed by Dr. Angela K. Jackson.  The evaluation includes criteria across the domains of people, policies, practices, and planning critical to programming and services at the university. The evaluation takes place between June 1st and August 1st of each year.

Adopting an institutional approach to digital accessibility includes an evaluation strategy that looks at the current compliance of existing electronic and information technology (EIT) with the goal of establishing a baseline of conformance that sets the foundation for digital accessibility planning and goal setting across the institution. The purpose of an institutional-wide digital accessibility evaluation (audit) is to develop an understanding of the institution's current level of compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 508 ICT Refresh,  the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.1 (WCAG), and ADA law. The initiative's primary goal is to identify digital accessibility challenges and barriers at the University of South Dakota as recommended by the DOJ and OCR. Four checklists have been developed as tools for the evaluation of critical programs and services that cover hardware (computer workstations, digital displays, kiosks, theaters, sports centers),  electronically delivered courses, online lectures, third-party content, live streaming content, streaming platforms, webpages, social media, major software programs, assistive technology, support, and training.

The steps included in the evaluation phase of the J4P Framework approach to institutional-wide digital accessibility are:

• Acquire stakeholder involvement and senior leadership support

• Establish a planning committee

• Identify the skills needed and experts leading and conducting the evaluation

• Secure the needed roles and permissions to conduct the evaluation objectively making note of conflicts of interest

• Apply a consensus process of decision-making to develop a list of what will be evaluated based on a risk matrix and resource limitations

• Create a written plan, selection strategy, and schedule

• Conduct the evaluation

• Collect and review the findings with the subcommittee members

• Present the evaluation findings to the digital accessibility committee

• Create a list of recommendations led by the Digital Accessibility Coordinator and Digital Accessibility Committee

• Present a report to leadership with recommendations

• Adopt an approved action plan

• Develop a digital accessibility strategic plan for the institution to implement corrective actions and preventive action steps