Indicator 26 — Welcoming people with disabilities

What the auditor actually checks

Indicator 26 is one of the most scrutinised of the framework, and one where the auditor’s attention is near systematic: disability is a national priority and non-conformities are frequent. Three expectations structure the review:

1. An appointed disability officer: does their name appear anywhere (website, welcome booklet, programmes)? Can they explain their role? For an independent, the trainer is their own officer — accepted, provided you own it and write it down.
2. A network you can mobilise: the auditor asks which partners you would call when an adaptation need exceeds your skills: Agefiph, the Ressources Handicap Formation (RHF) network, Cap emploi, the MDPH, specialised associations.
3. A welcome and adaptation procedure: how do you detect a need (a question asked at registration), how do you analyse possible adjustments (duration, materials, pace, premises accessibility), and what do you do if you cannot adapt (a documented referral)?

Achieving compliance, step by step

1. Appoint and display the disability officer

Name the officer, mention them on your website and welcome documents with a direct contact. Have them attend an awareness session (the free Agefiph or RHF webinars do the job) and keep the certificate.

2. Build detection into your enrolment path

Add a systematic question to the needs-analysis questionnaire: “Do you have any specific adjustment needs (disability, health constraints)?”. It is the simplest and most convincing proof that the topic is built into your process, not bolted on.

3. Build your address book

A one-page table suffices: organisation, field, contact, website. Include at minimum Agefiph, your region’s RHF, Cap emploi and one association related to your sector. You do not need signed agreements: identified, current contacts suffice.

4. Write the adaptation procedure

One page: detection → interview with the beneficiary → analysis of possible adjustments → implementation or reasoned referral → traceability. Keep a register of requests, even empty: it proves the circuit exists.

Field advice

Never say in an audit “I have never had a disabled trainee, so it does not apply”: the indicator applies to everyone, preventively. Say instead: “here is how I would detect the need, here is who I would contact, here is what I can adapt myself”. An auditor prefers a small structure lucid about its limits and equipped to refer, over an unverifiable universal-accessibility speech.

Examples of evidence that passes the audit (real cases)

Documents actually shown in audits and deemed convincing for indicator 26:

• The website’s accessibility page with the disability referent’s name, their direct contact details and the welcome process described in a few lines: it is the auditor’s first check, often done before the audit.
• The certificate of an awareness webinar taken by the referent (Agefiph, Ressources Handicap Formation): free to obtain, it turns a paper designation into a real function.
• The enrolment or needs-analysis questionnaire carrying the systematic question: “Do you have any particular adjustment needs?” — the most convincing proof that detection is built into the process.
• The regionalised partner directory: Agefiph, your region’s RHF, Cap emploi, MDPH, a sector association — with up-to-date contacts. No signed agreements needed.
• The adjustment-requests register, even empty but dated and structured: it proves the circuit exists before the first case arises.
• A record of an adaptation actually delivered when you have one: extra time granted, enlarged materials, adjusted pace, or a reasoned referral to a better-equipped provider. One real, well-traced case is worth any amount of talk.

Disability welcome and adaptation procedure outline (template)

Your procedure fits on one page, structured as follows:

1. Purpose and referent — name, role and contact details of the disability referent; published on your information materials.
2. Detection — a systematic question at enrolment and in the needs analysis (indicator 4), active listening throughout the pathway.
3. Adjustment analysis — an interview with the beneficiary, review of possible adaptations: duration, pace, materials, assessment methods, accessibility of premises or distance-learning tools.
4. Mobilising the network — when the need exceeds your capabilities, calling on the identified partners (Agefiph, RHF, Cap emploi, MDPH).
5. Implementation or referral — a traced adjustment, or a reasoned, documented referral to a suitable provider.
6. Traceability — register of requests and outcomes, feeding continuous improvement.

The complete version of this procedure, ready to customise field by field, is in sheet 26 of the kit — together with the disability referent’s role sheet and the adjustment-requests register.