Minnesota Communities
Deaf, DeafBlind, and hard of hearing Minnesotans
Deaf people who use American Sign Language are a cultural and linguistic community, not only a disability category. Hard of hearing and late-deafened people may prefer captioning and assistive listening. DeafBlind people may use tactile or Protactile communication.
Participation shaped by community voices
Minnesota’s Commission of the Deaf, DeafBlind and Hard of Hearing shares opportunities for civic participation and engagement with public decisions. Community members are shaping public life—not merely requesting access to it. Communication access makes that participation possible.
Explore community participation and advocacyA different starting point
If participants helped design your meeting from the beginning, what might change about how people contribute and make decisions?
Community overview
ASL users, oral communicators, cochlear implant users, late-deafened elders, DeafBlind people, and Deaf people from immigrant communities who use other sign languages.
Names and terms
Deaf (cultural, capital D); deaf; hard of hearing; DeafBlind
Do not use 'hearing impaired'. Ask the person's preference.
History, culture, and life today
Practice considerations
Effective communication is a legal obligation. Exchanging written notes is not equally effective for a Deaf person who uses sign language, and a family member is not an interpreter. Your process must work with video relay and captioned phone calls.
What to ask
- How would you like to communicate today: ASL interpreter, captioning, written English, or something else?
- Do you use video relay or a captioned phone?
- Who should be in the room?
Access considerations
- Qualified ASL interpreter or CART booked in advance; not a family member.
- Videos captioned; phone processes have a relay-compatible path.
- Visual alerts in waiting areas; written materials in plain language.
Who to involve
- Accessibility or ADA coordinator.
- Minnesota's Deaf and Hard of Hearing Services Division as a resource (verify current contact).
- Equity Director or administration steward.
Assumptions to examine
- Do not assume lip reading is enough.
- Do not assume written English is a first language for a Deaf ASL user.
- Do not assume a hearing aid means full access.
Sources
Continue the connection
History and the decisions we make today
In this lesson
- Connect a historical condition described in the brief to a present-day service question.
- Distinguish community-level context from an individual’s circumstances.
- Identify evidence needed before changing a service requirement.
Consider this fictional situation
A meeting offers captions, but a DeafBlind participant cannot use the projected display. What would make participation possible?
Ask the participant which communication and access arrangements work for them. Arrange those supports before the meeting and check the materials as well as the conversation. Captions alone do not meet every access need.
Family, identity, and individual experience
In this lesson
- Recognize differences in identity, language, and experience within a community.
- Ask about a person’s relationships without prescribing who should be involved.
- Identify an assumption that could distort a service conversation.
Consider this fictional situation
A person names a close friend as an important source of support. How would you learn what that relationship means for the decision being discussed?
Ask the person how they want their friend involved, and explain any relevant requirements. A community description cannot establish whom an individual trusts or what support they want.
From understanding to an equity analysis
In this lesson
- Identify a specific access barrier in a proposed process.
- Name whose input would help evaluate the decision.
- Choose a way to check whether a revision improves access.
Consider this fictional situation
A team has offered a listening session but has not explained what changed afterward. What would strengthen the work?
Explain what input affected the decision, what remains unresolved, and how participants can respond. Attendance is useful information, but it does not show that the decision became more responsive.