On June 13, 2025, InclusiveSpaces hosted a focus group during the European Passengers’ Federation (EPF) Conference in Swindon, UK. The session provided an opportunity to present updates on the InclusiveSpaces project, introduce two of its core tools currently under development (the Universal Design Tool and the Accessibility Routing Tool) and collect valuable feedback from professionals in the transport and accessibility sectors.

Led by Floridea Di Ciommo (cambiaMo) alongside Kathryn Bulanowski and Wandifadza Chivaura (EPF), the workshop brought together over 50 participants from 10 European countries. Attendees included representatives from passenger advocacy organisations, academia, public transport operators, and policymakers. Together, they shared ideas, discussed prototypes, and offered feedback to improve the inclusiveness and usability of the tools.

Imagining Inclusive Cities

The session began with an icebreaker: participants described their vision of an inclusive city in three words. Common themes emerged across the room: accessible, welcoming, safe, integrated, barrier-free, and understandable. These responses helped ground the tool discussions in people’s real expectations for more inclusive environments.

Evaluating the Universal Design Tool

Developed by project partner VIC, the Universal Design Tool is an interactive online manual offering recommendations to make the built environment more accessible. Focus group participants looked at a sample of the tool’s 257 recommendations, which are grouped into six categories: building by use, facilities and equipment, navigation and circulation, public spaces, transport, and virtual spaces.

Participants were divided into six working groups, each assigned one category. Using printed cards and a structured feedback template, they shared thoughts based on personal experiences. Their comments pointed to specific strengths and areas for improvement:

• Building by Use: Participants highlighted the need for accessible parking close to building entrances, especially in places like supermarkets. They stressed that while regulations often exist, their enforcement and implementation remain inconsistent.
• Facilities and Equipment: This group stressed the importance of well-maintained, hygienic, and inclusive amenities. Suggestions included better lighting, varied seating options, and improved signage, noting that digital-only tools like QR codes may exclude some users.
• Navigation and Circulation: The group underscored the importance of expert evaluation of design solutions to ensure their practicality. They also flagged unclear wording in some tool cards, such as Card 120, which caused confusion.
• Public Spaces: Participants emphasized the need for simple, clear language in signage and public messaging. They pointed out common challenges such as lack of elevators, uneven surfaces like cobblestones, and tight public spaces that restrict wheelchair movement, all contributing to reduced independence.
• Transport: Several participants discussed the disconnect between installed infrastructure (like elevators) and its maintenance. Inaccessible or broken facilities discourage use, leading to social isolation. One attendee cited their partner’s reluctance to leave home due to unreliable bus stops and poorly maintained streets.
• Virtual Spaces: This group found the concept and language of the virtual space recommendations unclear. They suggested more visual aids and clearer terminology to ensure all users understand the proposed digital accessibility features.

Reviewing the Accessibility Routing Tool

The second half of the session introduced the Accessibility Routing Tool, developed by NTUA. The app aims to support pedestrian journey planning by providing accessible routes tailored to different needs, including visual and mobility impairments. Participants were split into four groups, each discussing a different version of the tool.

• Users without physical impairments: This group recommended integrating tourist attractions and accommodating family needs (e.g., people with children). They also raised questions about the app’s audience: is it for residents, visitors, or both? Suggestions included clearer guidance (e.g., “turn left after the church”) and route information tailored for various user types.
• Users with visual impairments: Two groups worked on this version. They called for better contrast, audio support, and integration with traffic signal systems for real-time updates. Participants emphasised that the app should never simply report “no accessible route” but instead offer alternative paths. Colour-coded route difficulty indicators and voice-guided navigation were also suggested.
• Users with mobility impairments: This group focused on practical concerns such as identifying rest spots and avoiding cobblestones or steep inclines. They highlighted the need for flexible routing (such as offering longer but more accessible paths when shorter routes are unsuitable) and proposed integration with public transport options to support multimodal travel.

From Feedback to Future Development

The feedback collected at the EPF Focus Group will play a vital role in shaping the next iterations of the Universal Design and Accessibility Routing tools. Participants’ insights underscored the importance of:

• Clearer visuals and simpler language in the Universal Design Tool
• Improved maintenance and enforcement of accessibility infrastructure
• More adaptable routing logic that considers real-life conditions and varying user needs
• Ongoing engagement with end users, particularly those with lived experience of disabilities

InclusiveSpaces remains committed to ensuring its tools are developed with and for the people who will use them. Events like this focus group are crucial to making sure that the project reflects the diversity of users across Europe.

Stay tuned for further updates as the project continues to test and refine its tools across six European cities.

To stay up to date with the project, sign up for our newsletter!