Connect with us

Finance

Accessibility In 2025: Forces, Finance, And The Future

Published

on

Accessibility In 2025: Forces, Finance, And The Future

After decades of halting advances, the field of Accessibility for people with disabilities has reached not a fork in one road—it’s smack in the middle of a bustling (and often contentious) convergence of many forces from many directions.

There are imperatives from legal and moral to societal and financial. Disabilities physical, sensory and cognitive. Politics and profit. Them, me. All crashing into each other in ways never seen before.

There is little consensus on where accessibility will emerge from all this. But if experts agree on anything, it’s that the business community will play a significant role. Progress will rely on good, old-fashioned entrepreneurship and investment in AI-driven communication devices, exoskeletons, consumer products and much more.

“Accessibility has been an ignored space from investment capital,” says Paul Kent, the managing partner of the Disabled Life Alliance, which connects and facilitates deals between private investors and innovators in the accessibility space. “It’s been thought of as a small market, which is ridiculous. There’s a massive return associated with this. A lot of people believe social impact requires less than market-rate returns. But that’s not true. This is not charity. It’s an investible market.”

Advertisement

Forbes’ inaugural Accessibility 100 list gives a unique look at the industry as it stands today, and where it’s headed. The list features the top innovators and impact-makers—from large companies to lone inventors—in sectors like mobility, communication, sports, entertainment and many more. Some make devices like “smart canes” that can tell blind users where things are, from poles to the Starbucks entrance; while others build playgrounds for disabled children, or provide access from everything to the beach, the ballot box and a career in modeling. Profiles of all 100 appear on pages devoted to those categories; for example, education is here.

Featuring companies and people from 15 countries, the list was compiled through more than 400 conversations with industry insiders over nine months, and with the guidance of an expert advisory board. Disabilities considered include physical, sensory and neurodivergent; types of accessibility include digital (technology, websites and so on), physical (access to public transportation and buildings) and experiences (sports, careers and the like). Emphasis was placed on breadth of impact felt now and expected in the near future. This page details the list’s methodology and advisory board.

Current debates over DEI (often called DEIA, the A for accessibility) often overlook one dynamic: the disabled community is the one minority which anyone of any race, gender, age or financial means can suddenly find themselves thrust into. The head of accessibility at a major communications company, who asked not to be identified given the current political climate, calls accessibility a “casualty of war” over DEI policies—such as when the Trump administration stopped providing sign-language interpretation during broadcasts of press briefings, cutting them off to deaf and hard-of-hearing citizens. (The National Association of the Deaf immediately sued.) Likewise, stricter protections for disabled airline travelers instituted by the previous administraion—such as reimbursement for wheelchair damage and better training for flight personnel to increase safety—have been opposed by the airline industry, which is now seeking to delay, dilute, or remove them altogether.

As such conflicts play out, companies and entrepreneurs currently changing the world of accessibility are, in ways surprisingly new, inviting people with all disabilities into design conversations and testing labs, heeding the community’s mantra, “Nothing about us without us.” Recently, as sign-language robotic hands were hailed by outsiders as possibly replacing expensive interpreters—a certainly worthwhile goal—the enthusiasm has obscured the reality that they didn’t really serve the deaf and hard-of-hearing community yet.

“American Sign Language is 70 percent what we call nonverbal markers—it’s your face, how your body moves, not just hand shapes,” says Kelby Brick, the chief operating officer of the National Federation of the Deaf. Usable innovation in the area, he suspects, would require AI-driven avatars that can convey that nuance.

Advertisement

Not all advancements in accessibility are contentious. Many become universal. Closed captioning—originally designed for the deaf—has grown so ubiquitous that it has became one of many examples of what is now called “the curb-cut effect,” so named after sloped curbs designed for people with disabilities wound up benefitting everyone, like those pushing strollers or pulling suitcases. Other instances include electric toothbrushes, speech-to-text and even bendable straws.

Indeed, the preferred approach for many companies has become “universal design,” where products and services are built from the start to serve everyone, rather than winding up immediately unusable by the disabled or clumsily retrofitted after the fact. Several firms, including Accessibility 100 listmakers Deque and Fable, now produce software that checks computer code as it’s written to ensure that accessibility features work out of the box. OXO, also on the list, is a household name (literally) that designs all of its kitchen products to be easy for everyone, from smooth-turning can openers to tongs that close with one hand.

One distinct feature of accessibility innovation is that companies—even direct competitors—enthusiastically share ideas and advances, even code, to hasten innovation for all. For example, Procter & Gamble invented raised icons that blind and low-vision people can feel to distinguish products like liquid soap, shampoo and laundry detergent from each other; the company is sharing them with others to make them standard. “We’re not just trying to do it alone,” says Sam Latif, P&G’s Company Accessibility Leader. “Doing it on a few products is not as impactful as the industry doing it together.”

Apple operating systems have built accessibility features into its software since the 1980s, but when Steve Jobs insisted that the first iPhone have no buttons—making it almost unusable for blind people—it sparked faster and faster feature innovations, like haptic feedback, screen magnification, suppression of flashing content and hundreds more. There are so many, in fact, that Apple recently introduced App Store “Accessibility Nutrition Labels” to let users know how each app serves their specific disability.

“It makes good business sense to make technology that works for everyone—we mean everyone,” says Sarah Herrlinger, Apple’s top accessibility official. “Accessibility is some of the most creative work we do.”

Advertisement

Finance

Newly appointed director of finance for Halifax County has now resigned

Published

on

Newly appointed director of finance for Halifax County has now resigned

The newly appointed director of finance for Halifax County has now resigned from the post, citing comments that she believes are questioning her integrity.

On Monday, supervisors named the school system’s finance director, Dr. Karen Bucklew, to also serve as the county’s interim finance director.

RELATED: Halifax County Schools finance director to assist county as interim finance director

In her resignation letter, Bucklew cites public comments from members of the board and to the media regarding whether serving both entities is a conflict of interest.

The letter lays out her professional and ethical standards, and said the comments have eroded the professional working environment, so she will remain as the school’s finance director only.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Finance

Bluespring adds $2.3bn in assets with SHP Financial purchase  

Published

on

Bluespring adds .3bn in assets with SHP Financial purchase  

Bluespring Wealth Partners has purchased SHP Financial, a firm based in Massachusetts that manages about $2.3bn in assets for mass-affluent and high-net-worth clients.  

Financial specifics of the deal remain undisclosed.  

Advertisement

Access deeper industry intelligence

Experience unmatched clarity with a single platform that combines unique data, AI, and human expertise.

Find out more


SHP Financial was established in 2003 by Derek L. Gregoire, Matthew C. Peck, and Keith W. Ellis Jr., who began their financial careers together in the insurance sector. 

The company employs around 50 staff across three offices in Plymouth, Woburn, and Hyannis. Its team includes seven advisers and 18 other financial services professionals. 

The firm is known for providing fiduciary advice and offers services such as its SHP Retirement Road Map, aimed at making retirement planning more accessible to clients. 

Peck said: “We are deeply protective of the culture we’ve built over the last two decades and were intentional about choosing a partner we felt could help us fuel SHP’s next stage of growth while helping us remain true to our goals. 

Advertisement

“And we found that partner in Bluespring. We believe Bluespring can provide the resources and support needed to grow and invest in our team, while preserving the client experience that defines SHP.” 

In 2025, Bluespring added over $6bn in assets under management to its business. 

Bluespring president Pradeep Jayaraman commented: “SHP is a team that has already built meaningful scale and is still hungry to grow. That’s what makes this an acceleration story, as opposed to a transition story.  

“SHP’s founders are seasoned leaders in the prime of their careers, still deeply engaged in their business, with decades of success yet ahead.  

Last month, Bluespring added Coghill Investment Strategies, managing around $600m in assets, to its network. 

Advertisement

Advertisement


Continue Reading

Finance

Oregon Democrats’ campaign finance proposal would establish spending limits, push back other provisions

Published

on

Oregon Democrats’ campaign finance proposal would establish spending limits, push back other provisions

The Oregon State Capitol in Salem, Ore. on Monday, Feb 2, 2026.

Saskia Hatvany / OPB

State leaders are trying to stand up a law to massively overhaul Oregon’s campaign finance system.

Now, two years after the original bill’s passage, a new proposal would limit political contributions before the next general election as planned, but give the Secretary of State more time to launch a required system to track spending.

An amended bill, unveiled Monday evening, is shining a spotlight on the divide between the politically powerful labor and business groups who support it and good government advocates who are accusing state leaders of trying to skirt the intent of the original legislation.

Advertisement

House Bill 4018, which saw its first public hearing Tuesday morning, comes as state officials seek to prop up the campaign finance bill passed in 2024. Since then, state leaders have been jockeying over how best to quickly set up the bill for Oregon’s elections. For years, the state has not capped political giving.

State elections officials have warned repeatedly that the legislation from 2024 was flawed and that Oregon was barreling toward a failed implementation. The Oregon Secretary of State says it needs far more money — potentially $25 million — to keep things on schedule.

In addition to a dizzying array of technical changes, the new bill gives the state more time to create an online system to better monitor and track political spending and giving. It would move the start date from 2028 to 2032.

The bill maintains the original plan of capping political donations by businesses, political committees, interest groups, labor unions and other citizens by 2027.

“If our goal is to strengthen trust in democracy, we cannot afford a rollout that undermines confidence in government’s ability to deliver,” Oregon Secretary of State Tobias Read said in testimony supporting the bill on Tuesday.

Advertisement

“Oregonians deserve campaign finance reform that works, not just on paper, but in practice,” said Read. “They deserve a system that ends unlimited contributions. HB 4018 is a step closer to achieving that goal by preserving the key contribution limits promised to Oregonians while providing a realistic runway for the state to resolve the more complex reporting and transparency issues.”

Rep. Julie Fahey (D-Eugene), right,  and Rep. Lucetta (R-McMinnville) attend a legislative preview for the press on Wednesday, Jan. 28, 2026 in Salem, Ore.

Rep. Julie Fahey (D-Eugene), right, and Rep. Lucetta (R-McMinnville) attend a legislative preview for the press on Wednesday, Jan. 28, 2026 in Salem, Ore.

Saskia Hatvany / OPB

House Speaker Julie Fahey, who proposed the bill, believes it “addresses the most urgent needs of our campaign finance system,” a spokesperson for the Lane County Democrat said. For the tracking system, the bill “will give the Secretary of State the time needed to build it carefully, test it thoroughly, and roll it out without risking problems in the middle of a major election.”

The bill has the backing of labor groups such as the Oregon Nurses Association, Oregon AFSCME, Oregon AFL-CIO and the Oregon Restaurant & Lodging Association. Republican leaders have yet to chime in.

“Oregon is fighting hard for a transparent, robust, and intact democracy against a challenging national landscape from federal threats and corporate power. Fair elections are the foundation of this,” said Harper Haverkamp, of the American Federation of Teachers — Oregon. “The upcoming rollout of recently passed campaign finance reforms is something for us to look forward to — but the rollout must be done right.”

Advertisement

Campaign finance advocates offered a withering view of the proposal on Tuesday, saying they were excluded from discussions around crafting the bill and calling on lawmakers to reject the bill. In written testimony, one of them urged lawmakers to “Stop kicking the can down the road.”

The bill “massively changes [the 2024 bill] to come very close to making the contribution limits and disclosure requirements illusory,” Dan Meek, a Portland attorney and campaign finance reform advocate, said in Tuesday’s public hearing.

Among other things, he added, the bill would delay disclosure requirements by three years. It would also only restrict a group’s contribution to a campaign if the Secretary of State’s office determined that a single person had created them with the intent of evading limits, “which will be very difficult to prove,” he noted.

“This is another stealth attempt by legislative leadership and the big campaign contributors to do an end run around on campaign finance reform, before it’s set to be implemented,” Kate Titus, the executive director of Common Cause Oregon, said in a statement to OPB Tuesday.

The bill is scheduled for another public hearing on Thursday.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending