- Before
- Reads 60 to 90 pages of documentation a day to find what it supports, then types each determination and letter by hand.
- Now
- Opens each request with the limitations already cited to their pages and drawn to what the student asked for, sees how the office decided like cases, and decides every line herself.
One request for college disability accommodations, from documentation to the testing center
Wednesday, October 21, 2026, at the office of Disability Resources at Halden State University, a public research university with a nursing school. Priya N., a junior in the BSN program, asked for five accommodations. Her case, DR-2026-1342, is on business day 5 of 10, with a decision due by October 28.
- 016:02 a.m.
Her documentation, the limitations it supports, and what she asked for
Documentation agentThe agent reads Priya's psychoeducational evaluation by Dr. Elena Varga, PsyD (9 pages), her statement (2 pages) and Dana Whitfield's intake notes (3 pages), all in the restricted space. It finds three functional limitations: processing speed (confidence 0.96), sustained attention under distraction (0.93) and writing fluency for lecture notes (0.88). Each request is drawn to the limitation it meets. Flexible attendance meets none and is struck through.
The Documentation agent never shows a diagnosis outside the restricted record, and never proposes an accommodation without a cited limitation.
- 02One click
Processing speed, lit to its pages
Dana Whitfield · Access SpecialistDana selects processing speed. Its sources light up: a Processing Speed Index of 80, at the 9th percentile, with 58% of items finished timed and 94% untimed, cited to evaluation page 6, statement page 1 and intake notes page 3. All three sources agree. Lines run to 1.5× time on exams and quizzes, and to the held request about the clinical check-off.
- 03Before she decides
37 of 41 like cases got 1.5× time
Precedent agentSince August 2023 the office granted extended time in all 41 cases with processing speed below the 10th percentile: 1.5× in 37, and 2× in 4, each of which had working memory below the 5th percentile. Priya's working memory is at the 34th percentile, so 1.5× is in line with the office's own practice. Other students are never named.
- 046:04 a.m.
An essential requirement in the nursing technical standards
Course agentReading the School of Nursing's technical standards, the agent finds that students must prepare and administer medications safely within the time frames of clinical practice, and that the NURS 3410 medication-administration check-off is completed within 20 minutes. It flags the request for extra time on the check-off as meeting an essential requirement (confidence 0.97). The written dosage-calculation quiz is not timed by design, so 1.5× applies there.
The Course agent never denies, and never contacts a student about the conflict.
- 059:12 a.m.
An interactive process instead of a silent denial
Dana Whitfield · Access SpecialistDana sends the four questions the Course agent drafted to Prof. Joanne Albright, the clinical faculty lead, and Dr. Ruth Calloway, Associate Dean for Undergraduate Nursing. At 9:14 Prof. Albright answers: the hands-on check-off stays timed, the written dosage-calculation quiz can take 1.5×, and Priya gets two extra supervised practice sessions before the November 12 check-off. Dr. Calloway agrees at 9:15. The agent drafts the group's finding with the alternatives considered and 7 of 7 like cases.
- 06Co-signed
A second signature on the fundamental-alteration finding
Dr. Simone Hartwell · Director of Disability ResourcesThe finding is in Dr. Hartwell's queue of seven, with the group, the standard, the alternatives and the precedent in one place. She can co-sign or return it with a reason. Dana proposed the finding, so she can never co-sign it.
The person who proposes a denial or a finding can never co-sign it.
- 07Every line decided
Approved, modified, or asked for more
Dana Whitfield · Access SpecialistDana approves 1.5× time, the reduced-distraction room and audio recording of lectures. The check-off request shows as modified and co-signed. For flexible attendance she asks Priya for documentation of an episodic condition rather than denying it, and the other lines go ahead. The determination can be sent only once every line is decided and co-signed where needed.
- 08Before release
Five faculty letters that name accommodations only
Letters agentThe agent drafts one letter per course. The letter to Dr. Kevin Ashby for NURS 3320 Pharmacology for Nursing lists 1.5× time, the reduced-distraction room and recording of lectures, with Exam 2 booked for October 29, 75 minutes, in room T-108. Every letter is scanned for clinical terms and medications before Dana releases it.
Scan passed: 0 of 312 clinical terms and medications
- 09Week of Oct 26
Exams booked from the syllabus
Ravi Kapoor · Testing Center CoordinatorThe Exams agent booked 471 of the week's 486 accommodated exams from course calendars, including Priya's Pharmacology Exam 2 at 75 minutes and her Pathophysiology midterm at 135 minutes. Three need a person: the 9:00 a.m. slot on October 29 has 37 bookings for 34 seats, so Ravi approves moving three to 10:30; Dr. Ashby has not uploaded his exam yet; and the learning system did not answer for one course. The agent proposes quiz timers to instructors and never changes one itself.
- 10On the record
Every read and decision, in one sealed inquiry pack
Audit pack agentThe audit trail holds every read, decision, co-signature and release, from Dr. Hartwell's co-signature to the letters released at 9:21 a.m. For an OCR inquiry the agent collects 38 records for the case, with every page cited, the decisions and reason codes, the interactive process, the letters and the access log, and redacts 41 other students in the precedent comparison. Gregory Tan, the ADA/504 Coordinator, approves the release.