Experiences of faculty and scientists with disabilities at academic institutions in the United States

Introduction. People with disabilities are underrepresented in higher education, facing systematic obstacles such as inaccessible institutions and difficulties in obtaining accommodations. This qualitative study aims to shed light on barriers to accessibility and disability inclusion in STEM and research institutions through confidential qualitative interviews with disabled faculty and scientists. Methods. We recruited participants (via virtual flyers) working in the United States (U.S.) as research faculty or scientists that applied for grant funding (last five years), and self-identified as having a disability. Interviews (n=35) were conducted via semi-structured one-on-one live interviews or written interviews to accommodate participants' needs. Data were analyzed by two study members using content analysis to identify themes and codes until saturation was reached. Results. Themes included identity/visibility, career trajectories, accessibility, accommodations, bias, representation, and inclusion. Some participants reported not disclosing their disabilities at work or during hiring processes due to fear of negative perceptions from peers or potential employers. Experiences around stigma and bias were noted both in professional relationships and when interacting with disability service offices, underscoring difficulties and delays in processes to secure accommodations. Respondents highlighted the issues of lack of disability inclusion and low representation of people with disabilities in academia, elevating the importance of self-advocacy, and of role models and mentors in shaping career pathways for future researchers with disabilities. Conclusion. Faculty with disabilities encounter systematic barriers at academic institutions, and lack of acknowledgement and research on these experiences has held back institutional and policy changes. To reduce disparities for disabled faculty, academic leadership must allocate resources to address ableism, create more inclusive environments, and raise standards beyond ADA compliance. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Funding Statement This study did not receive any funding ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: This study was approved by the Johns Hopkins Medicine Institutional Review Board (#00310675). I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes Data are not available as these were obtained from confidential interviews