ADA Transition Plan (28 CFR 35.150) Template
Document your public entity’s ADA transition plan in one place, including barrier inventory, removal methods, schedule, and responsible official. Use it to create a clear audit trail for 28 CFR 35.150(d) planning.
Trusted by frontline teams 15 years of frontline software AI customization in seconds
Built for: Local Government · Public Education · Transit Agencies · Parks And Recreation · County Administration
Overview
This ADA Transition Plan (28 CFR 35.150) Template is a structured workplace form for documenting how a public entity will identify and remove physical barriers to access. It brings the plan into a single record with fields for the public entity name, effective date, scope, responsible official, barrier summary, facility list, removal methods, implementation schedule, and the basis for that schedule.
Use it when you need to turn an accessibility review, facilities assessment, or capital planning discussion into a formal transition plan that can be reviewed, updated, and assigned. The form is especially useful for city halls, libraries, campuses, parks buildings, transit facilities, and other public-facing sites where barrier removal needs to be tracked over time. It helps you keep the plan specific: what the barrier is, where it is located, how it will be addressed, and who owns the next step.
Do not use this as a substitute for an accessibility audit, legal advice, or a detailed engineering specification. If you do not yet know the barriers, start with an inspection first. If the issue is not physical access, this template may not be the right fit. It is also not meant for collecting unnecessary personal data; the contact fields should stay limited to the responsible official and the notes should avoid PII unless it is needed for the plan and disclosed appropriately.
Standards & compliance context
- This template supports documentation of a public entity’s transition plan under 28 CFR 35.150(d) by capturing barriers, removal methods, and implementation timing.
- The responsible official field helps create an audit trail showing who owns the plan and who can respond to accessibility follow-up.
- The form is designed to support data minimization by collecting only role-based contact information and necessary plan details.
- If attachments or notes include PII, the consent and notice fields should be used to document disclosure and acknowledgement before submission.
General regulatory context for orientation only — verify current requirements with counsel or the relevant agency before relying on this template for compliance.
What's inside this template
Plan Overview
This section defines the document’s scope, effective date, and covered entity so the transition plan is clearly tied to the right facilities and programs.
- Plan title
- Public entity name
- Plan effective date
- Coverage scope
- If other, describe the scope
Responsible Official
This section identifies the person accountable for updates, follow-up, and recordkeeping, which is essential for a usable audit trail.
- Responsible official name
- Responsible official title
- Department or office
- Official email
- Official phone
Physical Barriers Identified
This section captures the actual access barriers that need attention, organized so they can be reviewed by category and facility.
-
Barrier summary
Summarize the physical barriers identified across facilities. Keep the description focused on observable barriers and affected areas.
- Barrier categories
-
Facilities affected
Add one row per facility or site with identified barriers.
Barrier Removal Methods and Schedule
This section turns findings into action by stating how each barrier will be removed and when the work is expected to happen.
- Barrier removal approach
-
Removal method details
Describe the specific method for removing barriers, including any interim measures if permanent removal is scheduled later.
-
Implementation schedule
Add one row per barrier or project milestone with target dates and status.
-
Schedule basis
Explain how the schedule was set, including budget, procurement, construction sequencing, or operational constraints.
Review, Consent, and Submission
This section confirms accuracy, acknowledges any PII notice, and records the final submission details so the plan is ready for review and retention.
- Accuracy attestation
- PII notice acknowledgement
- Additional notes
How to use this template
- Enter the public entity name, plan title, effective date, and scope so the document clearly states which facilities and programs the transition plan covers.
- Name the responsible official and provide role-based contact details so reviewers know who owns updates, questions, and follow-up actions.
- List each physical barrier in plain language, then group them by category and facility so the plan can be reviewed by site, issue type, or project.
- Describe the removal approach for each barrier and add implementation details that connect the work to a project, work order, or capital plan.
- Set the schedule basis and timeline for each item, then review the plan for completeness, accuracy, and any missing facilities or barriers before submission.
- Confirm the accuracy attestation, acknowledge the PII notice if applicable, and add only necessary notes that support the record without overcollecting data.
Best practices
- Use specific barrier descriptions such as 'noncompliant entrance threshold at north lobby' rather than broad labels like 'access issue.'
- Keep the facility list aligned to the actual scope so reviewers can tell which sites are included and which are intentionally excluded.
- Assign one responsible official who can coordinate updates across facilities, legal, and operations instead of leaving ownership diffuse.
- Use progressive disclosure in the barrier section by listing only the fields needed for the barrier type and facility, not every possible detail.
- Tie each removal method to a concrete action, such as repair, replacement, relocation, or redesign, so the schedule is actionable.
- Base the implementation schedule on priority, dependency, and available funding rather than vague timing language.
- Review the plan after each completed project so finished items are marked clearly and the remaining work stays current.
- Limit notes to necessary operational context and avoid collecting extra PII that does not support the transition plan.
What this template typically catches
Issues teams running this template most often surface in practice:
Common use cases
Frequently asked questions
What does this template cover?
This template covers the core elements of an ADA transition plan under 28 CFR 35.150(d): the public entity name, effective date, scope, responsible official, identified physical barriers, removal methods, and implementation schedule. It is designed to capture the plan itself, not to replace an accessibility audit or legal review. Use it to organize the information you already have and create a clear record of next steps.
Who should complete this form?
A facilities manager, ADA coordinator, public works lead, or another designated responsible official should complete it, often with input from operations and legal/compliance staff. The named responsible official should be the person who can answer follow-up questions and coordinate updates. If multiple departments are involved, one owner should still be assigned to keep the audit trail clear.
How often should an ADA transition plan be updated?
Update the plan whenever barrier conditions change, projects are completed, or new facilities and service areas are added to scope. Many public entities review it on a recurring schedule so the implementation timeline stays current and unfinished items do not disappear. The template works best when it is treated as a living record rather than a one-time filing.
Does this template apply to all facilities and programs?
It should be scoped to the public entity’s covered facilities and the areas where physical barriers affect access. If a facility is outside the current scope, use the scope fields to state that clearly rather than leaving ambiguity. The template also includes an 'other' scope field so you can document exceptions or special coverage notes without forcing them into the wrong category.
What are the most common mistakes when filling this out?
Common mistakes include listing barriers without identifying a removal method, using vague schedule language like 'as soon as possible,' and failing to name a responsible official. Another frequent issue is collecting too much personal data in notes or attachments when only role-based contact information is needed. The template is structured to keep entries specific, actionable, and limited to what is necessary.
Can this template be customized for different departments or facilities?
Yes. You can adapt the barrier categories, facility list, and schedule basis to match city halls, libraries, parks, campuses, transit facilities, or other public-facing sites. If your organization uses separate capital planning or work-order systems, you can also add references in the notes field so the plan connects to existing workflows.
How does this template fit with accessibility audits or work-order systems?
Use the template after an inspection or audit to convert findings into a formal transition plan. The barrier list can be mapped to work orders, capital projects, or maintenance tickets, and the schedule can reference those systems by ID or project name. That makes it easier to track progress without duplicating every operational detail inside the form.
What should be included in the schedule basis?
The schedule basis should explain how priorities were set, such as severity of the barrier, impact on access, facility usage, budget timing, or project dependencies. It should not be a placeholder phrase; it should show why one item is scheduled before another. Clear schedule basis language helps reviewers understand the plan and reduces confusion during updates.
Related templates
Go deeper on the topic
-
Lockout/tagout (LOTO) is the procedure for controlling hazardous energy — electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, mechanical, thermal, chemical — before...
-
Job hazard analysis (JHA) — also called job safety analysis (JSA) — is the structured exercise of breaking a work task into sequential steps, identifying the...
-
A near-miss is an event that could have caused injury or damage but didn't — a slip that didn't fall, a load that shifted but didn't drop, a machine that...
-
AI governance is the framework a company uses to decide what AI tools are allowed to do, who's accountable for their outputs, what data they're allowed to...
-
Learn how organizations with hourly workers, union contracts, and shift differentials can apply compensation rules consistently and accurately at scale.
-
MangoApps 2026 Winter Release adds native shift scheduling, structural AI for surveys and wikis, and a redesigned search—unifying frontline operations in one...
-
Small team strategies to win big clients with collaboration, transparency, and agility—without enterprise overhead.
-
Employee app solutions that close communication gaps, keep frontline teams informed, and help prevent costly corporate crises.
Ready to use this template?
Get started with MangoApps and use ADA Transition Plan (28 CFR 35.150) Template with your team — pricing built for small business.