Best Practices Observed from Sesame Place Philadelphia

Based on analysis of Sesame Place Philadelphia’s accessibility documentation, this page highlights best practices that other organizations can learn from and adapt.

Overview

Sesame Place Philadelphia provides comprehensive accessibility documentation through:

  1. Park Accessibility Guide 2025 – Comprehensive guide covering all attractions, facilities, and services
  2. Sensory Guide – Detailed sensory profiles for each attraction

These resources demonstrate excellence in several areas while also revealing improvement opportunities.

What Sesame Place Does Well

1. Attraction-Level Granularity

Practice: Rather than building-level statements, Sesame Place provides individual profiles for each ride, show, and attraction.

Why It Matters:

  • Different areas have vastly different accessibility profiles
  • Visitors need granular information for decision-making
  • Generic statements like “partially accessible” are not actionable

Application to Other Venues:

  • Museums: Gallery-by-gallery or exhibition-specific guidance
  • Theaters: Performance-by-performance accessibility notes
  • Libraries: Floor-by-floor or section-specific information

2. Standardized Information Format

Practice: Each attraction uses the same template with consistent categories (transfer requirements, restraints, sensory characteristics).

Why It Matters:

  • Enables comparison between experiences
  • Visitors can quickly scan for relevant details
  • Reduces ambiguity

Application to Other Venues:

  • Create repeatable templates for similar spaces
  • Use consistent terminology throughout
  • Maintain parallel structure for easy comparison

3. Comprehensive Sensory Documentation

Practice: Separate sensory guide documents visual, auditory, physical, tactile, and olfactory characteristics.

Why It Matters:

  • Sensory processing needs are distinct from mobility needs
  • Advance information enables preparation and decision-making
  • Serves autistic visitors, people with PTSD, sensory processing disorders, migraine/seizure conditions

Application to Other Venues:

  • Document lighting conditions (darkness, strobe, projections)
  • Note sound characteristics (volume, types, duration)
  • Describe physical motion or tactile elements
  • Identify quiet/low-stimulation spaces

4. Transparent About Limitations

Practice: Clear statements about what is NOT accessible and specific reasons why.

Why It Matters:

  • Builds trust
  • Prevents wasted trips
  • Allows for advance planning of alternatives

Examples from Sesame Place approach:

  • “Guests must be able to support their own weight”
  • “Transfer from wheelchair required, with one step down”
  • “Must have control of head and torso”

5. Guest Assistance Pass Program

Practice: Structured accommodation program for guests who cannot wait in traditional queue lines.

Why It Matters:

  • Proactive accommodation rather than reactive
  • Maintains dignity (no public disclosure of disability)
  • Operationally feasible
  • Serves multiple disability types

Application to Other Venues:

  • Timed entry alternatives
  • Priority access systems
  • Advance booking options
  • Staff assistance programs

6. Annual Updates

Practice: Dated versions showing currency of information.

Why It Matters:

  • Accessibility information degrades over time
  • Visitors need to know information is current
  • Enables change tracking year-over-year

Application to Other Venues:

  • Set review schedule (annual minimum)
  • Update after modifications
  • Document changes
  • Archive previous versions

Improvement Opportunities

These gaps represent learning opportunities for ALL organizations:

1. Co-location of Accessibility Resources

Gap: Sensory guide is at a different URL path from the main accessibility guide.

Recommendation:

  • Create single accessibility landing page
  • Integrate sensory information into main guide or link prominently
  • Use consistent URL structure (e.g., /help/accessibility-guide/ and /help/accessibility-guide/sensory/)

Why It Matters:

  • Visitors may not discover all resources
  • Forces multiple searches
  • Creates inconsistent experience

2. HTML-First Presentation

Gap: Primary format is PDF download rather than HTML.

Recommendation:

  • Present all information in HTML first
  • Offer PDF as secondary download option
  • Enable searchability and filtering
  • Support responsive mobile design

Why It Matters:

  • PDFs have accessibility limitations
  • HTML enables searching within content
  • Mobile users benefit from responsive design
  • Screen reader users have better experience with semantic HTML

3. Interactive Filtering

Enhancement Opportunity: Enable visitors to filter attractions by accessibility criteria.

Example Use Cases:

  • “Show me rides that don’t require transfer from wheelchair”
  • “Find attractions with low auditory stimulation”
  • “Which shows offer captioning?”

Implementation:

  • Database-backed approach
  • Filter by accessibility categories
  • Sort by criteria
  • Create personalized visit plans

4. Change Tracking

Enhancement Opportunity: Document what has changed from previous versions.

Why It Matters:

  • Return visitors need to know what’s new
  • Shows commitment to currency
  • Enables visitor feedback verification

Key Takeaways for Organizations

For Theme Parks and Multi-Experience Venues

  1. Document every attraction individually
  2. Use standardized format for all attractions
  3. Include both mobility AND sensory information
  4. Provide accommodation programs, not just infrastructure
  5. Update annually at minimum

For Museums and Cultural Venues

  1. Gallery-by-gallery or exhibition-specific guidance
  2. Document temporary exhibitions separately
  3. Note sensory characteristics (lighting, sound, crowds)
  4. Provide quiet spaces and communicate their locations
  5. Include assistive listening and captioning availability

For All Organizations

  1. Be specific: “12 steps” not “some stairs”
  2. Be honest: State what is NOT accessible
  3. Be comprehensive: Cover full visitor journey (arrival → egress)
  4. Be current: Update regularly and date your content
  5. Be discoverable: Make it easy to find from multiple entry points
  6. Be HTML-first: Web content first, PDF as supplementary

Framework Contributions to This Toolkit

The Sesame Place analysis informed several toolkit enhancements:

Templates

  • Need for program/attraction-level template (repeatable format for individual experiences)
  • Enhancement to sensory profile template (standardized sensory categories)
  • Addition of accommodation program template (Guest Assistance Pass model)

Content Guidance

  • Attraction classification systems (transfer required, mobility requirements, etc.)
  • Sensory documentation categories (visual, auditory, motion, tactile, olfactory)
  • Transparent limitation language

Maintenance Checklists

  • Annual comprehensive review
  • Review after attraction modifications
  • Seasonal/special event updates
  • Guest feedback integration

Comparison: Sesame Place vs. Toolkit Rubric

Criterion Score Notes
Discoverability 4/5 Accessible from Help section; could improve with footer link
Arrival Clarity 4/5 Parking well documented; transit could be more detailed
Entrance Clarity 4/5 Clear entrance locations; could map accessible routes more explicitly
Internal Navigation 5/5 Excellent pathway documentation, rest areas, terrain notes
Facilities Clarity 5/5 Comprehensive restroom locations, companion facilities, dining
Program Accommodations 5/5 Ride-by-ride detail, GAP program, show accommodations
Transparency 5/5 Honest about limitations, clear about restrictions
Format Quality 4/5 Well-structured PDFs; would benefit from HTML-first approach

Overall Assessment: Strong example demonstrating comprehensive attraction-level documentation.

Application Beyond Theme Parks

This framework extends to:

  • Museums: Exhibition-by-exhibition accessibility profiles
  • Theaters: Performance-specific accommodations and sensory characteristics
  • Conference Centers: Room-by-room accessibility specifications
  • Shopping Centers: Store-level information and wayfinding
  • Educational Institutions: Building-by-building and classroom-level guidance
  • Civic Buildings: Department-by-department or service-point guidance

Core Principle: When a venue contains multiple distinct experiences or spaces, provide granular, location-specific information using standardized formats.

Resources

Implementation Checklist

Organizations wishing to adopt Sesame Place best practices should:

  • Audit all distinct experiences/spaces within venue
  • Create standardized template for describing accessibility of each
  • Document both mobility AND sensory characteristics
  • Establish accommodation program for queue/waiting alternatives
  • Integrate all accessibility resources into single discoverable location
  • Provide HTML-first presentation with PDF as secondary
  • Set annual review schedule
  • Train staff on accommodation procedures
  • Collect and respond to visitor feedback
  • Update after any modifications or seasonal changes

Back to Resources