Small Devices, Large Changes: Investigating the Impact of a University-Government 3D-Printed Assistive Technology Program on Residents with Disabilities
Krystal Yangmengzi Zhang, Erin Higgins, Agnny Vannessa Morant, Foad Hamidi · 2025 · ASSETS 2025: 27th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility · doi:10.1145/3663547.3746323
Summary
This paper investigates a DIY Assistive Technology (DIY-AT) program created through a collaboration between a university makerspace at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC) and the Maryland Department of Disabilities Assistive Technology (MDOD-AT) program. Using an Action Research methodology over more than two years and across three iterative research cycles, the authors examine how institutional, technical, and informational infrastructure evolved to support the production and distribution of 3D-printed assistive devices to Maryland residents with disabilities. The program leveraged an existing state AT lending library network to distribute free, customized devices to people who might not otherwise have access to assistive technology due to cost, insurance limitations, or a lack of commercially available solutions that meet their specific needs. The research draws on interviews with 16 device recipients and 7 MDOD-AT staff members, supplemented by over 200 pages of program documentation including email correspondence, meeting notes, and device tracking records. The paper maps the full production pipeline from device selection and 3D printing through quality assurance and distribution, identifying key stakeholders including university students and faculty as makers, MDOD-AT staff as coordinators and distributors, and recipients as end users. The authors propose expanding the existing three-stakeholder model to include a fourth role: community advocates, recipients who actively promote the program and encourage others to request devices. The study documents how the program evolved its infrastructure over time, developing shared tracking systems, dedicated staffing, and institutional support mechanisms to sustain large-scale device distribution.
Key findings
Recipients reported meaningful improvements in daily living activities from relatively simple 3D-printed devices such as book page holders, jar openers, reading bars, and handle grippers. Several participants with conditions like Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, POTS, and small fiber neuropathy described how devices reduced joint pain and strain during everyday tasks. The free provision of devices lowered barriers to experimentation, with recipients more willing to try assistive technology they might not have purchased. Importantly, none of the recipients had created or modified their own devices after receiving them, but many expressed strong interest in learning 3D modeling and printing skills if beginner-friendly resources were available. Several participants described creative past experiences modifying household items, suggesting latent maker capacity. The program faced significant visibility and access challenges: 4 of 10 interviewed recipients could not recall how they initially found the request form, multiple participants assumed they could only request one device, and some had difficulty relocating the program website for repeat requests. A physical therapist participant reported that 70% of his clients who received devices through the program eventually began requesting specific devices independently. Community advocates organized presentations at senior living communities, generating over 100 new device requests. Quality and material limitations of consumer-grade 3D printers were also noted, with one wheelchair user finding a bottle opener too fragile for her needs.
Relevance
This research offers a practical, replicable model for scaling low-cost assistive technology distribution through cross-sector partnerships between universities and government disability services. For accessibility practitioners, the findings highlight how even simple, inexpensive 3D-printed devices can meaningfully improve daily living for people with a wide range of disabilities. The study underscores the importance of program visibility and clear communication channels — recurring challenges that mirror accessibility issues in digital service design. The emergence of community advocates as a fourth stakeholder role provides a template for building grassroots support and sustainability in AT programs. The paper also reveals a gap between recipients desire to customize or create their own devices and the technical barriers to doing so, suggesting opportunities for accessible maker tools and training. For organizations considering similar programs, the documented infrastructure evolution — from informal arrangements to systematic tracking, dedicated staffing, and quality assurance processes — provides a roadmap for scaling DIY-AT initiatives.
Tags: DIY assistive technology · 3D printing · action research · makerspace · university-government collaboration · assistive technology distribution · disability services · digital fabrication · community advocacy
Standards referenced: Assistive Technology Act