Appendix M - Accommodations and Interview-Policy Checklist

Turn every answer into a setup

“Use your preferred editor” is not a tool policy. A familiar editor may contain ordinary completion, an AI coding extension, a cloud clipboard, and an automatic meeting transcript. “Breaks are fine” does not establish when they occur. “We support accommodations” does not make captions appear in the call.

The useful artifact is therefore not a long list of possible questions. It is one record that carries each material answer through three stages:

ask -> confirm in writing -> configure or schedule

A policy is settled only when the environment matches the answer. An access arrangement is settled only when the people and tools involved can deliver it.

This appendix is practical preparation, not legal advice. Rights, employer obligations, documentation requirements, and privacy rules vary by location and circumstance. Use the employer’s official process and current guidance for your jurisdiction.

Open one record when the schedule arrives

Copy this for each company. Record only facts that change what you will ask, bring, enable, disable, or rehearse.

INTERVIEW ACCESS AND POLICY RECORD

Company / role:
Recruiter or coordinator:
Urgent day-of contact:

ROUND MAP
Round:
Date, time zone, duration:
Location or platform:
Expected working surface:
Planned break before or after:

ACCESS ARRANGEMENTS
Adjustment or assistive tool:
Official contact or process:
Confirmed wording:
Who will make it available:
When and where it was tested:
Day-of fallback:

TOOL RULES
Editor or assessment environment:
Autocomplete:
AI assistants or agents:
Documentation and search:
Personal or scratch notes:
External libraries and third-party help:
Recording, transcription, and screenshots:

TAKE-HOME, IF ANY
Time boundary:
Allowed dependencies and references:
AI and attribution rule:
Required submission contents:
Confidentiality and deletion boundary:

SOURCE OF TRUTH
Policy document or message:
Confirmed by:
Date:
Unresolved question and owner:

“Documentation allowed” is still unresolved if it could mean either official API references or unrestricted web search. “Autocomplete allowed” needs one more question when the editor combines identifier completion with generated functions. Expand ambiguous words until they describe a setup you can actually reproduce.

Route an access request without telling your life story

Ask the recruiter for the official accommodations route. Describe the barrier and the adjustment that would let you participate. The person handling the request may need information required by that process; the interviewer usually needs only the operating instruction for the round.

Hi [recruiter],

I would like to request an accommodation for the interview process. For
[round or format], I need [specific adjustment] so that I can participate in
the intended assessment. Please send me the official request process and let
me know how the arrangement will be confirmed and tested before the loop.

Thanks,
[name]

Name the adjustment concretely. Depending on the barrier, that might be live captions, written prompts, a screen-reader-compatible document, keyboard-only operation, a larger or high-contrast working surface, predictable breaks, extra setup time, an alternative input method, or a different round schedule. The useful level of detail is the level at which someone can make the change.

If the arrangement depends on a platform, ask for a practice environment or a short dry run. A generic accessibility claim cannot tell you whether the exact prompt, editor, run control, and submission path work with your setup.

Ask policy questions in one short message

Do not send an inventory when the company has already supplied a clear policy. Read it first, mark only the gaps, and ask the questions whose answers change your preparation.

Could you confirm the written tool policy for the coding and design rounds?
I want to configure the environment before the interview. The remaining
questions are:

- [local editor or supplied environment]
- [ordinary autocomplete versus generated code]
- [official documentation versus broader search]
- [scratch notes or prepared project notes]
- [AI assistants, agents, or meeting summaries]
- [recording, transcription, or screenshots]

If different rounds have different rules, could you note the boundary for
each one?

For a take-home, ask separately about the clock, permitted libraries and references, AI use and attribution, collaboration, what must be submitted, and whether company material must be deleted afterward. A live-coding rule does not automatically govern a take-home, and a preparation rule does not govern assessed work.

Make the confirmation executable

Suppose the written answer permits a local editor, ordinary completion, tests, and official language documentation. It forbids generated code, AI chat, meeting summaries, recording, screenshots, and third-party help. Project notes are allowed only in project discussions. Captions and written prompts have also been approved.

That answer should produce visible changes:

CONFIGURE
[ ] Clean editor profile selected
[ ] AI extensions, agents, and cloud helpers disabled
[ ] Allowed completion behavior verified
[ ] Clean browser profile and permitted documentation ready
[ ] Recorder, transcriber, meeting summary, and screenshots disabled
[ ] Notes separated by round; no prompt-specific solution material open

VERIFY ACCESS
[ ] Captions work in the actual meeting platform
[ ] Written prompt can be reached and read with the intended setup
[ ] Approved input, display, timing, or break arrangement is scheduled
[ ] Alternate medium and escalation contact are known

REHEARSE
[ ] Join, share, read, work, run, and submit through the actual path
[ ] Confirmations are reachable without exposing private correspondence
[ ] One ordinary failure can be handled without abandoning the round

Do not infer permission from silence. Leave a nonessential uncertain feature off until the policy owner answers. Do not quietly disable an approved assistive tool because it processes language or changes input; confirm it through the access route so the interview team receives the right instruction.

Confirm the boundary at the start

Use one sentence when the rule affects the opening minutes. A long recital can make a settled matter sound unsettled.

My written instructions allow [tools] and ask me to disable [features]. I am
using [configured environment]. Does that match the setup for this round?

For an approved arrangement:

The access confirmation for this round includes [arrangement]. Is it available
here, or should we contact [coordinator] before the clock starts?

For notes:

I have a blank scratchpad for reasoning and a short list of questions for the
end. I will not use prepared solution notes.

When the day contradicts the record

An interviewer’s casual “use whatever you normally use” should not silently override narrower written instructions. Nor should a missing caption, an unexpected AI panel, or an unannounced transcription bot be absorbed as if nothing changed.

Use the same four moves:

1. PAUSE the affected work or clock.
2. NAME the observed mismatch without speculation.
3. REFER to the written confirmation.
4. RESOLVE through the named owner, or agree on a workable alternate path.

Keep the language factual:

The prep note allows official documentation but does not mention general
search. Which boundary should I follow here?

An AI completion panel opened in this editor. I have closed it because the
written policy does not allow AI assistance.

My confirmation says captions will be available, but I do not see them. Could
we enable them before starting or contact the coordinator?

This tool is not usable with my approved setup because [specific barrier].
Could we use [alternate medium] while preserving the same task?

I see a note-taking bot in the call. Is the interview being recorded or
transcribed, and what consent and retention policy applies?

Escalation is appropriate when the missing arrangement prevents participation, a required tool creates an access barrier, a material instruction conflicts with the written rule, recording begins without a clear agreement, or a take-home’s evaluation boundary changes after submission. Ask the recruiter or coordinator to realign the process. Do not spend the round arguing policy with an interviewer who may not own it.

Keep assessed material inside its boundary

Unless the company explicitly permits otherwise:

• do not record another person or an interview without consent;
• do not upload proprietary prompts or company documents to third-party tools;
• do not publish prompts, screenshots, transcripts, or take-home material;
• do not let an automatic assistant summarize a confidential conversation;
• remove company material from local systems when the agreed process ends.

If AI is allowed, permission does not transfer responsibility for the result. Follow the stated disclosure and attribution rule. Understand the suggestions you accept, test the submitted work, protect confidential inputs, and be prepared to explain every decision. The governing rule is the current instruction for this company and this stage, not an old forum answer or another employer’s policy.

The card to carry into the loop

The full record belongs in preparation. The day-of version can be much smaller:

THIS ROUND
Working surface:
Allowed:
Disabled:
Access arrangement:
Written source:
If conditions differ, contact:

PAUSE -> NAME -> REFER -> RESOLVE

The record has done its job when it no longer competes for attention. The environment matches the written boundary, the access arrangement is real, and one known person owns any mismatch. The interview can then spend its time on the work it intended to observe.

Related links

• Accommodations, Accessibility, AI, and Tool Policies
• Remote and In-Person Mechanics
• Day-of Checklists
• Company Research Template