Before leading inclusive design at GFT, I spent nearly two decades as an occupational therapist specializing in accessibility and functional design. My work was grounded in understanding how people engage with the spaces around them and recognizing the power of design to support that experience. To analyze what people do in a space, we use a core model that examines the intersection of the person, the environment, and the occupation (the task at hand). According to the CDC, one in four U.S. adults lives with a disability — a reminder that inclusive design isn’t niche; it’s mainstream. In my recent blog “Inclusive Design for In-Between Spaces,” I wrote about how the journey from home to work — sidewalks, parking garages, bus shelters, transit hubs — often determines who has access and who doesn’t. The more time I spent helping people adapt to poorly designed environments, the clearer it became: the surroundings themselves needed to adapt. That realization now guides GFT’s inclusive design process — one that tests real-world usability with diverse users before designs are finalized. 

I saw this in homes with narrow hallways, where someone using a walker struggled to turn a corner or manage stairs. I saw it in community settings, where uneven sidewalks, heavy doors, and confusing signage made simple trips more difficult than they needed to be. These real-world challenges reveal how the built environment can either support or hinder a person’s independence. Even ADA-accessible places can be challenging. An entrance can be compliant in width, door force, and slope and still hard to use independently. For a wheelchair user, access depends on more than whether each element passes on its own. It depends on whether the full sequence of actions can be carried out safely, smoothly, and without excessive effort.  

The disconnect between the standards on paper and what people experienced is what pushed me towards inclusive design. These insights now inform GFT’s inclusive design strategies, helping the firm test design assumptions early and adapt solutions before construction. 

Testing design decisions with diverse user groups can reveal insights we might not otherwise see. Rather than evaluating static code requirements, we analyze how people enter, move through, wait in, and transition between spaces, identifying where physical exertion, sensory processing, and cognitive demand converge. This mindset is foundational to GFT’s design process. It encourages teams to examine how people enter, move through, and wait in, or transition between spaces, and to identify where some environments make those moments more difficult. By focusing on these typical interactions, inclusive design at GFT aims to create built environments that work more intuitively for more people, not by adding special features, but by making thoughtful choices from the start.

With this lens, GFT teams design environments with a clearer understanding of how people navigate them.

The clinical lens exposes what standard review cannot. Cognitive processing and physical exertion draw from the same energy reserves, so a person using a walker who navigates an incline while decoding complex signage and filtering out auditory echo faces compounding systemic load. Our work considers the total demand: improving the clarity of pathways from entrance to platform, designing floor-to-floor connections that account for biomechanical effort and visual logic, and enhancing lighting and signage for better visibility and orientation.

Inclusive design may focus on creating welcoming entries, intuitive lobby layouts, clear sightlines, and accessible interior routes that support visitors of all ages and abilities. In some spaces, that might also mean addressing floor glare that affects the balance of older adults or lobby acoustics that become overwhelming for people with sensory sensitivities.

The occupational therapy lens is also critical. For a neurodivergent student, the imperceptible flicker of an LED light fixture can act as a micro-stressor, contributing to cumulative cognitive fatigue by early afternoon. GFT considers environmental conditions that shape regulation and participation, including sensory comfort, adaptable layouts, and lighting approaches that support different learning styles and energy levels throughout the day.

Across all these projects, the intent is the same: thoughtful design approaches can make daily experiences easier, more user-friendly, reduce confusion, and help people navigate their environments with greater confidence.

Moving from accessible to human-centered design transforms how people experience spaces — increasing usability, satisfaction, and community trust.