A number of suggestions are made to aid research aimed at developing UD evaluation in buildings. (1) Design standards and guidelines should be contested or validated where possible; (2) evaluation criteria should be contextual; (3) it may be more practical to have separate methodologies for contextualising UD to allow for the creation of an evaluating tool that is practical in use. Additionally, there is a difficulty in establishing a clear basis for evaluating how empathetic buildings are without expanding the methodological horizons of UD evaluation. Implications for Rehabilitation For universal design (UD) evaluation to address human need requires methods that are culturally, temporally, and typologically specific. Practical instruments for measuring UD need to be divorced from but contingent upon methods than can address local specificities. The process of evaluation can provide knowledge that can contest or validate the literature based sources such as design guidelines, or standards. UD evaluation requires constant renewal by searching for new, flexible strategies that can respond to socio-cultural change.

No abstract