Are government websites delivering information to New Zealanders?

In June and July 2005, AccEase Ltd, on behalf of the Office for Disability Issues, undertook a survey of 150 websites owned by government agencies or agencies funded by government.

The purpose of the survey was to explore the ways in which government agencies are meeting the requirements of Objective 6 of the Disability Strategy, and in particular the requirement to take into account the needs of disabled people when providing public-access information by means of a website.

Methodologies for building sites that are accessible have been codified in the E-government Guidelines (particularly section 6) and in the international Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 1.0) to which the E-government Guidelines refer. An accessible site is one whose information and services are available to everyone, regardless of physical, sensory or cognitive disabilities, work constraints or technological barriers. To make a site accessible is to make it barrier free.

While compliance with such guidelines is not in itself sufficient to guarantee that a site is barrier free, it is an important first step – and failure to comply makes it almost certain that some users will be unable to access some information.

The percentage of the population affected by such barriers is substantial. Twenty percent of adult New Zealanders identified in the 2001 Disability Survey (Statistics New Zealand) as having a physical, sensory or cognitive disability. Fifty percent of adult New Zealanders have poor reading skills (International Literacy Survey). More than 80% of New Zealanders access the Internet via a dial-up connection when connecting from home, as do many small businesses and community agencies. Beyond that, a study by Forrester Research in the United States suggests that up to 60% of adults would benefit from accessibility features (such as the ability to enlarge text, change contrast or use keyboard commands) some of the time, perhaps in poor light or when they were tired.

How we surveyed the agencies

"It was a good site to use, with good enlargement and restful colour."

In Phase 1 of the survey, we used WCAG 1.0 as a filtering mechanism, testing sites with an automated testing tool (AccVerify from HiSoftware) in Step 1, and manually verifying checkpoints that were not amenable to automated testing (Step 2). From the results of this phase, we selected 56 sites for testing in Phase 2.

Phase 2 comprised a user test (Step 4) and a technical test of key e-government and WCAG guidelines that had not been tested in Phase 1 (Step 3).

Sites tested in Phase 2 were examined not only for their overall accessibility, but also for their accessibility to four specific disability groups disadvantaged by non-compliance (vision impaired, blind, mobility impaired, reading impaired).

Results

"Download times were longer on this site than on other sites I have tested. Navigating was a bit hard at times. The language, font size and presentation of the text was difficult."

Our survey highlights that the most accessible sites pay attention to the following points:

• Organisations should not use pdfs as the sole means of providing accountability reports and other information crucial to the purpose of the websites. Such a publication strategy excludes many users.
• All images – even decorative images – must have a text alternative that provides equivalent information to the information provided by the image. Where the image conveys no information (such as an image the same colour as the background used as a spacer between visible elements) the required text alternative is alt=””

• Low vision users require good contrast in order to use a site. Even if the contrast is sufficient to access information with difficulty, low vision users may find it extremely tiring to use a site.
• The ability to enlarge text is also a necessity for users with low vision.
• A standard list of shortcut key combinations (shortcut keys) is required for all government sites.
• Focal points for links to other site areas or for returning to the top of the page need to be large enough to be easy to use for people with a mobility impairment such as a tremor or poor co-ordination.
• Rather than focusing on compliance, a good accessibility statement attempts to consider and meet the needs of the widest possible audience.
• Home pages need to avoid presenting too much information.

Best sites overall

"Found this the best so far. Apart from finding no accessibility statement, everything was laid out in a manner I found understandable and also attractive and not confusing."

Twelve of the 150 sites achieved a score of 75 or more out of a possible 100. These were: 4 million careful owners, Bioethics Council, E-government Unit, Families Commission, Ministry for the Environment, Ministry of Transport, New Zealand Embassies, Office for Disability Issues, Office for Senior Citizens, Reduce your Rubbish, Skill New Zealand and StudyLink.

Findings by specific user group (Steps 3 and 4)

To find out which sites best served the needs of specific disability groups, we selected from the step 3 questions those known to impact on accessibility for specific groups and produced a composite score with the step 4 (user test) results. Testers with low vision found at least one question impossible to answer for three quarters of the 56 sites tested in phase 2. The three sites we found to best serve the needs of our low vision user group were those of the Ministry for the Environment, the Bioethics Council and the E-government Unit. Blind testers recorded the widest range of results of the four groups, with both the least approved and the second best site. The three sites that best served the blind testers were those of the E-government Unit, the Office for Senior Citizens, and Reduce your Rubbish. Mobility-impaired testers were less likely than those with low vision to find a task impossible, but more likely to find it very hard. The five best sites for this user group were the Ministry for the Environment, the Ministry for Culture and Heritage, 4 million careful owners, New Zealand Embassies and Reduce your rubbish. Reading impaired users were more likely than any other users to find a question impossible to answer. The four best sites were Office for Disability Issues, Population Statistics, E-government and Reduce your rubbish.

Conclusions

This survey shows that many agencies are making strenuous efforts to meet compliance requirements and to go beyond them to create truly user-centred websites. We hope this report will contribute to helping site owners and builders to understand what the barriers are, who they affect, and how they may be removed.