Why we build accessible services
When budget holders hear that all our software needs to be accessible, we often get a few common responses:
- “The service has only a small number of users, do we need to make it accessible?”
- “How much more money will it cost?”
The usual replies are “it’s the law” and “it depends...”, which, while true, don’t always help build understanding or empathy.
Who benefits from accessible services?
In short, everyone benefits when services are accessible. Accessibility is not just for people with recognised disabilities, but making services easier to use for people in any situation, for example:
- People with a poor internet connection or using old and outdated computers.
- People in a noisy or disruptive environment.
- People who don’t speak English as a first language or who struggle with reading.
All these conditions can create barriers to people using websites and digital services. Disability is the other core reason for ensuring our services are accessible. In 2023/24, 24% of people in the UK reported having a disability. Of those people, 49% feel excluded from society because of their condition or impairment.
Accessibility is about anticipating the challenges and barriers people may face and putting in place mitigations to address them.
Understanding the need for accessible services
For the first nine years of my career, I worked in local government. My first experience conducting research with a disabled user was for a social prescribing service we were designing. This service aimed to support the socially isolated and vulnerable in the borough by connecting them with community networks, groups, and support services through community referrals.
We had no budget to recruit research participants with digital access needs. Reaching out to local groups, I connected with a blind resident, let’s call him Clive, who ran a local talking newspaper for other visually impaired residents. He agreed to spend some time with us for user research, so off we went.
Clive was a lovely guy and greeted us warmly. As I followed him into his living room, I was struck by how dark it was. What followed was a series of mistakes on my part.
Firstly, I flicked the light switch on, only to look up and realise there was no bulb in the socket. We were going to do this in the dark. I cringed for not anticipating it. Clive just laughed and sat down on the edge of his sofa. I hadn’t considered that his house would be quite so gloomy. I looked at my colleague for reassurance, couldn’t make out his face, so just sat down next to Clive on the sofa. My colleague looked around for another seat, couldn’t see one, so squeezed up next to me.
I started explaining what we wanted to do. I said we wanted to observe him using his usual computer setup while he tried to use our new website. My eyes had adjusted a bit by this point, so I looked around and asked where his computer was. With his foot, he kicked a box next to him on the floor. “It’s here,” he said. I then realised there was no computer screen in sight. We needed to observe where he was on the website throughout the session, in order to take notes and understand where to make changes. My heart sank as I explained the issue to Clive, asking if he would be free again the following week. He laughed again and said, “I thought you might say that.” From beside the sofa, he pulled out a small monitor. “I haven’t needed to use this in years but thought it might be useful,” he explained. A big sigh of relief, again kicking myself for not anticipating it.
As Clive booted up the computer and started navigating to the website, I began to realise how different the experience was for people with visual impairments.
Firstly, the screen reading software. It was quiet at first, so Clive turned it up so I could hear it. I couldn’t understand a thing. Clive, like many screen reader users, listens at 300%+ speed, which is completely incomprehensible to the untrained ear. Here is a quick video to show what that sounds like. Thankfully, Clive agreed to slow it down to a more manageable 150% speed for the session.
Secondly, navigating a web page. There is no scrolling up or down a page for screen reader users. There’s no use of a mouse to click on things. Clive explained that screen reader users typically navigate a page in one of three ways: through lists of links, buttons, or headers. If you go to a webpage and hit TAB on your keyboard a few times, you will see the focus of your navigation dart around the page. This is how users with screen readers consume web content, with each bit of information being read out as a user tabs through.
What followed was an incredibly insightful session. There were issues with the navigation on some pages, the context on some links and buttons, and inconsistencies in header layouts. What really stood out to me, though, was the completely different lived experience Clive had. He expressed how happy he was that we were there testing with him, as the Council website was a nightmare for him to navigate, and he struggled to find basic information that he needed. The reason he started the talking newspaper was to help other visually impaired residents get key local information that they would otherwise be unable to get, partly due to poor consideration of accessibility on the Council’s website.
How much does It cost?
If we incorporate accessibility into our designs from the start, it shouldn’t cost any more to make our service accessible. If we design without accessibility in mind at the start and then need to make remedial changes to fix it, then it will cost more money.
Think about a Council laying pavement for a new road. They don’t build the whole pavement, then remove the end blocks so they can drop the kerb and allow wheeled access. Councils understand that a dropped kerb needs to be there at the beginning, and they factor it in from the start, causing no additional cost.
It’s a small thing to do, but it has a huge impact on those who need it. Wheelchair users are physically unable to access pavements without a dropped kerb, like how people who use screen readers are unable to navigate or understand web pages if they are not designed properly.
Finally, making things accessible doesn’t only benefit those with access needs. If you drop a kerb, it’s not just for people in wheelchairs; it makes it easier to traverse for those with pushchairs or on roller skates. If you create websites that are clearly laid out, in plain English and semantically correct, it doesn’t just help users with screen readers. It makes it easier to understand for those who don’t speak English as a first language, who are neurodiverse, or are trying to get information as quickly as possible.
What’s the point?
There are three key points I want to get across:
- People with disabilities are disadvantaged in so many ways in life; using digital services shouldn’t be another one.
- When we design and build with accessibility from the beginning, it doesn’t cost any more and saves us money in the long run.
- When we make services accessible for anyone, we make them better for everyone.
1 comment
Comment by Graham Spicer posted on
Great post, couldn't agree more. Great insight into how people actually use screen readers