Accessibility  Technical information about the digital estate’s accessibility

The University of Leeds is committed to making its digital estate accessible, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.

Compliance status 

The digital estate is partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard, due to the non-compliances and exemptions listed below.

You can find out about the sites and applications that we tested.

Non-accessible content

The content listed below is non-accessible for the following reasons.

Non-compliance with the accessibility regulations

The following are detailed lists, grouped by website type, of parts of our digital estate that are not compliant with the accessibility regulations. The groupings list the relevant sites, and each non-compliance notes on which of those sites that issue appears.

The sites covered here are a representative sample of the full University web estate. See our Mobile app accessibility statements page for information about the compliance of rest of our digital estate.

We are applying our Web Accessibility Project plan to improve these parts of our digital estate and will endeavour to resolve as many of the accessibility issues listed below as soon as possible.

For the parts of the digital estate that aren’t in scope for the Web Accessibility Project, the University’s Governance, Risk and Compliance team is addressing non-compliances by working through a prioritised list of sites and systems with internal teams and external suppliers.

Main university site

These non-compliances apply to the main University of Leeds site – leeds.ac.uk.

  • Some pages have links that don’t have any clickable text or other content. This can be confusing for keyboard and screen reader users as the function or purpose of the link will not be obvious. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (Level A). We plan to either remove these links or include link text by the end of August 2022.
  • There are multiple pages on the website that contain an illogical heading structure where the first heading on a page is an H2 or H3. This can make it difficult for a screen reader user to navigate around the page. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A) and 2.4.6 Headings and Labels (Level AA). This issue is part of our backlog and we hope to have it addressed before the end of 2022.
  • There are empty headings on several pages. This can cause confusion for screen reader users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A) and 2.4.6 Headings and Labels (Level AA). This issue is part of our backlog and we hope to have it addressed before the end of 2022.

  • There are a handful of instances where images have non-descriptive alt text. This can cause confusion for screen reader users or mean they miss information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A). Where this has been found to be an issue with third-party content, we are in the process of asking for this to be addressed, subject to the provider’s timelines. For University-owned content, we hope to have these issues solved by the end of Q3 2022.

  • There are several instances where images are missing alternative text. This makes it impossible for a screen reader user to know what it is depicting. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A). We hope to have these issues solved by the end of Q3 2022.

  • There are several links where the link text isn’t descriptive enough. This can make a site harder to navigate for screen reader users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.1 Info and Relationships and 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (Level A). This issue is part of our backlog and we hope to have it addressed before the end of 2022.

  • There are some links that only convey their function through a change of colour and/or the colour doesn’t contrast enough with the surrounding text. When links share the same size, weight, style, and font face as surrounding text, they lack purpose and identity, and can be hard for users to distinguish from surrounding text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.3 Sensory Characteristics (Level A), 1.4.1 Use of Color (Level A) and 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast (Level AA). Where this has been found to be an issue with third-party content, we are in the process of asking for this to be addressed, subject to the provider’s timelines.

  • There are unlabelled form fields and cases where the form label is not linked correctly to the form element. On the ‘Staff A-Z’ page there is a form field ambiguously labelled ‘Search’. This may make it difficult for some assistive technology users to successfully submit information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose (Level AA), 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A), 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A). Where this has been found to be an issue with third-party content, we are in the process of asking for this to be addressed, subject to the provider’s timelines. For internal pages, this issue is part of our backlog and we hope to have it addressed before the end of 2022.

  • Some download pages have an empty button or ambiguous button labelling. Providing descriptive button labelling will allow users to make an informed decision whether to activate a button or not. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose (Level AA) and 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A). Where this has been found to be an issue with third-party content, we are in the process of asking for this to be addressed, subject to the provider’s timelines. For internal pages, this issue is part of our backlog and we hope to have it addressed before the end of 2022.

  • The ‘Undergraduate open days’ page contains a form with mandatory form fields denoted by a red asterisk. These mandatory markings are hard to see. Furthermore, there is no explanation of what the asterisk means. This will frustrate a screen reader user. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose (Level AA) and 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A). This has been found to be an issue with third-party content. We are in the process of asking for this to be addressed, subject to the provider’s timelines.

  • Screen reader users aren’t properly notified of errors when submitting the ‘Undergraduate open days’ form. This will make it harder for them to successfully complete a form. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 3.3.3 Error Suggestion (Level AA) and 4.1.3 Status Messages (Level AA). This has been found to be an issue with third-party content. We are in the process of asking for this to be addressed, subject to the provider’s timelines.

  • A news page has a moving gif animation that cannot be paused. This content is triggered automatically. Users who require more time to read and understand content may have difficulty reading the content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.2.2 Pause, Stop, Hide (Level A). We aim to resolve this issue by the end of September 2022.

  • There are a data tables missing the correct code to show which cells are heading cells. On the ‘Staff A-Z’ page when a user performs a search, the results are in the form of data table that sometimes has empty data cells. This will make it difficult for screen reader users to understand the content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A). This issue is part of our backlog and we hope to have it addressed before the end of 2022.

  • There are objects that don’t contain alternative or fallback content. The object element needs a text alternative so that users of screen readers know the contents of the object. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A). We aim to resolve this issue by the end of September 2022.

  • Some embedded content is in a frame that does not contain a descriptive title. When a screen reader user needs to know the purpose and content of a frame. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A). Where this has been found to be an issue with third-party content, we are in the process of asking for this to be addressed, subject to the provider’s timelines. For internal pages, we hope to have the issue addressed before the end of September 2022.

  • Some video and audio isn’t provided with a text alternative. People cannot, or struggle, hear the audio may be unaware if they are missing any information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.2.1 Audio-only and Video-only (Prerecorded) (Level A) and 1.2.3 Audio Description or Media Alternative (Prerecorded) (Level A). We hope to have the issue addressed before the end of 2022.

  • Some video isn’t provided with audio description. People who have limited or no sight might miss information that is only shown and not announced. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.2.3 Audio Description or Media Alternative (Prerecorded) (Level A) and 1.2.5 Audio Description (Prerecorded) (Level AA). We hope to have the issue addressed before the end of 2022.

  • Many downloadable documents, such as PDFs, available on the site have issues that will prevent some users some accessing their content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria such as 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A), 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A), 1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence (Level A), 2.4.2 Page Titled (Level A), and 3.1.1 Language of Page (Level A). We hope to have these issues addressed before the end of 2022.

  • Some pages have duplicate ID errors. This can be problematic for screen reader users that rely on this attribute to accurately convey relationships between different parts of content to users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 Parsing (Level A).

  • There are combinations of colours that fall below the minimum contrast levels that make the text difficult to read. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (Level AA). Where this has been found to be an issue with third-party content, we are in the process of asking for this to be addressed, subject to the provider’s timelines. For internal pages, we hope to have the issue addressed before the end of September 2022.

  • When increasing the size of the text on the ‘Undergraduate open days’ page, the size of the text within the drop-down boxes does not increase. Small text can be difficult to read for certain people. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.4 Resize text (Level AA). This has been found to be an issue with third-party content. We are in the process of asking for this to be addressed, subject to the provider’s timelines.

  • When increasing the size of the text on the ‘Homepage’, some of the content starts to overlap in the events area. This makes it harder to read the information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.4 Resize text (Level AA). This issue is part of our backlog and we hope to have it addressed before the end of 2022.

A digital accessibility audit of the main University site was delivered in July 2022. Any non-compliances on the main University website will be addressed as soon as possible or as described in this statement.

Students and staff

These non-compliances apply to the following sites and URLs:

  • For Students - students.leeds.ac.uk
  • Student Education Service - ses.leeds.ac.uk
  • Careers Centre - careerweb.leeds.ac.uk 
  • For Staff - forstaff.leeds.ac.uk
  • HR - hr.leeds.ac.uk
  • Wellbeing, Safety and Health - wsh.leeds.ac.uk

All sites in this group are part of the Web Accessibility Project. The project plan is currently being reassessed and the dates for when these sites will be addressed haven’t been determined yet. However, we expect that work will begin before the end of 2022. We have noted against the relevant issue where improvements are expected earlier.

  • Some images and graphical content don’t have a text alternative, so the information in them isn’t available to people using a screen reader. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text content (Level A). This issue is present across all the sites in this group except for Wellbeing, Safety and Health.
  • Some non-live audio and video content does not have a descriptive text transcript or audio description. This will make it harder for blind or partially sighted people to access information in this media content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.1 Audio-only and Video-only (Prerecorded) (Level A). This issue is on the Careers Centre site.
  • Page regions are poorly defined, lists aren’t always marked correctly and sometimes there’s a lack of relevant headings. People who are blind or have low vision may struggle to always understand what the page is communicating. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A). This affects the For Staff and Careers Centre sites.
  • Navigational order isn’t always clear. This can create difficulty people who rely on assistive technologies that read content aloud. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence (Level A). This affects the Careers Centre, For Staff and HR sites.
  • Autocomplete could be set on some input fields but isn’t. his may reduce ease of use for people with learning disabilities or cognitive or motor impairments. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose (Level AA). This affects the HR site.
  • Colour is used as the sole way of distinguishing links in some cases. This can cause difficulties for people who are colourblind or have low vision. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.1 Use of Color (Level A). This affects the HR and For Staff sites.
  • Text doesn’t always have high enough contrast against its background. People with low vision may have difficulty reading some text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (Level AA). This issue is on the Student Education Service, HR, For Staff and Careers Centre sites. This issue will be improved on the For Students site in July 2022.
  • Buttons and some links don’t have strong enough contrast against their backgrounds. People with low vision may have difficulty perceiving parts of the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast (Level AA). This affects the Student Education Service, HR sites.
  • Some functionality isn't accessible by keyboard. This may mean the site isn't fully operable by people with no vision and those who rely on keyboard navigation/operation or similar. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.1 Keyboard (Level A). This affects the Student site in particular where a map embed cannot be used properly by keyboard.
  • There is some content that moves automatically that cannot be paused. This can be challenging for neurodivergent people. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.2.2 Pause, Stop, Hide (Level A). This affects the Careers Centre and For Staff sites.
  • There's no way to skip repeated navigation and other repeated parts of a page. This could make it more difficult to reach the main content of a web page for people using screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (Level A). This affects the HR and For Staff sites.
  • Page titles aren't always descriptive enough to indicate to people where they are and what is available on the page. This may make the browsing experience difficult for blind people, those with low vision, people with cognitive disabilities and those use voice navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.2 Page Titled (Level A). This affects the Careers Centre, Student Education Service, HR and For Staff sites.
  • The navigation order of links isn't always intuitive. This can make the experience confusing for screen reader and screen magnification users, as well as people who otherwise rely on keyboard navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.3 Focus Order (Level A). This affects the Careers Centre, Student Education Service, HR and For Staff sites.
  • Link purpose isn't always clear from each link's text. This can be confusing for keyboard and screen reader users as the function or purpose of the link will not be obvious. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (Level A). This affects the Careers Centre and For Staff sites.
  • There might not always be more than one clear route to a page. Not all our sites have sitemaps, for example. People with cognitive impairments or who use assistive technology may find it's harder to get to the information they need. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.5 Multiple Ways (Level AA). This affects the HR and For Staff sites.
  • Page headings and labels for interactive elements aren't always intuitive. This can make things more challenging for screen reader users or those who have cognitive disabilities. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.6 Headings and Labels (Level AA). This affects the Student Education Service and Student sites.
  • It's not always completely clear which part of the page has focus. People who rely on keyboard navigation may struggle to move around some parts of the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.7 Focus Visible (Level AA). This affects the Student Education Service and For Staff sites.
  • Some buttons don’t have sufficient alternative text and labelling. This may cause problems for people using screen readers and speech navigation software. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A). This affects the Student Education Service, HR and For Staff sites.
  • Page language isn't properly noted in the page code. People who use screen readers may find some content more difficult to understand. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.1.1 Language of Page (Level A). This affects the Careers Centre site.
  • The search bar has a character limit that isn't communicated. People who are blind or have cognitive or learning disabilities may not always know an error has occurred. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.1 Error Identification (Level A). This affects the Careers Centre site.
  • Labels and instructions on input fields could better describe what users should do. People who use screen readers or have cognitive or learning disabilities may struggle to always enter the correct information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A). This affects the For Staff site.
  • Some of the page's HTML may not be set in a way that meets best practice. This may cause operation difficulties for some assistive technologies or mean that kind of software doesn't accurately communicate content to users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 Parsing (Level A). This affects the Careers Centre, HR and For Staff sites.
  • Use of mark-up languages like ARIA, form labels, frame titles and more doesn't always follow correct practice. User of screen readers, screen magnifiers, and speech navigation software, may find the correct information or operation isn't always clear. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A). This affects the Careers Centre, HR and For Staff sites.
  • There are unlabelled form fields and cases where the form label is not linked correctly to the form element. This may make it difficult for some assistive technology users to successfully submit information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose (Level AA), 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A), 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A). This affects the Careers Centre site.

Faculties

These non-compliances apply to the following sites and URLs:

  • Arts, Humanities and Cultures - ahc.leeds.ac.uk
  • Biological Sciences - biologicalsciences.leeds.ac.uk
  • Business School - business.leeds.ac.uk
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences - eps.leeds.ac.uk
  • Environment - environment.leeds.ac.uk
  • Medicine and Health - medicinehealth.leeds.ac.uk
  • Social Sciences - essl.leeds.ac.uk

All sites in this group are part of the Web Accessibility Project. The project plan is currently being reassessed and the dates for when these sites will be addressed haven’t been determined yet. However, work could begin in 2023.

  • Some images and graphical content don’t have a text alternative. Some information may be lost for people who are blind or have low vision. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A). This affects all sites in this group.
  • Page regions may be poorly defined, lists aren’t always marked correctly and sometimes there’s a lack of relevant headings. People who are blind or have low vision may struggle to always understand what the page is communicating. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A). This affects all sites in this group.
  • Navigational order isn’t always clear. This can create difficulty people who rely on assistive technologies that read content aloud. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence (Level A). This affects all sites in this group.
  • Text doesn’t always have high enough contrast against its background. People with low vision may have difficulty reading some text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (Level AA). This affects all sites in this group.
  • There's no way to skip repeated navigation and other repeated parts of a page. This could make it more difficult to reach the main content of a web page for people using screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (Level A). This affects all sites in this group.
  • Page titles aren't always descriptive enough to indicate to people where they are and what is available on the page. This may make the browsing experience difficult for blind people, those with low vision, people with cognitive disabilities and those use voice navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.2 Page Titled (Level A). This affects all sites in this group.
  • The navigation order of links isn't always intuitive. This can make the experience confusing for screen reader and screen magnification users, as well as people who otherwise rely on keyboard navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.3 Focus Order (Level A). This affects all sites in this group.
  • Link purpose isn't always clear from each link's text. This can be confusing for keyboard and screen reader users as the function or purpose of the link will not be obvious. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (Level A). This affects all sites in this group.
  • There might not always be more than one clear route to a page. Not all of our sites have sitemaps, for example. People with cognitive impairments or who use assistive technology may find it's harder to get to the information they need. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.5 Multiple Ways (Level AA). This affects all sites in this group.
  • Some buttons don’t have sufficient alternative text and labelling. This may cause problems for people using screen readers and speech navigation software. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A). This affects all sites in this group.
  • Some of the page's HTML may not be set in a way that meets best practice. This may cause operation difficulties for some assistive technologies or mean that kind of software doesn't accurately communicate content to users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 Parsing (Level A). This affects all sites in this group.
  • Use of mark-up languages like ARIA, form labels, frame titles and more doesn't always follow correct practice. User of screen readers, screen magnifiers, and speech navigation software, may find the correct information or operation isn't always clear. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A). This affects all sites in this group.

Leisure and facilities

These non-compliances apply to the following sites and URLs:

  • Great Food at Leeds - gfal.leeds.ac.uk
  • Sport and Physical Activity - sport.leeds.ac.uk
  • Meet in Leeds - meetinleeds.co.uk
  • Facilities Directorate - facilitiesdirectorate.leeds.ac.uk

All sites in this group are part of the Web Accessibility Project. The project plan is currently being reassessed and the dates for when these sites will be addressed haven’t been determined yet. However, work could begin in 2023.

  • Some images and graphical content don’t have a text alternative, so the information in them isn’t available to people using a screen reader. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text content (Level A). This affects the Meet in Leeds, Sport and Good Food at Leeds sites.
  • Page regions are poorly defined, lists aren’t always marked correctly and sometimes there’s a lack of relevant headings. People who are blind or have low vision may struggle to always understand what the page is communicating. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A). This affects the Meet in Leeds, Sport, Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • Navigational order isn’t always clear. This can create difficulty people who rely on assistive technologies that read content aloud. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence (Level A). This affects the Facilities Directorate, Sport and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • Autocomplete could be set on some input fields but isn’t. his may reduce ease of use for people with learning disabilities or cognitive or motor impairments. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose (Level AA). This affects the Sport and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • Colour is used as the sole way of distinguishing links in some cases. This can cause difficulties for people who are colourblind or have low vision. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.1 Use of Color (Level A). This affects the Facilities Directorate, Meet in Leeds, and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • Text doesn’t always have high enough contrast against its background. People with low vision may have difficulty reading some text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (Level AA). This affects the Sport site.
  • Content doesn’t always adjust well to page zoom or smaller screens. Users may find this site isn't always optimised for mobile viewing and those who need to zoom in to view content might not see all the information. suitable This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.10 Reflow (Level AA). This affects the Sport site.
  • Buttons and some links don’t have strong enough contrast against their backgrounds. People with low vision may have difficulty perceiving parts of the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast (Level AA). This affects the Sport site.
  • It’s not possible to dismiss some hover-over content. This may disadvantage users with low vision, users who increase mouse cursor size, and those with motor difficulties. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.13 Content on Hover or Focus (Level AA). This affects the Sport site.
  • Some functionality isn't accessible by keyboard. This may mean the site isn't fully operable by people with no vision and those who rely on keyboard navigation/operation or similar. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.1 Keyboard (Level A). This affects the Sport and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • There's no way to skip repeated navigation and other repeated parts of a page. This could make it more difficult to reach the main content of a Web page for people using screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (Level A). This affects the Sprot and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • Page titles aren't always descriptive enough to indicate to people where they are and what is available on the page. This may make the browsing experience difficult for blind people, those with low vision, people with cognitive disabilities and those use voice navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.2 Page Titled (Level A). This affects the Facilities Directorate, Sport and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • The navigation order of links isn't always intuitive. This can make the experience confusing for screen reader and screen magnification users, as well as people who otherwise rely on keyboard navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.3 Focus Order (Level A). This affects the Great Food at Leeds site.
  • Link purpose isn't always clear from each link's text. This can be confusing for keyboard and screen reader users as the function or purpose of the link will not be obvious. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (Level A). This affects the Facilities Directorate and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • There might not always be more than one clear route to a page. Not all of our sites have sitemaps, for example. People with cognitive impairments or who use assistive technology may find it's harder to get to the information they need. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.5 Multiple Ways (Level AA). This affects the Great Food at Leeds, Meet in Leeds and Facilities Directorate sites.
  • Page headings and labels for interactive elements aren't always intuitive. This can make things more challenging for screen reader users or those who have cognitive disabilities. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.6 Headings and Labels (Level AA). This affects the Great Food at Leeds and Meet in Leeds sites.
  • It's not always completely clear which part of the page has focus. People who rely on keyboard navigation may struggle to move around some parts of the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.7 Focus Visible (Level AA). This affects the Sport, Meet in Leeds, Facilities Directorate and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • Some buttons don’t have sufficient alternative text and labelling. This may cause problems for people using screen readers and speech navigation software. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A). This affects the Sport, Facilities Directorate and Meet in Leeds sites.
  • Labels and instructions on input fields could better describe what users should do. People who use screen readers or have cognitive or learning disabilities may struggle to always enter the correct information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A). This affects the Sport, Facilities Directorate and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • Some of the page's HTML may not be set in a way that meets best practice. This may cause operation difficulties for some assistive technologies or mean that kind of software doesn't accurately communicate content to users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 Parsing (Level A). This affects the Meet in Leeds, Sport and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • Use of mark-up languages like ARIA, form labels, frame titles and more doesn't always follow correct practice. User of screen readers, screen magnifiers, and speech navigation software, may find the correct information or operation isn't always clear. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A). This affects the Meet in Leeds, Facilities Directorate, Sport and Great Food at Leeds sites.
  • There are several links where the link text isn’t descriptive enough. This can make a site harder to navigate for screen reader users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.1 Info and Relationships and 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context). This affects the Facilities Directorate site.

Administrative

These non-compliances apply to the following sites and URLs:

  • Strategy and Planning - leeds.ac.uk/stratplan
  • Finance - leeds.ac.uk/finance
  • Secretariat - leeds.ac.uk/secretariat/index.html
  • Finance log-in - asd.leeds.ac.uk

All sites in this group are part of the Web Accessibility Project, with the exception of the Finance log-in site. The project plan is currently being reassessed and the dates for when these sites will be addressed haven’t been determined yet. However, work may begin on migrating the Strategy and Planning, Finance, and Secretariat sites in Q3 2022. The Finance log-in site will be part of the accessibility effort lead by the Governance, Risk and Compliance team in beginning in late 2022.

  • Some images and graphical content don’t have a text alternative, so the information in them isn’t available to people using a screen reader. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text content (Level A). This affects the Finance and Strategy and Planning sites.
  • Page regions are poorly defined, lists and tables aren’t always marked correctly and sometimes there’s a lack of relevant headings. People who are blind or have low vision may struggle to always understand what the page is communicating. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A). This affects the Strategy and Planning and Finance sites.
  • Navigational order isn’t always clear. This can create difficulty people who rely on assistive technologies that read content aloud. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence (Level A). This affects the Finance site.
  • Colour is used as the sole way of distinguishing links in some cases. This can cause difficulties for people who are colourblind or have low vision. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.1 Use of Color (Level A). This affects the Secretariat and Finance sites.
  • Text doesn’t always have high enough contrast against its background. People with low vision may have difficulty reading some text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (Level AA). This affects the Strategy and Planning site.
  • Buttons and some links don’t have strong enough contrast against their backgrounds. People with low vision may have difficulty perceiving parts of the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast (Level AA). This affects the Strategy and Planning site.
  • Some functionality isn't accessible by keyboard. This may mean the site isn't fully operable by people with no vision and those who rely on keyboard navigation/operation or similar. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.1 Keyboard (Level A). This affects the Finance site.
  • Page titles aren't always descriptive enough to indicate to people where they are and what is available on the page. This may make the browsing experience difficult for blind people, those with low vision, people with cognitive disabilities and those use voice navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.2 Page Titled (Level A). This affects the Finance log-in and Strategy and Planning sites.
  • The navigation order of links isn't always intuitive. This can make the experience confusing for screen reader and screen magnification users, as well as people who otherwise rely on keyboard navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.3 Focus Order (Level A). This affects the Finance site.
  • Link purpose isn't always clear from each link's text. This can be confusing for keyboard and screen reader users as the function or purpose of the link will not be obvious. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (Level A). This affects the Secretariat, Strategy and Planning and Finance sites.
  • There might not always be more than one clear route to a page. Not all our sites have sitemaps, for example. People with cognitive impairments or who use assistive technology may find it's harder to get to the information they need. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.5 Multiple Ways (Level AA). This affects the Finance site.
  • It's not always completely clear which part of the page has focus. People who rely on keyboard navigation may struggle to move around some parts of the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.7 Focus Visible (Level AA). This affects the Finance log-in and Finance site. 
  • Some buttons don’t have sufficient alternative text and labelling. This may cause problems for people using screen readers and speech navigation software. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A). This affects the Finance, Strategy and Planning and Finance log-in sites.
  • Page language isn't properly noted in the page code. People who use screen readers may find some content more difficult to understand. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.1.1 Language of Page (Level A). This affects the Finance and Strategy and Planning sites.
  • Some of the page's HTML may not be set in a way that meets best practice. This may cause operation difficulties for some assistive technologies or mean that kind of software doesn't accurately communicate content to users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 Parsing (Level A). This affects the Strategy and Planning site.
  • Use of mark-up languages like ARIA, form labels, frame titles and more doesn't always follow correct practice. User of screen readers, screen magnifiers, and speech navigation software, may find the correct information or operation isn't always clear. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A). This affects the Strategy and Planning, Secretariate and Finance log-in sites.
  • There are empty headings on several pages. This can cause confusion for screen reader users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A) and 2.4.6 Headings and Labels (Level AA). This issue is part of our backlog and we hope to have it addressed before the end of 2022. This affects the Secretariat site.
  • There are several instances where images are missing alternative text. This makes it impossible for a screen reader user to know what it is depicting. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A). We hope to have these issues solved by the end of Q3 2022. This affects the Strategy and Planning site.
  • There is an area element without an accessible name. The inclusion of the area element gives the logo two different destinations which may be confusing to users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A). We hope to have this site replaced with a more accessible version the end of Q3 2022. This affects the Finance site.
  • There are several pages with empty links. This means there is no text for a screen reader to announce and so it may announce the full link URL, which can be confusing for a user. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (Level A). This affects the Secretariat site.
  • There are some links that only convey their function through a change of colour and/or the colour doesn’t contrast enough with the surrounding text. When links share the same size, weight, style, and font face as surrounding text, they lack purpose and identity, and can be hard for users to distinguish from surrounding text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.3 Sensory Characteristics (Level A), 1.4.1 Use of Color (Level A) and 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast (Level AA). This affects the Secretariat site.
  • There are unlabelled form fields and cases where the form label is not linked correctly to the form element. This may make it difficult for some assistive technology users to successfully submit information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose (Level AA), 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A), 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A). This affects the Finance and Secretariat sites.
  • Some pages don’t have a default page language set using language attributes. This might mean some screen readers don’t work correctly on these pages. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.1.1 Language of Page (Level A). This affects the Strategy and Planning and Finance sites.
  • There are code errors that may impact on assistive technologies and may cause screen readers to miss content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 4.1.1 Parsing (Level A) and 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A).
     

External services

These non-compliances apply to the following sites and URLs:

  • Accommodation - accommodation.leeds.ac.uk
  • Coursefinder - courses.leeds.ac.uk
  • Library - library.leeds.ac.uk
  • Masters scholarships - masters-scholarships.leeds.ac.uk
  • PHD - phd.leeds.ac.uk
  • Application - application.leeds.ac.uk

All sites in this group apart from the Application site are part of the Web Accessibility Project. The project plan is currently being reassessed and the dates for when these sites will be addressed haven’t been determined yet. However, work could begin in 2023. The Application site will be part of the accessibility effort lead by the Governance, Risk and Compliance team beginning in late 2022.

  • Some images and graphical content don’t have a text alternative. Some information may be lost for people who are blind or have low vision. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A). This affects the Coursefinder, Accommodation, Library and Application sites.
  • Page regions may be poorly defined, lists aren’t always marked correctly and sometimes there’s a lack of relevant headings. People who are blind or have low vision may struggle to always understand what the page is communicating. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A). This affects the Accommodation site.
  • Navigational order isn’t always clear. This can create difficulty people who rely on assistive technologies that read content aloud. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence (Level A). This affects the Accommodation and Library sites.
  • Text doesn’t always have high enough contrast against its background. People with low vision may have difficulty reading some text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (Level AA). This affects the Coursefinder, Accommodation, and Application sites.
  • Page titles aren't always descriptive enough to indicate to people where they are and what is available on the page. This may make the browsing experience difficult for blind people, those with low vision, people with cognitive disabilities and those use voice navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.2 Page Titled (Level A). This affects the Coursefinder, Accommodation, Library and Application sites.
  • The navigation order of links isn't always intuitive. This can make the experience confusing for screen reader and screen magnification users, as well as people who otherwise rely on keyboard navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.3 Focus Order (Level A). This affects the Accommodation and Library sites.
  • Link purpose isn't always clear from each link's text. This can be confusing for keyboard and screen reader users as the function or purpose of the link will not be obvious. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (Level A). This affects the Accommodation and Application sites.
  • There might not always be more than one clear route to a page. Not all of our sites have sitemaps, for example. People with cognitive impairments or who use assistive technology may find it's harder to get to the information they need. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.5 Multiple Ways (Level AA). This affects the Coursefinder and Accommodation sites.
  • Some buttons don’t have sufficient alternative text and labelling. This may cause problems for people using screen readers and speech navigation software. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A). This affects the Coursefinder and Accommodation sites.
  • Some of the page's HTML may not be set in a way that meets best practice. This may cause operation difficulties for some assistive technologies or mean that kind of software doesn't accurately communicate content to users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 Parsing (Level A). This affects the Coursefinder and Accommodation sites.
  • Use of mark-up languages like ARIA, form labels, frame titles and more doesn't always follow correct practice. User of screen readers, screen magnifiers, and speech navigation software, may find the correct information or operation isn't always clear. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A). This affects the Coursefinder and Accommodation sites.

Foundation: WordPress toolkit

These non-compliances apply to the following sites and URLs:

  • Communications - comms.leeds.ac.uk
  • Leeds Institute for Teaching Excellence - teachingexcellence.leeds.ac.uk
  • Digital Education Service - digitaleducation.leeds.ac.uk
  • Equality Policy Unit - equality.leeds.ac.uk
  • Organisational Development and Professional Learning - peopledevelopment.leeds.ac.uk
  • Sustainability - sustainability.leeds.ac.uk
  • LOGIK (Learning Opportunities for Gaining Information and Knowledge) - logik.leeds.ac.uk

All sites in this group are part of the Web Accessibility Project. The project plan is currently being reassessed and the dates for when these sites will be addressed haven’t been determined yet. 

An update of the University-branded WordPress theme has been created and tested and is expected to be implemented before the end of 2022. This will solve many of the following code-based issues.

  • Some images and graphical content don’t have a text alternative, so the information in them isn’t available to people using a screen reader. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text content (Level A). This affects the Equality and Inclusion Unit, Organisational Development and Professional Learning, Leeds Institute for Teaching Excellence, Communications, Digital Education Service and Sustainability sites.
  • Lists aren’t always marked correctly and sometimes there’s a lack of relevant headings. People who are blind or have low vision may struggle to always understand what the page is communicating. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning, Digital Education Service and Sustainability sites.
  • Navigational order isn’t always clear. This can create difficulty people who rely on assistive technologies that read content aloud. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence (Level A). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning, Digital Education Service and Sustainability sites.
  • Autocomplete could be set on some input fields but isn’t. his may reduce ease of use for people with learning disabilities or cognitive or motor impairments. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose (Level AA). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning and Sustainability sites.
  • Colour is used as the sole way of distinguishing links in some cases. This can cause difficulties for people who are colourblind or have low vision. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.1 Use of Color (Level A). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning and Sustainability sites.
  • Text doesn’t always have high enough contrast against its background. People with low vision may have difficulty reading some text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (Level AA). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning, Leeds Institute for Teaching Excellence, Communications, Digital Education Service and Sustainability sites.
  • Content doesn’t always adjust well to page zoom or smaller screens. Users may find this site isn't always optimised for mobile viewing and those who need to zoom in to view content might not see all the information. suitable This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.10 Reflow (Level AA). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning site.
  • Buttons and some links don’t have strong enough contrast against their backgrounds. People with low vision may have difficulty perceiving parts of the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast (Level AA). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning, Leeds Institute for Teaching Excellence and Sustainability sites.
  • It’s not possible to dismiss some hover-over content. This may disadvantage users with low vision, users who increase mouse cursor size, and those with motor difficulties. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.13 Content on Hover or Focus (Level AA). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning sites.
  • Some functionality isn't accessible by keyboard. This may mean the site isn't fully operable by people with no vision and those who rely on keyboard navigation/operation or similar. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.1 Keyboard (Level A). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning site.
  • There is some content that moves automatically that cannot be paused. This can be challenging for neurodivergent people. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.2.2 Pause, Stop, Hide (Level A). This affects the Sustainability site.
  • There's no way to skip repeated navigation and other repeated parts of a page. This could make it more difficult to reach the main content of a Web page for people using screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (Level A). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning and Sustainability sites.
  • Page titles aren't always descriptive enough to indicate to people where they are and what is available on the page. This may make the browsing experience difficult for blind people, those with low vision, people with cognitive disabilities and those use voice navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.2 Page Titled (Level A). This affects the Equality and Inclusion Unit, Organisational Development and Professional Learning, Digital Education Service and Sustainability sites.
  • The navigation order of links isn't always intuitive. This can make the experience confusing for screen reader and screen magnification users, as well as people who otherwise rely on keyboard navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.3 Focus Order (Level A). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning and Sustainability sites.
  • Link purpose isn't always clear from each link's text. This can be confusing for keyboard and screen reader users as the function or purpose of the link will not be obvious. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (Level A). This affects the Logik, Organisational Development and Professional Learning and Sustainability sites.
  • There might not always be more than one clear route to a page. Not all our sites have sitemaps, for example. People with cognitive impairments or who use assistive technology may find it's harder to get to the information they need. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.5 Multiple Ways (Level AA). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning and Logik sites.
  • Page headings and labels for interactive elements aren't always intuitive. This can make things more challenging for screen reader users or those who have cognitive disabilities. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.6 Headings and Labels (Level AA). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning site.
  • It's not always completely clear which part of the page has focus. People who rely on keyboard navigation may struggle to move around some parts of the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.7 Focus Visible (Level AA). This affects the Sustainability site.
  • Some buttons don’t have sufficient alternative text and labelling. This may cause problems for people using screen readers and speech navigation software. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A). This affects the Equality and Inclusion Unit, Organisational Development and Professional Learning, Leeds Institute for Teaching Excellence, Communications and Digital Education Service sites.
  • Some links send people to other University sites that have a different navigation structure but the link might not make it clear this change will happen. Users with cognitive limitations or visual impairments may find their experience is sometimes unpredictable. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation (Level AA). This affects the Sustainability and Organisational Development and Professional Learning sites.
  • Labels and instructions on input fields could better describe what users should do. People who use screen readers or have cognitive or learning disabilities may struggle to always enter the correct information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A). This affects the Organisational Development and Professional Learning and Sustainability sites.
  • Some of the page's HTML may not be set in a way that meets best practice. This may cause operation difficulties for some assistive technologies or mean that kind of software doesn't accurately communicate content to users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 Parsing (Level A). This affects the Sustainability, Leeds Institute for Teaching Excellence, Communications, Digital Education Service and Organisational Development and Professional Learning sites.
  • Use of mark-up languages like ARIA, form labels, frame titles and more doesn't always follow correct practice. User of screen readers, screen magnifiers, and speech navigation software, may find the correct information or operation isn't always clear. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A). This affects the Equality and Inclusion Unit, Sustainability, Leeds Institute for Teaching Excellence, Communications, Digital Education Service and Organisational Development and Professional Learning sites.

Other

These non-compliances apply to the following sites and URLs:

  • Leeds Child Development Unit (CDU) - leedscdu.org
  • The Unbundled University - unbundleduni.com
  • SiriusWeb - siriusweb.leeds.ac.uk
  • Chaplaincy - unichaplaincy.org.uk

Leeds Child Development Unit (CDU) and Unbundled University are part of the Web Accessibility Project. Unbundled University is due to be closed so will not be subject accessibility improvements. Leeds CDU will be part of the project plan, which is currently being reassessed so the date for when this site will be addressed hasn’t been determined yet. However, work could begin in 2023. 

SiriusWeb and Chaplaincy will be part of the accessibility effort lead by the Governance, Risk and Compliance team beginning in late 2022.

  • Some images and graphical content don’t have a text alternative, so the information in them isn’t available to people using a screen reader. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text content (Level A). This affects the Chaplaincy, Unbundled University and Leeds CDU sites.
  • Page regions are poorly defined, lists aren’t always marked correctly and sometimes there’s a lack of relevant headings. People who are blind or have low vision may struggle to always understand what the page is communicating. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A). This affects the SiriusWeb and Unbundled University sites.
  • Navigational order isn’t always clear. This can create difficulty people who rely on assistive technologies that read content aloud. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence (Level A). This affects the SiriusWeb site.
  • Autocomplete could be set on some input fields but isn’t. his may reduce ease of use for people with learning disabilities or cognitive or motor impairments. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose (Level AA). This affects the SiriusWeb and Chaplaincy sites.
  • Colour is used as the sole way of distinguishing links in some cases. This can cause difficulties for people who are colourblind or have low vision. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.1 Use of Color (Level A). This affects the Chaplaincy, Unbundled University and Leeds CDU sites.
  • Text doesn’t always have high enough contrast against its background. People with low vision may have difficulty reading some text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (Level AA). This affects the SiriusWeb site.
  • Content doesn’t always adjust well to page zoom or smaller screens. Users may find this site isn't always optimised for mobile viewing and those who need to zoom in to view content might not see all the information. suitable This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.10 Reflow (Level AA). This affects the Unbundled University site.
  • Buttons and some links don’t have strong enough contrast against their backgrounds. People with low vision may have difficulty perceiving parts of the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast (Level AA). This affects the SiriusWeb site.
  • There is some content that moves automatically that cannot be paused. This can be challenging for neurodivergent people. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.2.2 Pause, Stop, Hide (Level A). This affects the Chaplaincy site.
  • There's no way to skip repeated navigation and other repeated parts of a page. This could make it more difficult to reach the main content of a Web page for people using screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (Level A). This affects the Chaplaincy site.
  • Page titles aren't always descriptive enough to indicate to people where they are and what is available on the page. This may make the browsing experience difficult for blind people, those with low vision, people with cognitive disabilities and those use voice navigation. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.2 Page Titled (Level A). This affects the SiriusWeb, Chaplaincy, Unbundled University and Leeds CDU sites.
  • There might not always be more than one clear route to a page. Not all our sites have sitemaps, for example. People with cognitive impairments or who use assistive technology may find it's harder to get to the information they need. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.5 Multiple Ways (Level AA). This affects the Chaplaincy site. 
  • Page headings and labels for interactive elements are't always intuitive. This can make things more challenging for screen reader users or those who have cognitive disabilities. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.6 Headings and Labels (Level AA). This affects the SiriusWeb, Unbundled University and Leeds CDU sites.
  • It's not always completely clear which part of the page has focus. People who rely on keyboard navigation may struggle to move around some parts of the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.7 Focus Visible (Level AA). This affects the Chaplaincy site.
  • Some buttons don’t have sufficient alternative text and labelling. This may cause problems for people using screen readers and speech navigation software. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A). This affects the SiriusWeb and Chaplaincy sites. 
  • Page language isn't properly noted in the page code. People who use screen readers may find some content more difficult to understand. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.1.1 Language of Page (Level A). This affects the SiriusWeb site. 
  • Labels and instructions on input fields could better describe what users should do. People who use screen readers or have cognitive or learning disabilities may struggle to always enter the correct information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A). This affects the Chaplaincy, Unbundled University and Leeds CDU sites.
  • Some of the page's HTML may not be set in a way that meets best practice. This may cause operation difficulties for some assistive technologies or mean that kind of software doesn't accurately communicate content to users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 Parsing (Level A). This affects the SiriusWeb, Leeds CDU and Chaplaincy sites. 
  • Use of mark-up languages like ARIA, form labels, frame titles and more doesn't always follow correct practice. User of screen readers, screen magnifiers, and speech navigation software, may find the correct information or operation isn't always clear. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A). This affects the SiriusWeb, Chaplaincy, Unbundled University and Leeds CDU sites.

Mobile applications

We know there are University mobile applications that are not fully compliant with WCAG 2.1 AA guidelines. See our Mobile app accessibility statements page to better understand the accessibility of this part of the University’s digital estate.

Disproportionate burden

IRIS and revisions for use in 2019

This internal application has undergone significant revision to support a one-off internal process in autumn 2019. There would be disproportionate burden to remediate the system for this one-off process on the basis of effort and the impact on the externally set deadline for the process to be completed. 

This system fails on several WCAG 2.1 AA criteria including the following:

  • Graphical objects don’t always have strong enough contrast against their background. This may lead to difficulty for colour blind or partially sighted users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast (Level AA).
  • Some icons containing images text could be presented using text instead. This may cause issues for people using screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.5 Images of Text (Level AA).
  • User is automatically logged out after 45 mins with no options to extend. This may cause issues for blind people and those with low vision, motor or cognitive limitations who may require more time to do things. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.2.1 Timing Adjustable (Level A).
  • Limited mechanism to skip repeated navigation content. This could make the product more difficult to use for people using screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (Level A).
  • Some buttons don’t have sufficient alternative text and labelling. This may cause problems for people using screen readers and speech navigation software. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.5.3 Label in Name (Level A).

An alternative provision was made available for, and used by, those who needed it. 

The future of IRIS is due to be decided in the coming months. If it will be retained, WCAG compliance will form part of its development and the University will cease the disproportionate burden claim.

Content that’s not within the scope of the accessibility regulations

PDFs and other office file formats 

Documents published before 23 September 2018

Our digital estate contains thousands of PDFs and other documents created over several decades. These include things like past exam papers, posters intended for printing and forms.

Many of our older PDFs and Word documents do not meet accessibility standards. For example, they may not be structured so they’re accessible to a screen reader. This does not meet WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (name, role value).

Some of our PDFs and Word documents are essential to providing our services. For example, we have PDFs with important course information, and forms published as Word documents. We have and are working to either fix these, replace them with accessible HTML pages, or create replacement Microsoft Forms that meet accessibility standards. Inaccessible PDFs may remain live where an accessible web page version is also available.

The accessibility regulations do not require us to fix PDFs or other documents published before 23 September 2018 if they’re not essential to providing our services. For example, we do not plan to fix our art trail. 

Documents published after 23 September 2018

We are always taking steps to reduce the number of PDFs and other office file formats we provide digitally – opting to create web pages instead where possible.

Any new PDFs or Word documents we publish will meet accessibility standards. We have provided guidance on how to create accessible content, as well as accessibility checklists to use when producing Word and PowerPoint documents, as well as a suite of general accessibility guidance to help staff meet accessibility standards when publishing new documents.

Teaching staff also have access to Blackboard Ally, which helps them provide more accessible learning materials through Minerva and automatically gives students access to files in multiple formats, such as html, mp3 audio and braille.

Media content

Pre-recorded time-based media 

  • Some non-live audio and video content does not have a descriptive text transcript or audio description. This will make it harder for blind or partially sighted people to access information in this media content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.1 Audio-only and Video-only (Prerecorded) (Level A).
  • Some non-live video does not have synchronised captions. It will be harder for Deaf/deaf people and those who are hard of hearing to access information in this media content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.2 Captions (Prerecorded) (Level A).
  • Some non-live audio doesn’t have a descriptive text transcript or audio description. It will be harder for blind and partially sighted people, Deaf/deaf people and those who are hard of hearing, as well as those with cognitive and motor impairments to access information in this media content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.3 Audio Description or Media Alternative (Prerecorded) (Level A).
  • Audio descriptions are not provided for all video content. It will be harder for blind and partially sighted people to access information in this media content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.5 Audio Description (Prerecorded) (Level AA). 

We haven’t added text and audio alternatives to all our time-based media published before 23 September 2020 because this is exempt from meeting the accessibility regulations. 

We have worked, and will continue to work, to ensure pre-recorded media published from 23 September 2020 is provided with transcriptions, captions and/or audio description as appropriate. 

Recordings of teaching provided via digital education systems offers some capacity for closed captions. For example, video captures of timetabled lectures conducted via Mediasite are sent for automated closed captioning. Those closed captions will be made available should they meet a quality threshold. 

Closed captions can be added to recordings of sessions conducted via Blackboard Collaborate Ultra and recordings of ad-hoc teaching through Mediasite. 

Disability Services can support students with disabilities who require closed captions on recordings. Disability Services can be contacted via phone, email, or in person:

Live time-based media

It’s possible some of our live time-based media, such as video streams, do not have synchronized captions. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.4 Captions (Live) (Level AA).

Technologies used by the University, such as Microsoft Teams, do provide automatic captioning although we recognise these aren’t always accurate. 

Work towards adding captions to live video streams may not always be prioritised because live video is exempt from meeting the accessibility regulations.

Online maps

Our online maps are not all accessible. The regulations do not apply to online maps as long as the essential information they contain is provided in an accessible format for maps intended for navigational use. 

Our Campus Directory is an accessible, text-based alternative to our interactive campus map.

You can also find information about access on campus in our information for disabled visitors.

Third-party content

We know that some of the third-party content included in our digital estate is not accessible. 

The accessibility regulations do not apply to third-party content that is not funded, developed, or controlled by the University, and many of these sites have their own accessibility statements. The searchBOX finder tool allows users to search for third-party accessibility statements. 

We will work with our suppliers to make sure they know about any accessibility issues we find. 

See our Third-party accessibility statements page to better understand the accessibility of these parts of the University’s digital estate.

Reproductions of heritage items

Our Library website has lots of images of our archives that have not yet been transcribed, and we do not yet have a way to extract the text from all our manuscripts and other heritage items efficiently. Our online archives are not fully accessible, and fail almost all testing with accessibility tools. The accessibility requirements do not apply to heritage items that cannot be made fully accessible for this reason.

However, we are working to make sure our online library and archive websites are fully accessible and have enough data to help you find what you need. We also work with the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) to provide a transcription service.

Archived websites and web pages

Our web estate contains many websites and sections of websites we consider to be archived. We will be working with site owners over the coming months to produce an up-to-date list of archived sites, which will be made available via this statement.

Government accessibility regulations define an archived website as one that only contains content not needed for active administrative processes and is not updated or edited after 23 September 2019. The regulations state we do not need to fix archived websites.

What we’re doing to improve accessibility

Our accessibility roadmap, How we’re improving accessibility, shows how and when we plan to improve accessibility across the digital estate.

Preparation of this accessibility statement

This statement was first prepared on 12 September 2019. It was last reviewed on 22 August 2022. 

A digital accessibility audit of the main University site, and select other websites, was completed by Shaw Trust and delivered in July 2022. We are addressing all of the issues (see the earlier heading ‘Non-compliance with the accessibility regulations’). Any non-compliances arising from Shaw Trust’s audit will be addressed as soon as possible.

The rest of the University of Leeds digital estate was last tested between 5 August and 6 September 2019. The test was carried out by a third-party auditor, Accenture. The findings inform some of the non-compliances noted in this statement for the sites that haven’t substantially changed since this time.

We used this approach to decide on a sample of pages to test, see How we tested the digital estate for accessibility and what we tested. This explains how we chose a sample of websites to test, the reasoning for the approach and which pages were tested. Testing involved assessing each page against WCAG 2.1 AA criteria and using the sites and systems with the JAWS (Job Access With Speech) screen reader, Dragon NaturallySpeaking voice recognition software, and the ZoomText screen reader and magnifier. 


Page updated: 22 August 2022