ACCESS CHECK-IN TESTING REVIEW REPORT
A SAMPLE REVIEW FOR YOU
WEB PAGE ACCESS CHECK-IN FINDINGS REPORT
The Access Check-In Findings Report provides you with a summary of the accessibility of the web pages submitted to our testers. It includes vital
information that can assist you in making the web pages accessible to people living with disabilities, such as the specific technology used, the
self-described computer expertise level of the tester and their disability type. (Note: These four major disability classifications are recognized by
the US Department of Human Services. The WeCo Disability Computer Use Classification is part of WeCo’s proprietary Access Approved™
accessibility testing product.) The Report will also let you know if the web page was accessible to a tester living with a disability, in regards to
primary considerations used by US and International accessibility legislation and guidance, as listed below.
DISABILITY
TYPE
Nicky’s
disability is
Sight-Related
See key at end
of document
SELFDESCRIBED
COMPUTER
EXPERTISE
Advanced
TECHNOLOGY
USED
PURPOSE AND
COMPREHENSION,
CONTENT AND
LAYOUT
OBJECT/IMAGE
ACCEESSIBILITY
FORM/APPLICATION
ACCESSIBILITY
NAVIGATION
AND
CONSISTENCY
PASS
WARN
WARN
EXCEL
Powerspec /
Windows XP /
System Access
Mobile
Assistive Device:
System Access
Screen Reader
ABOUT YOUR TESTER:
Nicky, a WeCo Senior Certified Test Consultant, is blind. She has advanced computer expertise and used a System
Access screen reader on a Powerspec computer with a Windows XP operating system for your test. She accessed
your links through the System Access Mobile Network.
2
COMMENTS FROM TESTER REGARDING THE WEB PAGES
Note: All comments in this Report remain unedited from Tester Results, except where needed for clarification.
WEB PAGE STRENGTHS
LINK #1: HTTP://WWW.EXAMPLE.COM/
“There were link on the page. They were easy to identify. As an example, I clicked on the FAQ link and I liked how the information was
organized in to headings.”
“I found the page very easy to navigate. The links were labeled very well.”
“I really liked how this page was laid out with clearly identified links and headings within each link.”
LINK #2: HTTP://WWW.EXAMPLE/SERVICES/
“The links on the page were very easy to identify. They did work for me.”
“I found the navigation links very easy to understand. The sublinks, were very easy to identify.”
“This page was very well marked up with headings. I really liked the headings on this page…. I noticed when I pressed the H key just once, the
headings kept coming up without consecutive presses of the H key. I’ve never seen that before.”
LINK #3: HTTP://WWW.EXAMPLE.COM/ACCESSIBILITY.HTML
“The links on the page were easy to identify. They did work for me.”
“The navigation links were easy to identify and the sub-links were very easy to identify as well.”
“I really like the headings on this page. I also like how the standards are listed for both Word and PDF formats of documents.”
©The Wehrman Collaborative, LLC 2013
This document contains confidential data. Unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited.
3
LINK #4: HTTP://WWW.EXAMPLE.COM/FORMS/
“There were graphics on this page. Get Adobe Reader. This graphic was on each page so far. There have been three or four occurrences of this
graphic on each page.”
“The links on the page were very identifiable. They did work for me.”
“The navigation links were very useful for me. I found the [sub-links] very easy to navigate as well.”
“I [really] liked how there were different formats of the forms such as PDF, HTML, and Word.”
REGARDING PAGE CONSISTENCY AND SITE NAVIGATION:
“The CiO page has moving [headings] when I press the H key for headings, I only have to push it once and the headings keep coming up by
themselves. The Accessibility page has some very well defined headings and some of the links are similar on the previous pages. The forms page
has very [well] defined headings and the top links are the same. as on previous pages. I do like the Skip to Main Content links on each page.”
WEB PAGE WEAKNESSES
LINK #1: HTTP://WWW.EXAMPLE.COM/
“I’m not sure if there are images on the page, however, when I press the G key for graphics, each press takes me to a different link.”
“When I pressed the F key for forms, I was brought to an edit box but I wasn’t sure what I was supposed to enter in to said edit box.”
LINK #2: HTTP://WWW.EXAMPLE/SERVICES/
“When pressing the F key for forms, it brought me to an edit box but I wasn’t sure what I was supposed to put in the box.”
LINK #3: HTTP://WWW.EXAMPLE.COM/ACCESSIBILITY.HTML
“When pressing the G key for graphics, each press brought me to individual links.”
©The Wehrman Collaborative, LLC 2013
This document contains confidential data. Unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited.
4
“There was a form that acted like an edit box. I wasn’t sure what to put in to that form field.”
LINK #4: HTTP://WWW.EXAMPLE.COM/FORMS/
“The only form I saw was an edit box with no labeled so, I wasn’t sure what to put in that form.”
DOCUMENT ACCESSIBILITY CHECK-IN FINDINGS REPORT
The Document Accessibility Check-In Findings Report provides you with a summary of the accessibility of the documents submitted to our
testers. It includes vital information that can assist you in making the documents accessible to people living with disabilities, such as the specific
technology used, the self-described computer expertise level of the tester and their disability type. (Note: The four major disability
classifications are recognized by the US Department of Human Services. The WeCo Disability Computer Use Classification is part of WeCo’s
proprietary Access Approved™ accessibility testing product.) The Report will also let you know if the document was accessible to a tester living
with a disability, in regards to primary considerations used by US and International accessibility legislation and guidance, as listed below.
DISABILITY
TYPE
Nicky’s disability is
Sight-Related
See key at end of
document
SELFDESCRIBED
COMPUTER
EXPERTISE
Advanced
©The Wehrman Collaborative, LLC 2013
TECHNOLOGY
USED
Powerspec /
Windows XP /
System Access
Mobile
STRUCTURED
NAVIGATION
POINTS
LABELED
TABLES,
CHARTS,
GRAPHS
TAGGED PHOTOS,
ILLUSTRATIONS
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
(IF
APPLICABLE)
PASS
WARN
N/A
PASS
Assistive Device:
System Access
Screen Reader
This document contains confidential data. Unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited.
5
COMMENTS FROM TESTER REGARDING THE DOCUMENTS
Note: All comments in this Report remain unedited from Tester Results, except where needed for clarification.
DOCUMENT STRENGTHS
LINK #5: HTTP://WWW.EXAMPLE.COM/DOCUMENTS/INVOICE.PDF
“The document was very well marked up via headings which were [very] identifiable.”
“There was a Table of Contents in the document. It did tell me what I [needed] to know.”
DOCUMENT WEAKNESSES
LINK #5: HTTP://WWW.EXAMPLE.COM/DOCUMENTS/INVOICE.PDF
“When I pressed the T key for tables, I wasn’t sure if what I found were tables or not.”
©The Wehrman Collaborative, LLC 2013
This document contains confidential data. Unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited.
6
RECOMMENDED SERVICES
We recommend the following WeCo services to assist your organization in strengthening accessibility weaknesses in your web pages and
documents.
To learn more about WeCo’s services, contact Lynn Wehrman, WeCo Test Team Director, at [email protected] or 855-849-5050 x1
1
SERVICE NEED RELATED
TO ACCESS WEAKNESS
To ensure that primary
aspects of your web are
accessible to people living
with disabilities
SERVICE
SOLUTION
WeCo’s Free Web
Accessibility Review
HOW THE SERVICE
CAN HELP
Our staff will review
your web site for
accessibility strengths
and challenges
2
Web pages contained
unmarked graphics; web
forms were inaccessible
WeCo’s Ensuring Access:
Best Practices for
Accessible Web Design
Training
(customized live webinar
delivered by WeCo
Accessibility staff)
2.5 hours
Provide training to your
web staff so they
understand how to fix
these accessibility issues
Access Check-In Service
Recheck
Verify that the changes
your staff has made
work for people living
with sight-related
disabilities
STEP
3
Web pages contained
unmarked graphics; web
forms were inaccessible
©The Wehrman Collaborative, LLC 2013
PRICING
FREE
Courtesy of WeCo!
Set up your free review
today!
$2,250.00
for up to 10 attendees
If you order the service
before September 30th
$2,500.00
after September 30th
Includes training
resources in accessible
electronic format
TBD
Contact WeCo for
Recheck Pricing
This document contains confidential data. Unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited.
7
STEP
SERVICE NEED RELATED
TO ACCESS WEAKNESS
4
Tables and other visual
aspects may not be marked
in your documents
SERVICE
SOLUTION
WeCo’s Accessible
Document Conversion
Services
HOW THE SERVICE
CAN HELP
Our staff will review
your native documents
and add accessibility
structure
PRICING
$125 per hour
AND/OR
WeCo’s Accessible
Document Training
Your staff will learn to
author and/or structure
existing Microsoft
documents that are
accessible
$3200
for up to 10 attendees
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT ACCESS CHECK-IN TESTING AND THIS REPORT
This report is designed to provide product developers with accessibility guidance, which will foster Section 508 or WCAG 2.0 compliance.
However, this report should not be used as a compliance verification document. WeCo’s Access Approved™ Testing services are designed to
verify and document Section 508 and WCAG 2.0 compliance needs and include limited use of WeCo’s Access Approved™ logo on your website.
©The Wehrman Collaborative, LLC 2013
This document contains confidential data. Unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited.
8
TESTER DISABILITY CLASSIFICATIONS KEY
The table below is a key of Disability Computer Use Classification, designed by WeCo, used in all of our accessibility testing processes to help you
make your projects accessible to people living with a wide range of disability types.
DISABILITY TYPE
TYPE OF ASSISTIVE DEVICE
USED
NOTES ON DISABILITY MANIFESTATIONS
Sight-Related
Screen Reader, Screen Magnifier,
Braille Display
Tester is blind or has extremely low vision making it difficult or impossible to encounter
the visual aspects of web pages without a Screen Reader, Screen Magnifier and/or a
Braille Display.
Hearing-Related
Standard Mouse/Keyboard
Motor-Skill Related
Cognitive-Related
Non-handheld pointer devices
Standard Mouse/Keyboard
©The Wehrman Collaborative, LLC 2013
Tester is deaf or hard of hearing making hearing the audio aspects of web pages
difficult.
Tester may lack all ability to use handheld devices making the physical navigation of
web pages difficult. May use devices such as eye trackers, speech recognition software,
or modified keyboards or mouses.
A cognitive-related disability may take the following forms: intellectual/developmental
and learning disabilities; traumatic brain injury, stroke, neurological or seizure
disorders; or memory impairment and chronic memory diseases.
This document contains confidential data. Unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited.
9
RATINGS KEYS
WEB PAGE ACCESS CHECK-IN ELEMENT ASSESSMENT RATINGS KEY
The Access Check-In Element Assessment Ratings are based on a Tester’s ability to find Elements on a web page and use them for their intended
functions.
EXCEL: The Tester could easily locate the Elements under review and had no difficulty using them for their intended function.
PASS: The Tester could locate the Elements under review and could use them for their intended function.
WARN: The Tester had difficulty locating the Elements under review and/or had some difficulty using them for their intended function.
FAIL: The Tester could not locate the Elements under review and/or could not use them for their intended function.
DOCUMENT ACCESSIBILITY ELEMENT ASSESSMENT RATINGS KEY
The Document Accessibility Element Assessment Ratings are based on the presence of the Element in the document, and its ability to aid the
Tester in reading the contents of the document.
EXCEL: The Element under review was present in the document, and it greatly aided the Tester’s ability to read the contents of the document.
PASS: The Element under review was present in the document, and it aided the Tester’s ability to read the contents of the document.
WARN: The Element under review was only partially implemented in the document, or it interfered with the Tester’s ability to read the contents
of the document.
FAIL: The Element under review was missing from the document, and thus greatly hindered the Tester’s ability to read the contents of the
document.
©The Wehrman Collaborative, LLC 2013
This document contains confidential data. Unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited.