Accessibility statement

A disability platform that isn’t itself accessible is a failure. WCAG 2.2 AA is our floor, not our goal. Here is what we do — stated plainly so you can check it.

What you can adjust yourself

Open Accessibility settings to change, across the whole site:

• Text size, up to 200%.
• Line spacing.
• A more legible font — either a wide, high-legibility font already on your device, or OpenDyslexic. Both are served from our own site (never a third-party font host), and OpenDyslexic only downloads if you choose it.
• High contrast.
• Reduced motion.
• Larger click and tap targets (at least 44 pixels).

These are saved in one functional cookie on your device. There is no account and no tracking, and the setting is applied by our server before the page reaches you — so it works with no JavaScript at all.

How the site is built

• Zero JavaScript on browsing pages. The pages you read are plain server-rendered HTML. Our security policy blocks scripts outright, so the site stays fast and works on low bandwidth and older devices.
• List first, never map-only. Every result is a real, readable list. A map, if we add one, will only ever be an extra on top.
• Keyboard and screen reader. A skip link, semantic landmarks, a visible focus outline, a sensible heading order, and text labels on every form field — designed in, not bolted on.
• Colour is never the only signal. Every trust label carries a word and a symbol, not just a colour.
• We respect your system settings too. Dark mode, high contrast, and reduced motion follow your operating system automatically — the controls above only override them when you want to.

How we test — and where we’re honest about limits

Every build runs automated accessibility checks (axe-core) in our continuous integration; a change that fails them does not ship. But that is one tool, and one tool is not much. When GOV.UK tested ten automated checkers against a page with 143 deliberate barriers, the best single one flagged or prompted manual inspection for 41% of them — and 29% of the barriers were missed by every tool tested. So automated passing is not the same as accessible, and we do not present it as such. Manual testing with real assistive technology, and paid disabled co-designers across a range of access needs, are part of how we judge a feature done.

Found a barrier?

If something here blocks you, that’s a bug to us — please tell us so we can fix it. This statement will be updated as the platform grows; it describes what is true today, not what we hope to build.