Accessibility statement

Documents that are provided for download only

• Templates, referral forms and reports
• Supporting SEND as part of the graduated approach

PDFs that are not accessible

• Pension Fund Annual Reports: The documents are provided by a 3rd party company and are not currently fully accessible for the following reasons:
  • some graphs/tables may not be readable by a screen reader
  • the document is missing a correct heading structure
  • the document is missing bookmarks
• Statement of Accounts: The documents are provided by a 3rd party company and is not currently fully accessible for the following reasons:
  • some graphs/tables may not be readable by a screen reader
  • the document is missing a correct heading structure
  • the document is missing bookmarks
• The local market for children's, adults, public health and housing services Integrated Market Position Statement
• documents that must be formatted in a way under Section 7 of the Procedure Guide For Local Plan Examinations that makes them not accessible:
  • Schedule of Main Modifications (MMs) to the Publication Draft Minerals and Waste Policies and Allocations Development Plan Document (M&WDPD)
  • Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulations Assessment Main Modifications Addendum
  • A Schedule of Additional Modifications to the Publication Draft M&WDPD
  • Draft M&WDPD with changes tracked

Excel

Excel spreadsheets may be added to this site but are not accessible. Whenever one is added a CSV file will also be provided.

• traffic sensitive street consultation (provide to give additional search functionality) - this information will be removed from the website in December 2025
• selective licensing postcode checker (provide to give additional search functionality)

Flipbooks

Flipbooks may be added to this site but are not accessible. Whenever one is added, an accessible PDF will also be provided.

• Climate Emergency Response
• Previous issues of Durham County News
• Durham County News - Winter edition out now!

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• zooming: viewport tag is being used to disable zoom, which fails criterion 1.4.4
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• navigation: the system does not have information about its general layout failing success criterion 2.4.5
• outline / border style: the stylesheet makes it difficult to see the dotted link focus outline, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• page language: this is not declared, failing success criterion 3.1.1

• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• stylesheets: absolute positioning fails success criterion 1.3.2
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for color-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• contrast ratio: some controls do not have a 3:1 contrast ratio which fails success criterion 1.4.11
• zooming: viewport tag is being used to disable zoom, which fails criterion 1.4.4
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• outline / border style: the stylesheet makes it difficult to see the dotted link focus outline, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• page language: this is not declared, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• forms: some have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• images: some images do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• images: decorative / spacer images are missing a null alt attribute, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• IDs: aria-controls attributes do not point to IDs of elements in the same document, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• IDs: aria-labelledby attributes do not point to IDs of elements in the same document, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• headings: empty headings fail success criterion 2.4.6
• outline / border style: the stylesheet makes it difficult to see the dotted link focus outline, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• language: there is a bad value for attribute lang, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• tags: an end tag violated nesting rules, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• elements: li element is a child element when it should not be, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• elements: a button appears as a descendant of the a element, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• IDs: some pages have duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• labels: some are blank, failing success criterion 4.1.2
• forms: some form controls have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2
• IDs: an aria-labelledby attribute references a non-existent element ID failing success criterion 4.1.2
• elements: some elements do not contain text or an img with an alt attribute, failing success criteria 2.4.4, 2.4.9 and 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• markup: the stylesheet font-weight property is used rather than semantic markup like strong, failing success criterion 1.3.1 
• tables: nested tables are used which do not make sense when read in a screen reader, failing success criterion 1.3.2
• keyboard users: onclick handlers do not have an equivalent onkeyup or onkeydown handler, failing success criterion 2.1.1
• keyboard users: onmousedown handlers are missing onkeydown / onclick handlers, failing success criterion 2.1.1 
• keyboard users: onmouseup handlers are missing onkeyup / onclick handlers, failing success criterion 2.1.1 
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• navigation: the system does not have information about its general layout failing success criterion 2.4.5
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• images in documents: some images / figures do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• document titles: some documents have no title failing success criterion 2.4.2
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6
• outline / border style: the stylesheet makes it difficult to see the dotted link focus outline, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• page language: this is not declared, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• forms: some have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2
• colours: some body or element colours are set, but not all of them, failing success criteria 1.4.3, 1.4.6 and 1.4.8
• fieldsets: fieldset elements are not labelled with legend elements, failing success criteria 3.3.1 and 3.3.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• hidden elements: an element with aria-hidden=true contains focusable content, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• navigation: the system does not have information about its general layout failing success criterion 2.4.5
• outline / border style: the stylesheet makes it difficult to see the dotted link focus outline, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• IDs: some elements have duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• images in documents: some images / figures do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• documents: PDFs are not tagged so are not accessible by screen readers, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• tables: nested tables are used which do not make sense when read in a screen reader, failing success criterion 1.3.2
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• document titles: some documents have no title failing success criterion 2.4.2
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6
• page language: this is not declared, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• markup errors: some pages have markup errors which cause screen readers to miss content, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• IDs: some pages has duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• forms: some have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2
• labels: some are blank, failing success criterion 4.1.2
• images: some alt text is the same as the image's file name, failing success criteria 1.1.1 and 1.2.1
• colours: some body or element colours are set, but not all of them, failing success criteria 1.4.3, 1.4.6 and 1.4.8

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• images: some images do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• lists: a list element contains other elements are is ordered incorrectly (register and login buttons), failing success criterion 1.3.1
• aria: aria roles are missing or not valid (register and login buttons), failing success criterion 1.3.1
• stylesheets: absolute positioning fails success criterion 1.3.2
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• zooming: viewport tag is being used to disable zoom, which fails criterion 1.4.4
• keyboard users: some features or links are not available when using a keyboard (privacy statement, contact methods), failing success criterion 2.1.1
• document titles: some documents have no title failing success criterion 2.4.2
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6
• outline / border style: the focus style makes it difficult to see the keyboard focus (privacy notice), failing success criterion 2.4.7
• page language: this is not declared, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• iframes: some interactive element iframes appear as a descendant of the a element failing success criterion 4.1.1
• IDs: some elements have duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• forms: some have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2
• elements: some elements do not contain text or an img with an alt attribute, failing success criteria 2.4.4, 2.4.9 and 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• images: some images do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• IDs: aria-labelledby attributes do not point to IDs of elements in the same document, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• elements: an aria-labelledby attribute reference is missing an element ID, which fails criterion 1.4.4
• contrast ratio: some controls do not have a 3:1 contrast ratio which fails success criterion 1.4.11
• keyboard users: onclick handlers do not have an equivalent onkeyup or onkeydown handler, failing success criterion 2.1.1
• images: animated images last over five seconds with no means of pausing or stopping them, failing success criterion 2.2.2
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• tabbing: the tab order does not follow a logical order, failing success criterion 2.4.3
• navigation: the system does not have information about its general layout failing success criterion 2.4.5
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6
• headings: empty headings fail success criterion 2.4.6
• outline / border style: the focus style makes it difficult to see the keyboard focus, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• IDs: some pages have duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• elements: the interactive element a appears as a descendant of the button element, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• elements: some elements do not contain text or an img with an alt attribute, failing success criteria 2.4.4, 2.4.9 and 4.1.2

Some links have duplicate link text but go to different destination, failing success criterion 2.4.4.

Some links have duplicate link text but go to different destination, failing success criterion 2.4.4.

Some links have duplicate link text but go to different destination, failing success criterion 2.4.4.

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• elements: objects elements do not have alt text, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• keyboard users: onclick handlers do not have an equivalent onkeyup or onkeydown handler, failing success criterion 2.1.1
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• links: links use generic link text that has no context, such as 'click here', failing success criterion 2.4.4
• page language: this is not declared, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• IDs: some elements have duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• forms: some form controls have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• tables: tables are being used for layout but still have structural markup, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• tables: nested tables are used which do not make sense when read in a screen reader, failing success criterion 1.3.2
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• navigation: the system does not have information about its general layout failing success criterion 2.4.5
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6
• page language: this is not declared, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• IDs: some pages have duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• colours: some body or element colours are set, but not all of them, failing success criteria 1.4.3, 1.4.6 and 1.4.8
• elements: some elements do not contain text or an img with an alt attribute, failing success criteria 2.4.4, 2.4.9 and 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• keyboard users: onclick handlers do not have an equivalent onkeyup or onkeydown handler, failing success criterion 2.1.1
• script: script is used to create a blinking effect, failing success criterion 2.2.2
• frames and iframes: some do not have a title attribute, failing success criterion 2.4.1
• document titles: some documents have no title failing success criterion 2.4.2
• colours: some body or element colours are set, but not all of them, failing success criteria 1.4.3, 1.4.6 and 1.4.8

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• tables: nested tables are used which do not make sense when read in a screen reader, failing success criterion 1.3.2
• zooming: viewport tag is being used to disable zoom, which fails criterion 1.4.4
• contrast ratio: some controls do not have a 3:1 contrast ratio which fails success criterion 1.4.11
• navigation: the system does not have information about its general layout failing success criterion 2.4.5
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6
• outline / border style: the stylesheet makes it difficult to see the dotted link focus outline, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• markup errors: some pages have markup errors which cause screen readers to miss content, failing success criterion 4.1.1

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• keyboard users: onclick handlers do not have an equivalent onkeyup or onkeydown handler, failing success criterion 2.1.1
• script: script is used to create a blinking effect, failing success criterion 2.2.2
• colours: some body or element colours are set, but not all of them, failing success criteria 1.4.3, 1.4.6 and 1.4.8
• elements: some elements do not contain text or an img with an alt attribute, failing success criteria 2.4.4, 2.4.9 and 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• stylesheets: some content is in stylesheet, making it unavailable to screen readers and users who are not using the stylesheet, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• headings: empty headings fail success criterion 2.4.6
• elements: some aria roles elements are empty/have no accessible name, failing success criteria 1.1.1 and 1.2.1
• links: some JavaScript is being used to behave like a link so it can not be tabbed to from the keyboard or read out when screen readers list the links on a page, failing success criteria 1.3.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.3 and 4.1.2
• elements: some elements do not contain text or an img with an alt attribute, failing success criteria 2.4.4, 2.4.9 and 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified

• images: some images do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• tables: nested tables are used which do not make sense when read in a screen reader, failing success criterion 1.3.2
• document titles: some documents have no title failing success criterion 2.4.2
• document titles: some documents contain placeholder text failing success criterion 2.4.2
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• headings: empty headings fail success criterion 2.4.6
• forms: some form controls have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2
• elements: some elements do not contain text or an img with an alt attribute, failing success criteria 2.4.4, 2.4.9 and 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCA 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• elements: fieldset elements are not labeled with legend elements, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• images: some images do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• documents: figures / images in documents have blank alt text, and are not marked as decorative, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• elements: objects elements do not have alt text, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• documents: PDFs are not tagged so are not accessible by screen readers, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• markup: the stylesheet font-weight property is used rather than semantic markup like strong, failing success criterion 1.3.1 
• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• tables: some data tables with two or more logical levels of headers are not marked up to associate the header cells failing success criterion 1.3.1
• tables: tables are being used for layout but still have structural markup, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• stylesheets: some content is in stylesheet, making it unavailable to screen readers and users who are not using the stylesheet, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• tables: nested tables are used which do not make sense when read in a screen reader, failing success criterion 1.3.2
• images in documents: some Word documents contains a non-inline graphic or objects, failing success criterion 1.3.2
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• keyboard users: onclick handlers do not have an equivalent onkeyup or onkeydown handler, failing success criterion 2.1.1
• document titles: some documents have no title failing success criterion 2.4.2
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• links: skip links are broken as there is no anchor link, failing success criterion 2.4.1
• headings: empty headings fail success criterion 2.4.6
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6
• outline / border style: the stylesheet makes it difficult to see the dotted link focus outline, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• page language: this is not declared, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• markup errors: some pages have markup errors which cause screen readers to miss content, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• IDs: some pages have duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• images: some alt text is the same as the image's file name, failing success criteria 1.1.1 and 1.2.1
• colours: some body or element colours are set, but not all of them, failing success criteria 1.4.3, 1.4.6 and 1.4.8
• images: an image has been updated but not its alt attribute, failing success criteria 1.1.1 and 4.1.2
• elements: some elements do not contain text or an img with an alt attribute, failing success criteria 2.4.4, 2.4.9 and 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.2 AA compliance have been identified

• graphs: these use a 3rd party web control so may not be compliant
• images in documents: some images / figures do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• markup: the stylesheet font-weight property is used rather than semantic markup like strong, failing success criterion 1.3.1 
• headings: these do not cascade, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• stylesheets: some content is in stylesheet, making it unavailable to screen readers and users who are not using the stylesheet, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• outline / border style: the focus style makes it difficult to see the keyboard focus, failing success criterion 2.4.7forms: some form controls have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified

• images in documents: some images / figures do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• documents: PDFs are not tagged so are not accessible by screen readers, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• IDs: aria-describedby attributes do not point to IDs of elements in the same document, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• hidden elements: an element with aria-hidden=true contains focusable content, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• zooming: viewport tag is being used to disable zoom, which fails criterion 1.4.4
• navigation: the system does not have information about its general layout failing success criterion 2.4.5
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6
• outline / border style: the stylesheet makes it difficult to see the dotted link focus outline, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• page language: this is not declared, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• IDs: some pages have duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• labels: some are blank, failing success criterion 4.1.2
• IDs: an aria-labelledby attribute references a non-existent element ID failing success criterion 4.1.2
• forms: some form controls have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2

• Anxious about School
• Local land searches: We are required to provide access to these documents on a short term basis while they are transferred.

• keyboard users: some features or links are not available when using a keyboard, eg tabbing through a calendar, failing success criterion 2.1.1
• 'hidden' text: some error and submission text is not available to a screen reader, failing success criterion 3.3.2
• links: some do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified

• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• IDs: aria-describedby attributes do not point to IDs of elements in the same document, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• markup: the stylesheet font-weight property.is used rather than semantic markup like strong, failing success criterion 1.3.1  
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• contrast ratio: some controls do not have a 3:1 contrast ratio which fails success criterion 1.4.11
• keyboard users: onclick handlers do not have an equivalent onkeyup or onkeydown handler, failing success criterion 2.1.1
• keyboard users: onmousedown handlers are missing onkeydown / onclick handlers, failing success criterion 2.1.1 
• frames and iframes: some do not have a title attribute, failing success criterion 2.4.1
• language: there is a bad value for attribute lang, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• IDs: an aria-labelledby attribute references a non-existent element ID failing success criterion 4.1.2
• buttons: there is an empty button element with no accessible name, failing success criterion 4.1.2
• colours: some body or element colours are set, but not all of them, failing success criteria 1.4.3, 1.4.6 and 1.4.8

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• IDs: some pages has duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• elements: some elements do not contain text or an img with an alt attribute, failing success criteria 2.4.4, 2.4.9 and 4.1.2
   

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• images: some images do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• language: some pages have words made of Unicode characters that look like English characters but are from another alphabet, meaning screen readers are unable to pronounce these words correctly, and failing success criterion 1.1.1
• stylesheets: some content is in stylesheet, making it unavailable to screen readers and users who are not using the stylesheet, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• form field labels: some are not unique or are not enclosed in a fieldset with a legend to make them unique, and fail success criterion 2.4.6
• outline / border style: the stylesheet makes it difficult to see the dotted link focus outline, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• language: some phrases in a different language should are not in a span or div with a lang attribute, failing success criterion 3.1.2
• IDs: some pages has duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• forms: some have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2
• elements: some elements do not contain text or an img with an alt attribute, failing success criteria 2.4.4, 2.4.9 and 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.2 AA compliance have been identified:

• markup: the stylesheet font-weight property is used rather than semantic markup like strong, failing success criterion 1.3.1 
• stylesheets: some content is in stylesheet, making it unavailable to screen readers and users who are not using the stylesheet, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• links: these do not have underlining making it hard for colour-blind users to see them, failing success criterion 1.4.1
• keyboard users: some features or links are not available when using a keyboard, failing success criterion 2.1.1
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• navigation: the system does not have information about its general layout failing success criterion 2.4.5
• outline / border style: the stylesheet makes it difficult to see the dotted link focus outline, failing success criterion 2.4.7
• IDs: some pages has duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• attributes: extra quote marks are appearing, possibly due to missing ones earlier in code, failing success criterion 4.1.1
• links: some JavaScript is being used to behave like a link so it can not be tabbed to from the keyboard or read out when screen readers list the links on a page, failing success criteria 1.3.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.3 and 4.1.2

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.2 AA compliance have been identified:

• headings: some headings do not cascade, failing success criterion 1.3.1

Some areas of the system that we do not use have not been tested, but we are unable to remove links to them.

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance have been identified:

• images in documents: some images / figures do not have an alt tag, failing success criterion 1.1.1
• tables: heading elements are not declared and role=presentation is not used, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• documents: PDFs are not tagged so are not accessible by screen readers, failing success criterion 1.3.1
• background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
• page language: this is not declared, failing success criterion 3.1.1
• page titles: pages titles are not unique, failing success criterion 2.4.2
• document titles: some documents have no title failing success criterion 2.4.2
• headings: empty headings fail success criterion 2.4.6
• images: some alt text is the same as the image's file name, failing success criteria 1.1.1 and 1.2.1

IDs: some pages/elements have duplicate IDs which cause problems in screen readers, failing success criterion 4.1.1