Accessibility statement

We want everyone who visits our website to be able to access the full range of services available, regardless of their skill or technology.

This accessibility statement applies to www.durham.gov.uk, linked sub domains of durham.gov.uk and all applications and systems that are classed as part of that site.

This website is run by Durham County Council.

How accessible this website is

We know some parts of this website aren't fully accessible.

HTML: the underlying code used to create the website
CSS: used to describe how HTML is shown on the pages
JavaScript: a development language used to program some areas of the site
3rd party functionality: areas of the site which are developed by external 3rd party companies
content: this includes web page content or documents

Feedback and contact information

We're always looking to improve the accessibility of this website. If you find any problems not listed on this page, think we're not meeting accessibility requirements or have any feedback, please email us at webadmin@durham.gov.uk.

If you need to contact us about any other issues, please use our contact us page.

Enforcement procedure

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is responsible for enforcing the accessibility regulations. If you're not happy with how we respond, please contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS).

Technical information about this website's accessibility

Durham County Council is committed to making its website accessible, in accordance with The Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.

Under the Equality Act 2010 we must ensure we do not unlawfully discriminate in our service delivery and make reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities where necessary. We are constantly working to improve the accessibility and usability of our site.

Compliance status

This website is partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard, due to the non-compliances listed below.

Non-accessible content

Disproportionate burden

Third party suppliers: Some of our websites or applications are provided by third party suppliers where we do not have permissions or access to be able to make changes. We continue to talk to suppliers about getting their systems accessible, and also review options when contracts come up for renewal.
Internally built systems: Where system replacements are planned as part of our ongoing maintenance program, we are looking to finish work on newer, accessible versions, rather than fix old, out-going systems, to ensure effective use of resource.

Below is a list of the systems and sites which we have identified as a disproportionate burden and details of the classification of the disproportionate burden, the expected date for this to be made accessible and the accessibility compliance fails.

Main site - documents

Documents on the site that we have marked as disproportionate burden.

ISSUU documents

ISSUU documents may be added to this site but are not accessible. Whenever one is added a PDF will also be provided. We intend to review these in January 2023.

Your Guide to Council Services 2020
Climate Change and Emergency Response Plan 2022-24
Guide to extending your home

Local land searches

We are required to provide access to these documents on a short term basis while that are transferred. We intend to remove them by May 2023.

Selective licensing postcode checker

An Excel spreadsheet has been added but is not accessible. A .csv file has also been provided. We intend to review this in January 2023.

Word documents

Where there are PDF forms that are not yet accessible, we have provided a Word version of the form.

Pension fund annual report 2021-22

This document 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 document was only made available a short time before the statutory deadline for publication.

Statement of accounts

This document 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 document was only made available a short time before the statutory deadline for publication.

Benefits calculator

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Births, deaths and marriages certificates

This is a system which is due to be replaced within the next year as part of the improvement programme.

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

Care Academy and adult learning courses

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Children's Services feedback forms

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Community grants

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Council tax / business rates / housing benefit repayments

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 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
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

Councillors, minutes and papers

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Customer account (Do It Online / online forms)

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

DCC Equal Online

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

DLI collections (Courageous Restraint collection)

This is a system which is due to be replaced within the next year as part of the improvement programme.

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

DLI collections (medal collection)

This is a system which is due to be replaced within the next year as part of the improvement programme.

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

DLI collections (objects collection)

This is a system which is due to be replaced within the next year as part of the improvement programme.

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

The Durham Record

This is a system which is due to be replaced within the next year as part of the improvement programme.

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
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
frames and iframes: some do not have a title attribute, failing success criterion 2.4.1
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

Ebooks

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Foster carers portal

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Freedom of information, information rights and disclosure log

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Human resources / MyView

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Jobs portal (applying for council jobs)

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Learn2swim

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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
markup: the stylesheet font-weight property is used rather than semantic markup like strong, 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
links: links use generic link text that has no context, such as 'click here', failing success criterion 2.4.4
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
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

Leisure centre bookings

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 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: absolute positioning fails success criterion 1.3.2
background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
http header: refresh is used to redirect pages, which can confuse users, failing success criterion 2.2.1
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
fieldsets: fieldset elements are not labelled with legend elements, failing success criteria 1.3.1 and 3.3.2
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

Leisure centre registration

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 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
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
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
http header: refresh is used to redirect pages, which can confuse users, failing success criterion 2.2.1
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
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
forms: some form controls have blank labels or titles, which fails success criterion 4.1.2
fieldsets: fieldset elements are not labelled with legend elements, failing success criteria 1.3.1 and 3.3.2
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

Library Online

This is a system which is due to be replaced within the next year as part of the improvement programme.

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

Mapping (public transport)

This provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Microsoft Bookings

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

Our Walk Durham booking system uses Microsoft Bookings.

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
background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
navigation: the system does not have information about its general layout failing success criterion 2.4.5
navigation: some navigation gives no way for the user to get back to the previous page
links: some links open in a new tab/window without warning or open as a pop up window
keyboard users: some keyboard functionality is not present
forms: mandatory fields are not marked as such and explained
links: a link is broken
links: two links on the same page have different link text but go to the same destinations

Microsoft Power BI reports

Power Bi reports are currently used for Peterlee's gym as construction work is causing reduced availability. It will be removed when this work has finished.

markup: the stylesheet font-weight property is used rather than semantic markup like strong, 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
attributes: some attributes do not have spaces between them, 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

Parent portal (providers)

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

During our accessibility checks the following fails with WCAG 2.1 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
stylesheets: absolute positioning fails success criterion 1.3.2
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
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
attributes: extra quote marks are appearing, possibly due to missing ones earlier in code, failing success criterion 4.1.1

Parent portal (school admissions and early years funding applications)

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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
background colours: some text / background colours do not have enough contrast, failing success criterion 1.4.3
markup errors: some pages have markup errors which cause screen readers to miss content, failing success criterion 4.1.1

Parking fines portal

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

PaybyPhone parking

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Pensions portal (scheme members)

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Pensions portal (scheme organisations)

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Planning applications

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Planning consultations

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

Volunteering portal

This is provided by a third party supplier where we do not have full control to make changes.

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

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

PDFs and documents (pre September 2018): PDFs or other documents published before 23 September 2018 and are not essential to providing our services
pre-recorded audio and video published before 23 September 2020
live audio and video including road and traffic cameras
interactive maps unless they provide core information
content that's under someone else's control that we have not paid for or developed ourselves:
- social media buttons and embedded Twitter feeds
- Shildon-Sunnydale leisure centre virtual tour: the tour relies on the user being able to see the tour and use a mouse to navigate it. It is a 3rd party product that was free. We do not intend to use further tours as there would be a cost associated and it is not an accessible product.
- Bishop Auckland bus station consultation virtual tour: the tour walk through relies on the user being able to see the tour and use a mouse to navigate it. It is a 3rd party product that was free.
- documents that we must make available and are submitted by the public or an external organisation:
  - planning application feedback
  - council minutes and papers
  - environmental permit consultations
  - common land decommissioning enquiries
  - neighbourhood plan submissions
  - Public Rights of Way register entries
- publications containing advertisements provided by an external organisation:
  - Warm Homes newsletters
- archived systems that are not needed for services we provide and are not updated:
  - the People Past and Present Archive
- Bootstrap
  - births, deaths and marriages certificates
  - DLI collections (Courageous Restraint, medals, objects)
  - The Durham Record
  - Duty to Refer
  - Library online
  - My Durham
  - Property services (CORAM)
  - Technical services (CORAM)

Preparation of this statement

This statement was prepared on November 2019. It was last reviewed on 22 July 2022.

We re-assess the code, design and content of a website, application or system for accessibility whenever it undergoes a major modification. We do this internally using a combination of automated and manual checking.

Main site page content is manually checked every time it is updated.

Website Administrator
: webadmin@durham.gov.uk

Related information