SayPro Accessibility Evaluation

SayPro Tasks to be Completed During the Period Accessibility Evaluation Perform a comprehensive accessibility audit of the SayPro website using automated tools (like WAVE or Axe) and manual testing from SayPro Monthly February SCMR-17 SayPro Monthly Inclusive Design: Ensure the site is accessible to users with disabilities by SayPro Online Marketplace Office under SayPro Marketing Royalty SCMR

Overview

The accessibility evaluation is a crucial task within the SayPro Monthly February SCMR-17 initiative aimed at ensuring that SayPro’s website is fully accessible to all users, including those with disabilities. This evaluation is performed through a combination of automated tools and manual testing to identify any barriers faced by users with disabilities. The goal is to provide a detailed report on the website’s current accessibility status, highlighting areas for improvement to ensure compliance with accessibility standards such as WCAG 2.1 and to support the overall goal of inclusive design.

Tasks to be Completed

---

1. Preparation for Accessibility Evaluation

1.1 Define Scope and Objectives

Before conducting the accessibility audit, it is essential to define the scope and specific objectives of the evaluation. The scope should cover:

• Pages and sections of the website to be tested (e.g., homepage, product pages, checkout process, etc.).
• User tasks that should be prioritized during testing (e.g., navigation, form submission, content consumption).
• Specific user groups to focus on (e.g., users with visual impairments, users with motor disabilities, etc.).

Clear objectives might include:

• Ensuring compliance with WCAG 2.1 Level AA.
• Identifying and prioritizing accessibility barriers based on user impact.
• Enhancing the overall user experience for people with disabilities.

1.2 Gather Relevant Tools and Resources

For this task, you will need the appropriate tools and resources to conduct a comprehensive audit. The following tools should be prepared and reviewed:

• Automated Tools:
  • WAVE: A web accessibility evaluation tool that helps identify a variety of accessibility and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) issues on a webpage.
  • Axe: Another popular automated accessibility testing tool that integrates with browsers to evaluate webpages for accessibility issues.
  • Lighthouse: A tool that provides a performance and accessibility audit for web pages, including a detailed report with suggestions for improvement.
• Manual Testing: A manual approach will be required to detect issues that automated tools might miss. This will include:
  • Keyboard-only navigation tests to ensure all interactive elements are navigable without a mouse.
  • Screen reader testing using tools like NVDA or VoiceOver to ensure content is correctly announced.
  • Visual checks for issues like color contrast, readable text sizes, and focus indicators.

---

2. Automated Testing Using WAVE, Axe, and Lighthouse

2.1 Conduct an Initial Automated Audit

Using WAVE, Axe, and Lighthouse, the first step is to conduct an automated audit of key pages across the website. These tools will provide immediate feedback on a range of accessibility issues, including:

• Missing alt text for images.
• Improper heading structures (e.g., missing H1 tags or improper use of headings).
• Color contrast issues that may prevent text from being readable by users with visual impairments.
• Form accessibility issues, such as missing labels or unlabelled buttons.
• ARIAL (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) attributes and roles on dynamic content.

2.2 Record and Review Results

Document the results of the automated audit:

• Create a spreadsheet or accessibility tracker to log identified issues, categorize them by severity (e.g., critical, high, medium, low), and note the page or section where each issue was found.
• Review any suggestions for remediation provided by the tools, such as recommended fixes for contrast, alternative text, or structural issues.

---

3. Manual Testing and User Experience Evaluation

3.1 Manual Review of WCAG 2.1 Compliance

Automated tools may not catch all issues, especially those related to user experience. Manual testing is essential to ensure comprehensive evaluation:

• Keyboard Navigation: Manually test the site to ensure that all interactive elements (buttons, forms, links, etc.) can be accessed and operated with only a keyboard. Ensure logical focus management (e.g., tabbing between elements in a predictable, intuitive manner).
• Screen Reader Testing: Test the site with screen readers like NVDA (NonVisual Desktop Access) or VoiceOver (for Mac users). Check that:
  • Alt text is provided for all non-text content, like images and charts.
  • The order of content is logical when read out loud by the screen reader.
  • Interactive elements are properly announced, including form fields and buttons.
• Color Contrast and Visual Design: Check the contrast between text and background to ensure readability for users with visual impairments (especially color blindness). Evaluate:
  • The contrast ratio of text against the background (must meet a ratio of at least 4.5:1 for regular text, 3:1 for large text).
  • The readability of the site’s text size, line height, and spacing.

3.2 User Testing with Real Users with Disabilities

Where feasible, organize user testing sessions with individuals who have disabilities to evaluate the actual usability of the website. This can include:

• Inviting users with disabilities (e.g., those who are blind, have low vision, or have motor disabilities) to interact with the website and gather feedback.
• Observing how users navigate the website using their preferred assistive technologies or methods (e.g., keyboard, screen readers, alternative input devices).
• Documenting challenges faced by users during these sessions to identify any areas that require improvement from a practical, user-centric perspective.

---

4. Analysis of Findings and Reporting

4.1 Document Accessibility Barriers

Following the audit, both from automated and manual testing, create a comprehensive report detailing the accessibility issues found. This report should include:

• A summary of the findings, including the number of issues discovered.
• A breakdown of the issues by category (e.g., visual impairments, motor disabilities, cognitive challenges, hearing impairments).
• Screenshots, annotations, or videos where applicable, illustrating specific problems.
• A severity rating for each issue, indicating how critical it is for users with disabilities (e.g., critical, major, minor).

4.2 Prioritize Issues Based on Severity and Impact

• Critical issues should be addressed immediately (e.g., missing alt text for important images, broken forms that prevent submission, or color contrast problems that hinder readability).
• Medium-priority issues include things like inconsistent keyboard focus or mild visual design issues.
• Low-priority issues might involve areas where minor improvements can be made (e.g., enhancing the layout of a page for easier reading or fixing non-critical ARIA attributes).

4.3 Recommendations for Remediation

Provide clear and actionable recommendations for resolving identified issues. This may include:

• Code changes (e.g., adding alt text, ensuring proper heading hierarchy).
• Design changes (e.g., adjusting color contrast or text sizes).
• Content modifications (e.g., adding captions to multimedia or improving form field labels).
• Improving the overall navigation structure to make it more intuitive and accessible.

---

5. Prepare and Share Accessibility Report

5.1 Prepare a Detailed Accessibility Report

Once the audit is complete, prepare a detailed report summarizing:

• The audit methods used (automated and manual testing).
• The number and types of issues found.
• The severity of each issue and its potential impact on users with disabilities.
• Recommendations for fixing each identified issue.

5.2 Share the Report with Key Stakeholders

Share the findings with relevant teams (design, development, content, and QA) to ensure everyone understands the issues and is aligned in addressing them. The report should be presented in an accessible format, with clear action points.

5.3 Track Remediation Progress

Create a system for tracking the progress of fixing identified issues. This could be through:

• A shared tracking document or tool to monitor the resolution of issues.
• Regular updates to ensure that critical issues are resolved promptly.
• Reporting back on the success of remediation efforts.

---

Conclusion

The Accessibility Evaluation task is a fundamental component of the SayPro Monthly February SCMR-17 initiative. By conducting a thorough automated and manual audit, SayPro can identify and resolve accessibility issues, ensuring that the website provides an inclusive experience for all users, regardless of their abilities. The findings from this evaluation will inform design and development improvements and help ensure that SayPro remains compliant with accessibility standards like WCAG 2.1.