This website is run by Good Thinking. We want as many people as possible to be able to use this website. For example, that means you should be able to:
We’ve also made the website text as simple as possible to understand.
Translating our website
If you would like to view this website in another language we recommend using Google Translate. To choose a new language select the drop down menu at the top-centre of the page.
We have done recent work to make this site as accessible as possible, including making sure that it is easy to navigate by different methods and that everything is correctly labelled.
We know that there are still improvements to be made. A full list is below under ‘Non-accessible content’. We will make improvements as part of further planned work on the site.
If you need information on this website in a different format like accessible PDF, large print, easy read, audio recording or braille, firstname.lastname@example.org. We’ll try to respond as soon as we can, generally within ten working days.
We’re always looking to improve the accessibility of this website. If you find any problems not listed on this page or think we’re not meeting accessibility requirements, then please contact us.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is responsible for enforcing the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018 (the ‘accessibility regulations’). If you’re not happy with how we respond to your complaint, contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS).
Good Thinking is committed to making its website accessible, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.
This website is partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard, due to non-compliances listed below.
The content listed below is non-accessible for the following reasons.
Some images do not have a text alternative, so people using a screen reader cannot access the information. We plan to add text alternatives for all images by end of March 2021. When we publish new content, we’ll make sure our use of images meets accessibility standards.
We offer some third-party PDFs for download, which are not fully accessible. We plan to provide content which meets the same need as these PDFs, or source accessible PDFs which do.
Colour contrast on certain navigation links falls slightly short of WCAG standards. We will address this as part of planned work on the site by end of March 2021.
We have short quizzes on the site, which are currently not navigable by keyboard users. We will address this as part of planned work on the site by end of March 2021. We also offer alternative, in-depth assessments which are navigable by keyboard.
We have not identified any improvements which will be a disproportionate burden to make, but we do intend to wait until previously scheduled website work to make the improvements outlined below, as it will be more cost effective.
PDFs and other documents
We offer some third-party PDFs for download, which are not fully accessible. We plan to provide content which meets the same need as these PDFs, or source accessible PDFs which do. Any new PDFs or other documents we publish will meet accessibility standards.
We carried out an accessibility audit of Good Thinking and made a number of improvements. We will continue to resolve outstanding non-compliance issues we have identified and work to make any other improvements that are suggested to us. We will update this page when issues are fixed.
We are also ensuring all new work is designed and tested for accessibility throughout the build.
This statement was prepared on 20 September 2020. It was last reviewed on 30 September 2020.
This website was last tested on 29 September 2020. The test was carried out by Soho Strategy. They tested the accessibility of key pages and features of the website, including the homepage, a sample of individual content pages, the quizzes, in-depth self-assessments and a sample of individual resource pages. They used this approach to deciding on a sample of pages to test: selecting pages which could be extrapolated to understand the accessibility of pages the vast majority of users are likely to see, judged by site usage data and the re-use of page templates.