How usable this site is, and how we know

What is checked, and how often

Every release runs an automated accessibility check across the whole site before it publishes. It uses axe-core at the WCAG 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2 A and AA rule sets, on each page, at a desktop width and at a phone width, after the page has finished animating — a page caught mid-fade reports colours that do not exist, which invents failures and hides real ones.

The list of pages it visits is derived from the site’s own routing table, and the build fails if any page is missing from it. That rule exists because the check used to carry a hand-written list written when the site was smaller: two pages had been added since, every run was green, and neither page had ever been opened.

A page with no visible heading is treated as a failure rather than a pass, because a hidden page scores perfectly on every automated rule there is.

What is built in

• A “Skip to content” link as the first thing the keyboard reaches on every page.
• Everything that can be clicked can be reached and operated with a keyboard, and shows where the focus is.
• All motion stops if your system is set to reduce motion — including the background animations and Gaia’s mark.
• Nothing that animates or types changes the size of its own box, so text never moves under you while you are reading it. This is measured, not assumed: a probe samples the page across a full animation cycle and requires one height and a layout-shift score of effectively zero.
• Text contrast is measured rather than eyeballed, and the brand colours are darkened where they would otherwise fail.
• Headings are real headings in order, form fields have real labels, and the page declares its language as British English.
• The site sets no cookies and shows no cookie banner, so nothing covers the page you are trying to read.

What the automated check cannot see

Automated testing catches a minority of accessibility problems — commonly estimated at around a third. It cannot tell you whether alternative text is right, whether a reading order makes sense, whether a label describes what a control actually does, or whether a page is understandable. Those need a person.

What has not been done

• No independent accessibility audit. Nobody outside the company has assessed this site.
• No testing with screen-reader users, or with any disabled person, yet. That is the largest gap on this page and it is the one we would most like to close.
• The white paper PDF has not been checked for screen-reader tagging. The same text is published as an ordinary web page at /paper, which is the accessible route to it.
• The research workspace, once it opens, will need its own check before anybody is invited into it.

If something on this site stops you

Please tell us — it is the fastest way anything here gets better, and you will get a reply from a person. Email research@mypetsitter.org with the page you were on, what you were trying to do, and what happened. If you use assistive technology, telling us which one helps us reproduce it.

If you would be willing to help us test the site properly, we would like to hear from you at the same address.

Enforcement

If you are not happy with how we respond, you can contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service, through its page on GOV.UK (opens in a new tab) or free on 0808 800 0082.

This statement was written on 23 September 2026 and is reviewed whenever the site changes materially. It is based on the checks described above; it is not the result of an independent audit.