Legal

Accessibility Statement

Version 1.0 · Last updated 24 August 2026

We publish analysis that is meant to be read by councillors, communities and the public — not only by specialists. Work that cannot be read by everyone it concerns has failed at something more basic than presentation.

1. Our commitment

We aim to meet WCAG 2.2 Level AA across this website and, where the format allows, across the deliverables we produce for clients. We are not a public sector body and so are not bound by the EU Web Accessibility Directive or S.I. 358/2020 — but many of our clients are, and material we hand them should not create a compliance problem for them.

2. What we have done on this site

• Semantic HTML with a logical heading order, a declared page language, and landmark elements so screen readers can navigate
• Colour contrast measured rather than assumed: body copy 9.5:1, muted supporting text 7.8:1, and every text and background pairing on the site at or above the 4.5:1 AA threshold
• Every interactive control is a real <button> or link, keyboard operable, with a visible :focus-visible indicator
• Expandable panels carry aria-expanded and aria-controls, and each panel is a labelled region
• The director biography opens in a dialog with aria-modal, focus trapped inside it, Escape to close, and focus returned to the control that opened it
• The rotating headline is hidden from assistive technology and replaced with the complete sentence, so it is announced once rather than on every character
• All form fields have associated labels; the anti-spam error is text with role="alert", not colour alone
• prefers-reduced-motion is respected — the headline typing, panel transitions and header animation are all suppressed
• Anchor links carry scroll-margin-top so headings are not hidden beneath the sticky header
• Decorative images have empty alt text; the logo is labelled

3. Known limitations

We would rather name these than let you discover them.

• No navigation menu on small screens. Below 760px the header links are hidden and there is no menu in their place, so reaching a section on a phone means scrolling the page. This is the most significant issue on the site and it is on our list.
• The approach diagram depends on pointer hover. Below 900px it is replaced by a stacked text version carrying the same information, and the elements respond to tap as well as hover — but the two experiences are equivalent rather than identical.
• Colour carries meaning in that diagram. Service families are distinguished on the ring by colour. The family name appears in the centre readout when an element is selected, but the ring alone does not convey it without colour.
• Interactive layers require JavaScript. With JavaScript disabled the full service list and all page content still render and remain readable; the expanding and filtering behaviour does not.
• Heading order skips a level in the stacked mobile version of the approach section.
• Interactive maps and dashboards. Spatial visualisation is difficult to make fully accessible to screen reader users. Where we publish a map or dashboard we aim to provide the underlying data as an accessible table or download, and a text summary of the finding. Tell us if one is missing and we will supply it.
• PDF reports. Older reports may not be fully tagged for screen readers. We can provide an accessible alternative format on request.

4. Accessible formats on request

If you need something we publish in a different format — accessible PDF, plain text, large print, or the underlying data as a spreadsheet — ask and we will provide it. There is no charge and you do not need to explain why.

5. Feedback

If you hit a barrier on this site or in anything we have produced, we want to hear about it. Email info@spatialis.ie with the page or document and what went wrong. We aim to acknowledge within 5 working days and to tell you what we are going to do about it.

6. Assessment

This statement is based on a self-assessment carried out on 24 August 2026, comprising a review of the site's markup and ARIA implementation and a mathematical check of every colour contrast pairing against WCAG 2.1 AA thresholds.

It has not yet been tested with assistive technology. No screen reader pass and no automated audit tool have been run against the live site. We would rather say so than imply a level of testing we have not done. Both are planned, and this statement will be updated with the date and method when they are complete.

We review this statement at least annually and whenever the site changes materially.