Where Accessibility Breaks Down
Where Accessibility Breaks Down – Why Website Compliance Alone Fails Real Users
Municipal websites across Manitoba are being redesigned with accessibility top of mind. Standards are reviewed. Checklists are followed. Audits are completed. And yet, many organizations continue to receive complaints, service inquiries, and accessibility-related feedback from residents who still struggle to complete basic tasks online.
This disconnect points to a reality that is often overlooked.
Accessibility is not just a technical website issue. It is a service design issue.
Organizations can meet accessibility standards and still unintentionally create barriers for the people they serve. The reason is simple. Accessibility failures most often occur not on individual pages, but across the full journey a resident must take to access a service.
The Problem with Treating Accessibility as a Checklist
Most accessibility efforts focus on page-level compliance. Teams ask whether a page meets WCAG requirements, whether images have alt text, whether headings are structured properly, and whether contrast ratios pass automated tests.
These efforts are important. They are also incomplete.
When accessibility is treated as a checklist applied after design decisions are made, it tends to focus on static content rather than real-world use. Residents, however, do not visit municipal websites to admire compliant pages. They visit to complete tasks.
Reporting an issue. Applying for a permit. Booking a program. Understanding eligibility. Finding the right department.
Accessibility challenges arise when these tasks span multiple steps, systems, or departments.
Accessibility Is a Service Design Problem
Where accessibility breaks down.
Consider a common scenario.
A resident wants to report a local issue such as a pothole or damaged sidewalk. They must locate the correct page, determine whether the issue falls under municipal jurisdiction, complete a form, possibly upload supporting information, and then wait for confirmation.
Each step may be technically accessible on its own. Together, the experience can still be confusing, overwhelming, or inaccessible in practice.
Barriers often appear when users move between pages, when instructions are unclear, when language is overly technical, or when forms require unnecessary effort to complete. For residents with cognitive disabilities, low vision, limited digital literacy, or situational challenges, these barriers can make services effectively unusable.
This is not a failure of compliance. It is a failure of service design.
Why Service Design Matters for Accessibility
Service design looks at the full experience from the user’s perspective. It considers not only what is presented on a page, but how people move through information, decisions, and actions to reach an outcome.
From an accessibility standpoint, service design asks different questions.
Is the task clear from the start?
Is the language easy to understand?
Are next steps obvious?
Does the experience remain consistent across tools and departments?
Is help available when users get stuck?
These questions matter just as much as technical standards.
Is this where accessibility breaks down?
Research consistently shows that users are more likely to abandon tasks when processes are complex or unclear, even when individual components are accessible. In public-sector environments, this often leads to increased phone calls, emails, and in-person visits that strain staff resources.
The Hidden Accessibility Risks Municipal Leaders Should Know
Many accessibility challenges are not visible in audits or automated testing.
Third-party tools such as forms, booking systems, and document viewers often introduce accessibility gaps. Content delivered through PDFs can remain difficult to navigate, even when technically tagged. Departmental silos can fragment responsibility for accessibility across the service journey.
In these cases, no single team owns the end-to-end experience. Accessibility becomes everyone’s responsibility and no one’s accountability.
This is where many well-intentioned redesigns fall short.
Accessibility and the Intent of Manitoba’s Legislation
The purpose of The Accessibility for Manitobans Act is not simply to ensure that websites pass technical tests. It is to remove barriers so Manitobans can access services independently and with dignity.
Organizations that focus only on compliance risk missing the broader intent of the legislation.
Leading public-sector organizations are beginning to shift their approach. Instead of asking whether pages are accessible, they ask whether services are usable. Or instead of auditing pages in isolation, they test real tasks from start to finish. Instead of assigning accessibility to a single role, they embed it across service delivery.
This approach aligns more closely with expectations emerging from the Government of Manitoba and accessibility leaders across Canada.
What a Service-Based Accessibility Approach Looks Like
A service-based approach to accessibility does not require advanced technical expertise. It requires clarity, coordination, and leadership.
Municipal leaders can begin by identifying the most important services their website supports. These are often the services that generate the highest volume of inquiries or complaints.
From there, teams can evaluate whether residents can complete those tasks easily and independently. This includes reviewing instructions, language, forms, confirmation steps, and follow-up communications.
Accessibility becomes part of how services are designed, not something checked at the end. This is where accessibility breaks down.
Practical Steps Municipal Leaders Can Take
First, focus on tasks, not pages. Identify the top services residents rely on and evaluate accessibility across the full journey.
Second, treat clarity as an accessibility feature. Plain language, predictable steps, and clear expectations reduce barriers for everyone.
Third, assign ownership for service accessibility. Someone must be accountable for the full experience across departments and tools.
Fourth, include accessibility considerations when selecting third-party platforms. Accessibility responsibilities should be clear in procurement and contracts.
Finally, measure success based on outcomes, not audits alone. Reduced support requests, improved task completion, and positive feedback are strong indicators of meaningful accessibility.
A Different Way Forward
Accessibility is often framed as a regulatory requirement. In practice, it is an opportunity to improve how services work for everyone.
When accessibility is approached as a service design problem, organizations create digital experiences that are easier to use, easier to maintain, and more resilient over time. Compliance becomes a byproduct of good design, not a last-minute hurdle.
For municipalities across Manitoba, this shift can reduce risk, improve public trust, and deliver services that truly work for the communities they serve.
