LEARNER LEAD
Legal

Accessibility statement

What we aim for, what has actually been measured, and what is still outstanding. Written for the person at an institution who has to assess this during procurement.

Effective
24 August 2026
Last updated
24 August 2026

1. Our commitment

Learner Lead targets WCAG 2.1 Level AA for the web portal and for this website. A school system is used by office staff, teachers, parents and students across a wide range of devices, connections and abilities, and by people who did not choose the software and cannot switch away from it. That makes accessibility a requirement rather than a refinement.

This statement distinguishes between what has been measured and what has only been targeted. Procurement teams are asked to take accessibility claims on trust more often than they should be, so the honest version is below.

2. This website

Status: conforms to WCAG 2.1 Level AA, verified rather than asserted.

Every foreground and background pair on the page was measured. Twenty-three failed either SC 1.4.3 (contrast of text) or SC 1.4.11 (contrast of non-text elements), and all twenty-three were corrected. Nine colour values here differ from the original design for exactly this reason, including a text-field border that carried 1.28:1 against the card it sat on, which meant the only thing marking it as a control was effectively invisible.

Also implemented:

  • Landmarks and a skip link. Header, navigation, main and footer regions, with every section labelled by its own heading, and a skip link ahead of the eight header controls.
  • The module grid is a real tab pattern, with roving focus and arrow-key navigation, rather than buttons that hide sections.
  • The FAQ is a disclosure pattern with the expanded state exposed, and each question inside a heading so the page outline still reads.
  • The school finder is an ARIA combobox with a listbox, arrow-key navigation and a live region announcing how many institutions match.
  • The sign-in dialog takes focus on open, keeps Tab inside it, restores focus to whatever opened it, and closes the listbox before itself on Escape.
  • A pause control on the scrolling module band. Motion that starts on its own and runs past five seconds needs a way to stop it under SC 2.2.2. It also pauses on hover and on keyboard focus.
  • Reduced motion is respected. The page runs ten looping animations, and prefers-reduced-motion stops all of them and resolves the scroll reveal immediately.
  • Decorative illustrations are hidden from assistive technology, and everything they depict is stated in the text beside them.
  • Percentages are text, not just bar length, so no value is conveyed by shape or colour alone.

Verified at 320, 360, 390, 640, 768, 900, 1024, 1152, 1440 and 1920 pixels wide, with no horizontal scrolling and no clipped content at any of them.

3. The product

Status: AA is the target. The full audit has not yet been carried out.

The web portal is built on Radix primitives through shadcn/ui, which supplies correct keyboard interaction and ARIA semantics for dialogs, menus, tabs and comboboxes. Colour and type come from one token source, which is what makes a contrast correction a single edit rather than a hunt.

A dedicated accessibility pass across the product is scheduled work and is not complete. Until it is, we will not claim the portal conforms. If your procurement process needs a completed VPAT or a conformance report for a specific release, write to us and we will tell you honestly where that release stands rather than sending a document that outruns the evidence.

The mobile application, which follows the web release, will follow the platform accessibility guidelines for iOS and Android in addition to WCAG where it applies.

4. Known limitations

  • The product accessibility audit is outstanding, as above.
  • The interface ships in English and Hindi at launch. Further Indian languages are supported by the architecture but not yet translated, which is a barrier for some users even though it is not a WCAG failure.
  • Uploaded content is not ours to fix. Where a school uploads a scanned circular or a photographed notice, we cannot add alternative text to it. The platform prompts for a description at upload; whether one is given is the institution’s practice.
  • Generated PDFs, including report cards and receipts, are laid out for print. Their tagging for screen readers has not been audited.

5. Assistive technology

The website has been checked with keyboard-only navigation and with the accessibility tree rendered by the browser. It has not been formally tested against a matrix of named screen readers and versions. When that testing happens, this section will name what was tested and on what.

6. Reporting a barrier

If something on this site or in the product is unusable for you, tell us. A specific report is worth a great deal more than a general one: the page or screen, what you were trying to do, and the browser, device and assistive technology you were using.

Write to the privacy address at the foot of this page and mark it for accessibility. We aim to acknowledge within five working days and to tell you what we intend to do and roughly when. Where a fix will take time, we will offer a way to complete the task in the meantime.

If you are a student or a parent, your institution can also raise it on your behalf, and a report routed through the school usually reaches the right screen faster because the school can say which one you were on.

7. Preparation of this statement

This statement reflects self-assessment. The website evaluation was carried out by measuring every contrast pair on the page and testing keyboard paths through each interactive component. No third-party accessibility audit has been commissioned yet. When one is, this section will name the auditor and the date.