Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is committed to making its websites accessible, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.
This accessibility statement applies to manchesterfire.gov.uk
This website is partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard, due to the non-compliances and the exemptions listed below.
The content listed below is not accessible for the following reasons:
(a) Non-compliance with the Accessibility Regulations
This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.3 focus order. This is an issue with our implementation of the third-party solution, Cookiebot.
We have raised this with Cookiebot and still hope to work towards a solution, but they have been unable to give us a timeline. We are now exploring fixes for the outstanding issues.
Not all images have a text alternative, so people using a screen reader cannot access the information.
Some images have alt-text that is not meaningful – for example, the featured image on the homepage has the alt-text “featured thumbnail.”
This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 non-text content and 1.4.5 images of text.
Not all links use meaningful link text and/or specify whether the link goes to an external website or opens a new tab or window. This may make it difficult for people to know where a link is going and could cause a new tab or window to open without the user knowing before clicking it.
Some link text is duplicated when going to different destinations, this could make the content confusing to people using screen readers as it will see the links without context.
This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 non-text content, 2.4.4 link purpose and 4.1.2 name, role, value.
The accessibility of embedded video content is dependent on the standards reached by the third-party provider, for example, YouTube. Where possible we make use of features such as subtitles, transcripts and captions to ensure our content is accessible. Some of our older videos that are within scope of the guidelines do not have subtitles, however our more recent ones do.
Some of our videos have subtitles that have been automatically generated and have not been reviewed by a human, which can lead to some errors in translation.
Some of our videos have meaningful visual content (e.g. animated text), but no audio track or transcript. Some of our videos have meaningful audio content (e.g. sound effect), but have no captions alongside the subtitles.
This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.1 audio only and video only (prerecorded), 1.2.2 captions (prerecorded), 1.2.3 audio description or media alternative (prerecorded), and 1.2.5 audio description (prerecorded).
Some iFrames are missing the ‘title’ attribute. Some iFrames have a title attribute but not a very meaningful one, for example, title=“blank”. This may make it difficult for people to know what content is contained in the iFrame before you interact with it, especially when using a screen reader.
This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 bypass blocks, and 4.1.2 name, role, value.
Interactive tools, data visualisations and transactions
Not all data visualisations within documents can be made accessible. Where possible we will include the same information in plain text using list hierarchies alongside the visualisation and/or provide alt-text with the chart.
Some structures and relationships within diagrams are not fully communicated when using screen readers.
Where visual data cannot be shown, this fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 non-text content and 1.3.1 info and relationships.
When some pages are enlarged some information and functionality is lost causing users to have to scroll in more than one direction. The text will also not reflow in a single column when you change the size of the browser window. This makes it hard for visually impaired users who may need to enlarge text on a webpage.
This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.10 reflow.
Some tables do not have correctly marked-up headings and do not have scope defined. Some tables are also irregular with merged or empty cells.
This fails WCAG 1.3.1 info and relationships
Some forms are in Word format and are not always accessible. Some forms use Microsoft Forms and are dependent on Microsoft’s compliance standards (external website).
Some of our online forms are not fully accessible. Inaccessible aspects of some of our documents include:
- No skip to content link allowing users to quickly bypass heading and navigational content, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 bypass blocks.
- Missing heading tags and missing table headers, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 info and relationships.
- Labels or instructions not provided where content requires user input e.g. required fields, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.2 labels or Instructions.
- Autocomplete attributes missing, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.5 identify input purpose.
Headings and structure
Text on some pages look like headings but have not been marked up correctly or have been nested incorrectly. This means important structural information that is communicated visually is not also communicated to users who cannot see the screen.
Some attributes have duplicate IDs which can cause accessible technologies to stop working.
This fails WCAG 1.3.1 Info and relationships.
The contrast between some user interface controls (e.g. buttons), form fields, and meaningful graphics do not meet the 3:1 contrast ratio required. This makes it hard for users with low vision to see them.
It is not possible to read some content after applying text spacing as it becomes obscured by other content.
This fails WCAG 1.4.11 non-text contrast and 1.4.12 text spacing.
On some pages users cannot navigate the page in a logical reading order using a keyboard. This can cause confusion for users tabbing through content.
Some pages cannot be found in multiple ways for example the Site Map page can only be found via a link in the footer. As users find content in different ways this can make the process of finding content slower.
Some interactive elements do not have a visible indicator when focussed using a keyboard. This can make it difficult for users navigating with a keyboard to identify which parts of a webpage they can interact with.
In some cases where an interactive component includes a visible text label, the label in the code does not match or include the visible text. If these do not match speech command will not work for people using speech input.
This fails WCAG 2.4.3 focus order, 2.4.5 multiple ways, 2.4.7 focus visible and 2.5.3 label in name.
Not all our documents are fully accessible.
Our more recent documents are mostly or partially compliant. Our focus is on meeting these core areas:
- Text can be read by screen readers
- Appropriate use of hierarchical, nested headers
- Content tagged and in the correct order within the tag tree
- Alt-text on images
For inaccessible PDFs, we ask content authors to provide a basic plain-text alternative, preferably in Open Document (ODT) or Microsoft Word formats.
Inaccessible aspects of some of our documents include:
- Document not tagged, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 info and relationships.
- Document does not have page title, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.2 page titled.
- Font size smaller than 12pt, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.4 resize text.
- reading order (tag tree) not in right order, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.2 meaningful sequence, 2.1.1 keyboard, 2.4.3 focus order.
- Incorrect tags used (e.g. p-tags instead of list tags), failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 info and relationships.
- Table of Contents tag not used, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 info and relationships.
- Tables with irregular table rows, empty or merged cells, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 non-text Content.
- Tables with header rows defined but scope not defined, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 info and relationships.
- Links without alt-text, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 non-text content, 2.4.4 link purpose and 4.1.2 name, role, value.
- Empty paragraph tags, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 info and relationships.
- Path objects not tagged, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 info and relationships
- Complex diagrams not explained in body text, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 info and relationships
- Alt-text too long, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1 non-text content
- Colour alone used to identify key information on documents, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.1 use of colour
- Poor colour contrast between text and background making it hard for all users to see content, failing WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 contrast (minimum)
Where documents are not in the format that you need, you can request an alternative by:
Calling the Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service Contact Centre: 0800 555 815
Content created by third-party agencies
We ask content commissioners to include accessibility within their procurement processes, however, we have found capability and compliance varies from agency to agency and content commissioners are not always able to check and challenge this.
Documents designed for print
Some older print documents may be inaccessible. Where newer print documents are also being made available online, publishers are asked to provide alternative HTML or plain text document versions. We also ask our publishers to create digital-first documents and ensure accessibility is considered at the start of the design process, regardless of whether it is a print-only or digital document.
Some of our documents are translated by a third-party translation service. Currently these documents are provided in a format that can be printed but not read online by screen readers.
This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 info and relationships.
(b) Disproportionate burden
We do not currently have any claims of disproportionate burden in place.
(c) The content is not within the scope of accessibility regulations
PDFs and other documents published prior to September 2018.
The Accessibility Regulations do not require us to fix PDFs or other documents published before 23 September 2018 if they are not essential to providing our services.
Live video content
We do not plan to add captions to live video streams because live video is exempt from meeting the accessibility regulations. We also have some existing pre-recorded video content that was published before 23 September 2020. This content is also exempt from the Accessibility Regulations.
Our website includes the use of online maps. These are exempt under the Accessibility Regulations. Essential information, such as addresses, are also included by way of an accessible alternative. If you require the information presented in an online map in a different format, please contact us to discuss reasonable adjustments.
Third-party content that is neither funded nor developed by, nor under the control of the Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is exempt under the regulations.
Some of the education materials we use, for example, have not been directly commissioned from us and come from sources that we cannot control, therefore the subtitles, transcripts, audio descriptions and captions may not be present.
Preparation of this accessibility statement
This statement was first prepared on 23 September 2019 following a comprehensive in-house audit that used a blend of manual and automated testing.
The statement was last reviewed and updated on 02/11/2023 to improve accuracy in the reporting of areas where we are not yet compliant.
Feedback and contact information
Reporting accessibility problems or requesting alternative formats
If you find any problems not listed on this page or think we’re not meeting accessibility requirements, or if you need information on this website in a different format, please contact us:
- Email: email@example.com
- Call: 0161 778 7000
- Write: Greater Manchester Combined Authority, Broadhurst House, 56 Oxford Street, Manchester, M1 6EU
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is responsible for enforcing the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.
If you’re not happy with how we respond to your complaint, contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS). The EASS provides information about discrimination and your rights. It has replaced the helpline service previously provided by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
The EASS provides information about discrimination and your rights. It has replaced the helpline service previously provided by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.