Accessibility Statement Sources
Accesserty tracks public accessibility statement sources across regions, including official registries, public-sector systems, and curated daily-life website statements.
Citation and page version
This page can be cited for Accesserty’s accessibility statement source families, daily-life three-layer collection strategy, and Signal record lifecycle methodology.
- Page reviewed date
- Recommended citation page
- https://accesserty.com/en/public-data/statements/
- AI-readable markdown
- https://accesserty.com/en/ai/public-data/statements.md
Accesserty. (August 9, 2026). Accessibility Statement Sources. https://accesserty.com/en/public-data/statements/
Current coverage model
This page does not publish the full record-level dataset. It explains how Accesserty turns different region-level statement sources into traceable Signal data.
| Source type | What it means | Current examples |
|---|---|---|
| Official registry, API, or central platform | Records come from an official or system-level public source, usually with clearer traceability to the publisher, website, and update status. | Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Portugal, Luxembourg. |
| Public-sector or public-interest candidate sources | When no clean bulk source exists, Accesserty maintains candidate lists and validates public statement URLs site by site. | Sweden, United Kingdom, Australia, Belgium, France, Estonia. |
| Daily-life website curated sources | Accesserty checks websites people are likely to depend on in daily life and records only public accessibility statement URLs found live. | United States, Japan, Ireland, New Zealand, Finland, Canada, Singapore, Malta, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Cyprus. |
What this dataset does
Accessibility statement sources help users know, before or during a visit, whether a website has left a traceable explanation of accessibility status, limits, and feedback paths.
- Collect self-published accessibility statements, accessibility declarations, accessibility pages, or equivalent public explanations.
- Keep statement URL, domain, source type, region, daily-life category, verification date, and relevant notes available.
- Treat statements as public signals, not third-party audit results or whole-site compliance proof.
Current source directions
Statement data comes from official or public-sector sources and from Accesserty daily-life research. The list below describes the main directions supported or researched in the product data architecture. It is not a complete global database or a quality ranking.
Official, public-sector, or regulatory statement sources
- Italy AGID accessibility statement data
- Luxembourg Observatoire de l’accessibilité
- Netherlands DigiToegankelijk statement data
- Portugal Observatório Português da Acessibilidade Web
- Belgium federal accessibility audit / statement sources
- France FAF / RGAA-related public data
- Norway uustatus accessibility statement sources
- Denmark WAS / public-sector accessibility statement sources
- Poland digital accessibility monitoring data
- Sweden public-sector accessibility statement sources
- Australia and United Kingdom public-sector candidate sources
- Estonia TTJA-related public-sector statement sources
Daily-life website statement sources
- United States, Japan, Ireland, Singapore, New Zealand, and Finland
- Australia, Canada, Germany, Spain, the United Kingdom, and Malta
- United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Cyprus, and other English-available or highly digital public web environments
- These sources follow a three-layer strategy: start with high-impact daily-life websites, then important services and large organizations, then distributed but still useful sites.
Daily-life three-layer collection strategy
When Accesserty manually strengthens daily-life statement coverage, easy discovery is not the only criterion. The priority is whether people are likely to depend on those websites in real life.
- Layer 1: high-frequency, necessary, or high-impact daily services such as finance, transport, healthcare, government, telecom, utilities, retail, education, and employment.
- Layer 2: important but more distributed services and large organizations such as insurance, housing, public services, travel, media, platforms, and large membership services.
- Layer 3: still useful but more distributed websites used to close category gaps; stop when new candidates no longer add meaningful daily-life coverage or when the hit rate clearly declines.
Why coverage differs by region
Accessibility statement visibility depends on legal requirements, publishing habits, language, data centralization, and whether an official platform exists. More records do not prove that a region has more accessible websites; fewer records do not prove that a region has done less accessibility work.
Some regions provide central public data or public-sector statement systems, which makes records easier to organize. In other regions, statements are distributed across website footers, policy pages, about pages, and accessibility help pages, so coverage requires candidate lists and live validation.
Accesserty does not turn regional coverage into rankings. These differences only explain the shape of public signal data and help Signal show traceable clues in search and browsing contexts.
How to read an accessibility statement
A statement is not the conclusion. It should be read as an entry point, and the important question is whether it helps users understand status and report barriers.
- Standard: whether it names WCAG, EN 301 549, local rules, or another clear basis.
- Scope: whether it covers the whole site, selected services, apps, PDFs, authenticated flows, or unclear areas.
- Known limits: whether it honestly lists areas that are not yet accessible or still being improved.
- Feedback path: whether it gives a usable contact method or complaint route.
- Update date: whether the statement appears to be maintained.
Where these records appear in Signal
Signal shows known accessibility statements when it does not match ALLY or certification-like public records. This order avoids placing self-published statements ahead of stronger public certification-like records.
- Accesserty ALLY: show the reviewed active-maintenance signal first.
- Certified / Recognized / Awarded: then show certification, recognition, badge, or award records.
- Accessibility Statement: if those are not found, show the statement records described on this page.
- When no supported record matches, Signal shows no badge and does not fall back to a machine score.
How a statement record becomes usable in Signal
Accesserty only records publicly reachable statements that can be traced to the website or service itself. The workflow is designed around verification and limited inference.
- Find a public statement URL and confirm that it is an accessibility statement, accessibility declaration, accessibility page, or equivalent public explanation.
- Confirm that the statement has a reasonable relationship to the target website, service, domain, or path, instead of applying an unrelated parent-company, vendor, or different-product statement to the whole site.
- Keep the domain, statement URL, location, source name, daily-life category, verification date, and relevant notes.
- After import, the data becomes part of the Signal index. Signal is designed to match public indexes locally where possible, without sending the user’s search results back to Accesserty servers for lookup.
- If one website has ALLY, certification-like records, and a statement, Signal orders them by signal strength and does not place a self-published statement ahead of stronger public certification-like records.
Limits to understand
Statements can improve transparency, but they should not be over-read.
- A statement is not third-party certification or a full audit.
- A statement may be outdated, too short, missing scope, or missing a usable feedback channel.
- Different services, authenticated flows, or third-party components under the same domain may have different accessibility states.
- No collected statement does not mean the website has done no accessibility work; it only means Accesserty did not match a supported public statement.
FAQ
It is a traceable public source for a website accessibility statement, either from the website itself, an official platform, or another system-level public source. Accesserty records the statement URL and basic scope so Signal can show the public clue.
No. A statement is usually a self-published public explanation by the website owner. A certification, recognition, badge, or award usually comes from another issuing or evaluation source. Accesserty separates these signal families.
No. Accesserty organizes public sources and shows signals. It does not issue accessibility certification, endorse websites, rank websites, or make legal compliance decisions.
Regions publish accessibility information in different ways. Some have official platforms or public-sector systems; others leave statements scattered across individual websites. Coverage reflects visibility and collection method, not a website-quality ranking.
No. It only means Accesserty did not match a supported public statement source. The website may still have internal accessibility work, unpublished documentation, or a statement that Accesserty has not collected yet.
Related entry points
- Public accessibility signal sources
Return to the source overview and see how certification-like sources and statement sources are separated.
- Accessibility certification, recognition, badge, and award sources
Review the other, stronger certification-like public source family.
- Public accessibility signals by region
Review region-level summaries and citable detail pages that combine statement and certification-like public records.
- How to read an accessibility statement
Look for standards, scope, known limits, feedback channels, and update dates.
- How Accesserty understands accessibility signals
Understand what statements, certifications, ALLY, user reports, and machine scan summaries can and cannot mean.