Abstract:Public dashboards are now a common way for US government agencies to share high stakes information with residents. We audited six live systems at federal, state, and city levels: CDC respiratory illness, HUD homelessness PIT and HIC, California HCD Annual Progress Report, New York City Mayor’s Management Report, Houston Permitting, and Chicago public health and budget dashboards. Using a rubric based on screen reader needs and WCAG, we checked five items: (1) discoverability of key metrics by assistive tech, (2) keyboard access without mouse hover, (3) clear semantic labels for axes, series, and categories, (4) short plain language status and trend notes, and (5...
Abstract:Public dashboards are now a common way for US government agencies to share high stakes information with residents. We audited six live systems at federal, state, and city levels: CDC respiratory illness, HUD homelessness PIT and HIC, California HCD Annual Progress Report, New York City Mayor’s Management Report, Houston Permitting, and Chicago public health and budget dashboards. Using a rubric based on screen reader needs and WCAG, we checked five items: (1) discoverability of key metrics by assistive tech, (2) keyboard access without mouse hover, (3) clear semantic labels for axes, series, and categories, (4) short plain language status and trend notes, and (5) machine readable tables or CSVs that mirror what sighted users see. Findings are mixed. Many charts fail basic discoverability or depend on hover, which blocks keyboard and screen reader use. Plain language summaries are common in CDC and Chicago, but rare in HUD and Houston. Machine readable data is strong for NYC, California, and HUD; it is weaker or unclear for Houston. Several sites promise service for the public or for customers yet do not name accessibility in their descriptions. Across systems we also observe urgency inversion: faster, operational dashboards tend to provide fewer accessible affordances than slower accountability dashboards. These patterns matter for equal participation and for ADA Title II compliance that references WCAG 2.1 AA. We propose three steps for any public dashboard: add a brief status and trend text at the same update cadence, publish a matching table or CSV of the visual metrics, and state an explicit accessibility commitment.
| Comments: | Preprint. Accessibility audit of six U.S. public dashboard ecosystems; 1 figure, 2 tables |
| Subjects: | Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Computers and Society (cs.CY); Digital Libraries (cs.DL); Information Retrieval (cs.IR) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2511.06688 [cs.HC] |
| (or arXiv:2511.06688v1 [cs.HC] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.06688 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) |
Submission history
From: Chadani Acharya [view email] [v1] Mon, 10 Nov 2025 04:20:46 UTC (153 KB)