Accessibility Test Cases

A11Y-USER-003

Task-based evaluation with personal assistive technology

Generated file current Authoring: Content complete
What file status means

This status reports only whether the generated procedure matches the current controlled source hash. It is not independent content verification, regulatory approval, product evidence or a conformance decision.

Recorded standards review: No optional specialist review recorded. Next review: Not scheduled.

MethodUser evaluation
TesterAccessibility researcher
Indicative effort315–457 min small scope

Observe disabled participants completing realistic tasks with their personal assistive technology under an approved, privacy-protective study protocol.

Available formats

Use this test in the format you need

The HTML procedure includes the working worksheet. JSON provides the structured source data. Editable Markdown files are delivered inside package downloads.

Purpose

What this test checks

Observe disabled participants completing realistic tasks with their personal assistive technology under an approved, privacy-protective study protocol.

What this result means: This procedure determines whether Evaluate a task with disabled participants meets its stated expectations for the recorded targets and accessibility-user-research. Unexecuted targets, states and environments remain outside that result.

Why it matters

Identify accessibility and usability barriers that standards checks or laboratory configurations may miss. People most likely affected: the disabled participant groups represented by the study; findings must not be generalised to all disabled people. Important barriers, effort, workarounds and recovery problems may remain invisible if assessment uses only standards checks and synthetic environments. In the recorded accessibility-user-research environment, protect participant consent, support needs and privacy while observing the complete task; an inaccessible study method can harm participants and produce findings that misrepresent their experience.

When to use it

Use when disabled-user evaluation is ethically approved and useful for the study objective. Combine findings with standards evaluation; do not use the study alone to claim WCAG conformance.

Confirm before starting

Mark it not applicable only when

Exceptions

This is an informative usability-evaluation method, not a normative conformance rule. Protocol exclusions and ethical stop conditions are study design controls, not normative exceptions.

Prepare

What you need

  • The product area and test targets are agreed before testing starts.
  • The operating system, browser, viewport and input method are recorded.
  • Test data is safe to use and does not expose unnecessary personal information.

Targets and required variations

  • Each study task and observed participant interaction, including assistance, interruption, recovery and completion.
  • Realistic success, validation error, interruption, recovery and confirmation tasks selected by the protocol.
  • Each participant's normal device, assistive technology, preferences and strategies where safe and consented.

Clean state

  • Complete a known-good calibration in the same environment before product testing.
  • Start from a recorded clean or known state and preserve any prior preferences, extensions, cache or profile settings that can affect output.

Effort estimate

Setup
120 min
Per target
60 min
Evidence
45 min
Technical review
90 min

Assumptions: one 45–60 minute participant session after approved recruitment and consent; recruitment, accommodations and qualitative synthesis are additional work

Variation: Add a new per-target execution and evidence allowance for each additional target class or state that could produce a different result. Add setup time for each distinct environment.

Excluded: Client coordination, inaccessible-environment recovery, recruitment, legal review, remediation implementation and waiting time unless the procedure states otherwise.

Execute

Test steps

Follow each action in order. The expected result is always visible; open the guidance when you need setup, tool, evidence, decision or repeat details. Step-level recording is optional while work is in progress and required only to export a completed execution.

Step 1

Freeze the ethical research protocol

Purpose: Define a safe and consistent study before contacting participants.

User impact: Poor governance can harm participants and invalidate otherwise useful observations.

Record objective, recruitment characteristics, consent, accommodations, tasks, assistance threshold, stop conditions, data map, retention, deletion, withdrawal and safeguarding; obtain the approvals required by the responsible organisation.

Expected result

An authorised, versioned protocol is available before participant contact.

Failure observation

Required approval, consent route, safeguarding or data handling is absent or unresolved.

Setup, evidence and decision guidance
Target
One study protocol covering objectives, participants, tasks, data and safeguarding.
Required state
Draft protocol before recruitment or collection of participant information.
Tool or command
Organisation's authorised research, privacy and safeguarding workflow.
Record
Protocol/version, approval references, data map and owner roles; no participant data.
Pass
All required organisational approvals are recorded.
Fail
Execution is blocked; no participant data is collected.
Not applicable
The engagement explicitly excludes participant research.
Blocked
Approval authority or privacy decision is unavailable.
Repeat or recover
Escalate to the responsible organisation; agent review cannot replace authority or consent.
Limitations
This repository supplies operational guidance, not ethical, legal or organisational approval.
If you are new to this test
Escalate to the responsible organisation; agent review cannot replace authority or consent.
Record this step

Step 2

Recruit against declared characteristics

Purpose: Assemble a bounded sample relevant to the study objective without claiming broad representation.

User impact: Convenience recruitment can exclude the people most affected and distort priorities.

Screen one candidate at a time against the declared characteristics, support needs and exclusion criteria. Record only necessary data and explain how each confirmed participant contributes to the study scope.

Expected result

The recruited sample matches the protocol and limitations are explicit.

Failure observation

Participants are recruited outside the criteria, necessary accommodations are unavailable or claims exceed the sample.

Setup, evidence and decision guidance
Target
The approved participant-characteristic matrix.
Required state
Protocol approved; accessible recruitment and screening materials available.
Tool or command
Accessible recruitment channels and consented screening process.
Record
Pseudonymous participant IDs, characteristic coverage, accommodation plan and sampling limitations.
Pass
The planned sample is achieved without unsupported representativeness claims.
Fail
A mismatch or exclusion undermines the planned coverage and is resolved or reported.
Not applicable
Participant research is outside scope.
Blocked
Suitable participants or accommodations are unavailable.
Repeat or recover
Adjust timing or the declared sample with authorised approval; never fabricate a participant or characteristic.
Limitations
Findings apply to the participants and tasks studied, not all disabled people.
If you are new to this test
Adjust timing or the declared sample with authorised approval; never fabricate a participant or characteristic.
Record this step

Step 3

Confirm accessible consent and session readiness

Purpose: Ensure the participant understands the session and can take part with needed accommodations.

User impact: Inaccessible consent or setup creates avoidable barriers and invalidates voluntary participation.

Explain purpose, tasks, recording, data use, withdrawal and payment. Confirm understanding, consent choices, accommodations, communication preferences and permission for quotations separately.

Expected result

Consent is informed and voluntary and the session setup meets agreed access needs.

Failure observation

The participant cannot access or understand the materials, consent is assumed/bundled or required accommodation is missing.

Setup, evidence and decision guidance
Target
One participant's consent and session setup.
Required state
Approved materials supplied in the requested format; recording off until consent is confirmed.
Tool or command
Accessible consent materials and participant's normal assistive technology where safe.
Record
Consent reference and accommodation checklist without unnecessary sensitive detail.
Pass
Consent and readiness are confirmed before observation.
Fail
Pause; no research data is collected until the issue is resolved.
Not applicable
No participant session is planned.
Blocked
Consent capacity, accessible materials or accommodation cannot be resolved.
Repeat or recover
Offer another format, supporter or rescheduled session within the approved protocol; respect withdrawal immediately.
Limitations
Consent to participate does not automatically permit publication of identifiable quotations or recordings.
If you are new to this test
Offer another format, supporter or rescheduled session within the approved protocol; respect withdrawal immediately.
Record this step

Step 4

Run one neutral task attempt

Purpose: Observe how the participant attempts a realistic task using their own strategies.

User impact: Coaching can conceal barriers and turn evaluation into training.

Read the task prompt once. Observe without directing actions. Record behaviour, comments, time, errors and assistance separately. Intervene only at the approved threshold or safety stop.

Expected result

The task attempt and assistance level are captured without avoidable facilitator influence.

Failure observation

The facilitator leads the participant, changes the task, fails to record assistance or continues past a safety/withdrawal condition.

Setup, evidence and decision guidance
Target
One approved task and its defined completion state.
Required state
Participant at the recorded start point; their usual device/AT configured; facilitator prompt ready.
Tool or command
Approved task script, observation sheet and participant's personal technology.
Record
Task ID, start/end state, action notes, participant statements, assistance events and outcome.
Pass
The approved task was attempted under the protocol and evidence is separable by source.
Fail
The observation is invalid for analysis; rerun only with participant consent and protocol approval.
Not applicable
The task is not relevant to this participant under the approved protocol.
Blocked
Product access, safety or participant withdrawal prevents completion.
Repeat or recover
Respect withdrawal; never pressure continuation. Preserve only data the consent terms allow.
Limitations
A blocked or incomplete task can still reveal a barrier but cannot be presented as a completed success measure.
If you are new to this test
Respect withdrawal; never pressure continuation. Preserve only data the consent terms allow.
Record this step

Step 5

Explore one error and recovery path

Purpose: Understand whether the participant can recognise, recover from and explain a realistic error.

User impact: Recovery barriers often cause abandonment even when the primary path appears usable.

Trigger or allow the planned state without deception beyond the approved protocol. Observe recognition, interpretation, workaround, assistance and recovery; stop at the assistance or safety threshold.

Expected result

The participant's experience of the state and recovery is recorded without coaching.

Failure observation

The state cannot be produced safely, facilitator interference changes the response or recovery evidence is conflated with the primary task.

Setup, evidence and decision guidance
Target
One approved validation, interruption or recovery state.
Required state
State can be produced safely; task attempt has reached the agreed trigger.
Tool or command
Approved scenario prompt and observation sheet.
Record
State ID, trigger, participant actions/comments, assistance, recovery outcome and time.
Pass
The scenario was observed consistently and its evidence is traceable.
Fail
Protocol deviation makes the evidence unreliable and it is excluded or rerun with consent.
Not applicable
No relevant recovery state is in the approved task.
Blocked
Safety, participant choice or environment prevents the scenario.
Repeat or recover
Skip or stop immediately when required; record the limitation, not a participant failure.
Limitations
One participant's recovery strategy does not establish general usability.
If you are new to this test
Skip or stop immediately when required; record the limitation, not a participant failure.
Record this step

Step 6

Validate the interpretation with the participant

Purpose: Separate observed behaviour, participant report and facilitator inference.

User impact: Unvalidated interpretation can misstate both barriers and participant intent.

Describe the observed event neutrally. Ask what the participant expected, what made it difficult, impact, workaround and whether the summary is accurate. Confirm quotation permission separately.

Expected result

The record clearly separates observation, participant explanation and facilitator interpretation.

Failure observation

Questions lead the answer, interpretation is presented as the participant's view or quotation permission is assumed.

Setup, evidence and decision guidance
Target
One potentially material observation from S4 or S5.
Required state
Task attempt complete; participant willing to discuss the event.
Tool or command
Open, non-leading follow-up prompts from the approved protocol.
Record
Verbatim or paraphrased response, validation status and quotation permission.
Pass
The participant confirms or corrects the bounded interpretation.
Fail
Unresolved interpretation remains labelled as facilitator inference rather than fact.
Not applicable
No potentially material observation was recorded.
Blocked
The participant declines discussion or withdraws permission.
Repeat or recover
Respect the decision; retain only the original observation when consent permits and mark interpretation limited.
Limitations
Participant validation strengthens accuracy but is not a standards conformance decision.
If you are new to this test
Respect the decision; retain only the original observation when consent permits and mark interpretation limited.
Record this step

Step 7

Synthesize findings within the sample boundary

Purpose: Turn session evidence into actionable themes without overgeneralising.

User impact: Overstated synthesis can misdirect remediation and erase individual differences.

Group observations only when their mechanism and context are comparable. Record frequency as counts, not population prevalence. Separate usability, suspected standards, platform and unresolved responsibility findings.

Expected result

Every theme links to evidence and states participant/task coverage and limitations.

Failure observation

Themes combine unrelated mechanisms, imply prevalence beyond the sample or convert participant evidence directly into WCAG failure.

Setup, evidence and decision guidance
Target
All consented task and observation records in the study.
Required state
Sessions complete or explicitly blocked; data minimised and pseudonymised.
Tool or command
Qualitative synthesis matrix with links to participant/task evidence.
Record
Theme matrix, linked participant/task IDs, contrary cases and limitation statement.
Pass
Synthesis is traceable and bounded.
Fail
Misclassified or unsupported themes are corrected before reporting.
Not applicable
No participant evidence was lawfully collected.
Blocked
Missing consent or evidence prevents synthesis.
Repeat or recover
Return uncertain suspected WCAG issues to criterion-specific testing and record unresolved responsibility explicitly.
Limitations
Research supports design decisions and identifies barriers; it does not establish WCAG conformance or legal compliance.
If you are new to this test
Return uncertain suspected WCAG issues to criterion-specific testing and record unresolved responsibility explicitly.
Record this step

Step 8

Review, report and dispose of research data

Purpose: Complete quality, privacy and retention actions before client delivery.

User impact: Unreviewed or over-retained data creates participant and organisational risk.

Review factual accuracy, consent scope, quotation permissions, re-identification risk and limitations. Export only authorised redacted evidence, record retention owners/dates and confirm deletion when due.

Expected result

Client wording is accurate and authorised data handling is traceable.

Failure observation

A report exposes unnecessary personal data, exceeds consent, omits limitations or lacks a retention/deletion decision.

Setup, evidence and decision guidance
Target
The synthesis, report extracts and retained source data.
Required state
Draft findings complete; consent permissions and retention dates available.
Tool or command
Independent research/privacy review workflow and secure evidence register.
Record
Review comments/resolution, redacted deliverables, retention record and deletion confirmation when due.
Pass
All review and data-handling requirements are satisfied.
Fail
Correct or withhold affected material before delivery.
Not applicable
No participant data was collected; retain the blocked protocol record only.
Blocked
Named review authority or deletion system is unavailable.
Repeat or recover
Block external delivery of affected evidence while completing all non-sensitive report preparation.
Limitations
Named organisational approval and real participant involvement cannot be simulated by an agent.
If you are new to this test
Block external delivery of affected evidence while completing all non-sensitive report preparation.
Record this step

Decide

How to decide

Passed

The authorised study protocol is executed as written; each selected task has traceable, consented observations; participants can complete and recover without a material study-defined barrier; and reporting remains limited to the represented participants, tasks and environments.

Failed

A material barrier prevents or substantially impairs a selected task under the study's decision rules, or required ethical, consent or privacy controls are violated.

Not applicable
No authorised disabled-user study exists in this engagement. This outcome says nothing about product accessibility.
Cannot tell
The observed behaviour, participant meaning or product/platform responsibility cannot be resolved within the approved evidence.
Not tested
The target is applicable, but a required state, environment, action or evidence item was not completed.
Aggregation and reporting boundaries

Aggregation: Preserve participant-level task outcomes and source observations. Aggregate only using the protocol's declared method and report the number and characteristics of participants represented.

WCAG decision: User evaluation alone never establishes WCAG satisfaction or non-satisfaction. Suspected standards failures require separate criterion-specific assessment.

Automation: Automated or simulated users cannot replace disabled participants for this method.

Record

Record the result

Record the target, state and observed behaviour. Add evidence or technical details only when needed.

Choose the option that best matches what happened to this target.

Describe the actual behaviour and why it supports the selected result.

When more than one target is recorded, the overall procedure result is calculated from all target results.

Environment: Not set.
Add evidence or details

Choose only the group needed for this record. These fields remain optional for a working draft.

Evidence references

Enter one file name, issue ID or evidence reference per line. Files stay on your device.

Test environment

Save a named profile once to reuse the same product, platform and environment details on other procedures in this browser.

Engagement and tester identifiers

Component expectation results

Use these controls only when the procedure has distinct component expectations. The overall outcome must agree with them.

E1 Study objective, participant characteristics, recruitment/consent, tasks, environments, facilitation, data and privacy controls are approved and recorded.

E2 Task observations, participant report and facilitator inference remain distinguishable and traceable.

E3 Reporting does not generalise beyond the sample or claim WCAG conformance from user evaluation alone.

Formal completion and limitations

Identify the frozen list or sampling record used to select every target represented by this execution.

Choose a final result before marking the execution complete. Completed records require the full environment, step, evidence and method-specific information.

Data management

Export before clearing if the record must be retained. Apply the engagement retention schedule and delete browser data when it is no longer needed.

Saved drafts stay in this browser and are not uploaded. Do not enter credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.

Reference

Supporting information

Standards and requirement mappings
  • W3C-INVOLVE-USERS · W3C-INVOLVE-USERS usability · supporting

    This source does not override WCAG or create an additional WCAG conformance requirement.

  • GOVUK-AT-TESTING · GOVUK-AT-TESTING usability · supporting

    This source does not override WCAG or create an additional WCAG conformance requirement.

Supporting and advisory guidance

Supporting sources are identified in the mappings and source register. They do not add conformance requirements.

Evidence specification
  • Study protocol

    Objective, participant characteristics, recruitment/consent, tasks, environment, facilitation, data, privacy, retention and approvals.

    Use a redacted extract or evidence reference. Do not include credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.

  • Participant context

    Coded relevant characteristics, personal assistive technology/environment and accommodations.

    Use a redacted extract or evidence reference. Do not include credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.

  • Task observation

    Task actions, completion, assistance, interruption/recovery, impact, workarounds and consented evidence reference.

    Use a redacted extract or evidence reference. Do not include credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.

  • Analysis record

    Separation of standards findings, usability observations, platform limitations and unresolved questions.

    Use a redacted extract or evidence reference. Do not include credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.

  • Privacy and review record

    Consent restrictions, reviewer findings, retention/deletion dates and authorised outputs.

    Use a redacted extract or evidence reference. Do not include credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.

Worked example and outcome calibration

A11Y-USER-003-WORKED-001: representative worked example

Context: Illustrative research record for a Civic Benefits Portal address-change journey; no participant session occurred.

Inspected: The prepared task script, consent flow, observation categories, assistance threshold, synthesis and reporting boundary.

Observed output: A representative observation describes a participant becoming unsure after an address lookup clears the street field, requesting help at the declared threshold and explaining that the change was unexpected.

Evidence:

  • EVD-REF-017 synthetic observation sheet
  • EVD-REF-018 representative participant-statement field
  • EVD-REF-019 synthesis trace

Tester reasoning: The example shows how to separate behaviour, reported impact and facilitator inference. It cannot establish frequency or represent real-user evidence because no participant performed it.

Decision: blocked

Finding: FND-REF-005 — Address lookup replacement is not explained. A user may lose entered address detail and need assistance to recover.

Remediation: Announce before replacement what the lookup will change, preserve manually entered values where possible and provide an explicit undo or edit path.

Reviewer feedback: Reviewer replaced 'users will abandon' with the bounded statement 'the representative scenario may require assistance' and marked all participant-derived fields synthetic.

Final client wording: Prepared research hypothesis: replacing manually entered address text without explanation may cause loss of context and assistance. Validate this with consented participants before presenting it as observed user evidence.

Retest: RT-REF-006 cannot occur until an authorised participant study and a remediated product build exist; the pilot package is ready for scheduling.

Boundary: This is a representative, synthetic worked example for training and calibration. It is not evidence from a client product, participant or real assistive-technology execution.

Outcome calibration

Passed
Under the approved protocol, each participant completes the selected task with their normal assistive technology; observations and limitations are reported only for the represented sample.

The study-defined task outcome passes without becoming a WCAG claim.

Failed
Several participants cannot recover from a validation error within the declared assistance threshold, and the source observations support a material task barrier.

The study-defined task fails; a separate technical test is linked for any standards claim.

Not applicable
The engagement authorises standards testing only and includes no disabled-user study.

The method is not part of scope; this is not evidence that users face no barriers.

Cannot tell
A participant abandons a task but declines follow-up, leaving the cause and impact ambiguous.

Preserve the observation and uncertainty without inventing a cause.

Not tested
Participants were recruited, but an inaccessible consent document blocks lawful session execution.

The execution is blocked and task outcomes remain untested.

Sampling, complete processes and platform limitations

Recruit participants and select tasks from the research plan. Record who and what the sample represents, without treating it as universal coverage.

If this check is part of a user journey, test the selected journey from start to finish, including relevant errors and recovery. Record any path that was not tested.

  • A small study cannot be generalised to all disabled people and cannot establish WCAG conformance by itself.
  • Check relevant browser, tool or assistive-technology release notes before assigning unexpected behaviour to the product.
  • If responsibility is unclear, record the reproducible behaviour and use cannot tell until it is resolved.
Related procedures

No related procedure is recorded.

ACT rules and WCAG technique traceability

This is a project-authored manual procedure, not a W3C Approved ACT Rule. An ACT result can support only the part of this procedure covered by that rule. It does not replace the remaining manual or assistive-technology checks.

No supporting W3C Approved ACT Rule is selected for this procedure.

This specialist procedure is not assigned to one WCAG success criterion.

Review history and source register
  1. 2026.08.27-rc.9 — Reworked for plain language, case-focused steps, scoped evidence and transparent draft review status.
  2. 2026.08.27-rc.9 — Migrated to professional catalogue schema v3 with separated outcomes, structured authority, applicability, evidence, decision and review records.
  3. 2026.08.27-rc.9 — Specialist procedure mapped to its task family and current first-party platform guidance and checked for internal consistency; competent review and real execution remain separate.
  4. 2026.08.27-rc.9 — Replaced migrated boilerplate with a case-specific reference implementation and completed generated-file integrity review.
  5. 2026.08.27-rc.9 — Rewritten as an atomic professional-delivery flagship with component effort guidance and a complete representative worked example.
  6. 2026.08.27-rc.9 — Procedure guidance and presentation simplified without changing draft governance status.

Review decision: pending. Open issues: No participants have been recruited and no user-study execution, consent, data or review is claimed.; A qualified user researcher, privacy reviewer and disabled research adviser must review the protocol before execution.

Source historyReport an accuracy issue
WCAG
Specialist or advisory method
Execution
Manual test
Catalogue version
2026.08.27-rc.9