Accessible Web Design for Nonprofits: A Practical Guide to Building Inclusive Websites

In a couple of weeks, I’ll be presenting at NTEN’s Nonprofit Technology Conference on accessibility and people-first digital design. Preparing for that session has prompted me to reflect on what accessible design really looks like in practice, not just in theory.

Accessibility is an ongoing discipline. New considerations emerge, technologies evolve, and our understanding deepens over time. That applies to nonprofits, purpose-driven organizations, and to us at Briteweb as well.

I wouldn’t call myself an expert; accessibility work is too nuanced and too human for that kind of finality. But I am committed to learning continuously, a mindset that is essential if we want to create high-calibre digital experiences that work for everybody. 

With that in mind, I’ve put together this practical guide for purpose-driven organizations, designed to help teams self-audit, reflect, and identify opportunities to grow their accessibility practice in a consistent and meaningful way.

One of the most persistent myths is that accessibility is something you can retroactively add on at the end of a web project; a series of boxes to check, so to speak.

In reality, it should be foundational to the entire process. If accessibility is treated like a final checklist item, you’ve already missed the mark. Good design is accessible design, and vice versa; it shouldn’t hinder your ability to create something great.

Another common misconception is that automated tools catch most accessibility problems. While tools are helpful, they typically only catch around 30% of issues. Structural problems, content clarity, and real usability challenges can often fly under the radar of these tools (Source: Easy A11y Guide). We’re also finding that some AI tools are introducing new accessibility problems just as quickly as they promise to solve others.

There’s also a common belief that accessibility is expensive. Retrofitting a site after launch can absolutely be costly, but building with accessibility in mind from the start is usually a marginal, and worthwhile, investment rather than a massive one. Accessibility debt is real technical debt. When it’s ignored, it compounds over time, becoming more complex and more expensive to address later.

And perhaps most importantly, accessibility means more than meeting compliance standards. For purpose-driven organizations in particular, it speaks volumes about values alignment. If your goal as an organization is to be inclusive and serve all of your audiences, your digital spaces should reflect that ethos.

Accessibility is rooted in the belief that everyone, regardless of ability, should be able to access the websites, tools, and technologies that fuel the web, and our world. The whole point is to create inclusive experiences for everyone.

Accessible design supports:

It also supports users on older devices, people experiencing stress or cognitive overload, and even future developers maintaining your site.

Next time you’re trying to navigate to a website that won’t load high-resolution images on a spotty 3G network, you’ll see how much the average person benefits from accessibility.

Bonus: Accessibility is great for SEO! If you structure your content in a way that is useful for human eyes, it also helps search engines and LLMs find your content more easily.

I recommend starting with simple but revealing questions, and actually testing them yourself:

Put your mouse away and use the Tab key to move through links, buttons, and form fields. You should be able to see a clear focus state as you move. If you get stuck, skip content, or lose track of where you are, that’s a signal something needs attention.

Use a screen reader and tab through your forms. Are labels announced clearly? Do instructions come before the fields they relate to? If the experience only works visually, it likely needs structural improvements.

Turn one on and try it. On a Mac, you can enable VoiceOver with Command + F5 or by going to Settings > Accessibility > VoiceOver. On other devices, similar settings live under Accessibility. Navigate your homepage and key pages. Are headings announced in the correct order? Are links descriptive, or do you hear “click here” repeatedly?

You can disable JavaScript in your browser settings or temporarily turn it off in your browser’s developer tools. With it disabled, does your navigation still work? Can you access key content? While many modern sites rely on JavaScript, core information and functionality should not completely disappear without it.

In your browser’s web inspector (DevTools), you can simulate network throttling to test slower speeds. There are also third-party tools that simulate low bandwidth environments. Better yet, test your site in a real low-speed setting. Does it load quickly enough to be usable? Do essential elements appear first?

If accessibility only comes up after launch or when something breaks, it’s likely being treated as a checklist item instead of a foundation. Ongoing conversation is a clear indicator of long-term commitment.

If these questions are difficult for you or anyone in your organization to answer, that might be your sign it’s time for a closer look. Accessibility often fails quietly, until someone can’t complete a donation, sign up for a program, or access critical information.

There are some impactful accessibility improvements that are also surprisingly simple.

Using descriptive link text like “Read our 2024 Impact Report” instead of “Click here” gives context to screen reader users and improves clarity for all users. Links should make sense on their own, helping people understand exactly where they’re navigating to.

Headings should follow a logical structure (H1 → H2 → H3) to create a meaningful outline of the page, not just visual styling. Screen readers rely on this hierarchy to help users navigate quickly and understand how content is organized.

This one is more for developers. Native <button> elements come with built-in keyboard functionality, focus states, and screen reader support. Styling a <div> to act like a button requires extra code and is easy to get wrong, often creating unnecessary accessibility barriers.

This is both a design and development consideration. Buttons and links should be large enough and spaced far enough apart to prevent accidental taps. Placing interactive elements too close together creates friction, especially on mobile.

WCAG 2.5.5 (AAA) recommends a minimum target size of 44×44 pixels, aligning with both Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines and Google’s Material Design standards.

It’s also important to note that visual size and interactive area do not need to match. A small icon can remain visually compact while its clickable area is padded to meet accessibility standards. This allows teams to maintain visual clarity without sacrificing usability.

None of these are flashy or overcomplicated, but they all make a difference.

I prioritize areas that are both foundational and mission-critical, and I focus on improvements or fixes that don’t necessarily require a full development overhaul right away. That said, I caution against relying on bandaid fixes.

If someone can’t donate, register, apply, or sign up, that’s not just an accessibility issue; it’s a mission issue.

Ensure that:

These can often be improved through thoughtful content and configuration rather than heavy development. These flows directly impact community access and support, so they’re a high-impact place to start.

Clear heading structure, logical content order, and meaningful labels create the foundation of an accessible site.

Much of this can be addressed in your CMS by organizing headings properly, avoiding skipped levels, and structuring content intentionally rather than visually.

If your content structure is sound, assistive technologies can interpret it correctly.

Testing your site using only a keyboard is one of the fastest ways to uncover structural problems.

Can you tab through links in a logical order? Can you activate buttons and complete key actions without a mouse? While deeper fixes may require development, simply auditing and documenting gaps is a low-barrier starting point.

Slow sites are inaccessible sites. Large images, unnecessary scripts, and bloated pages disproportionately impact users on older devices, slower networks, or limited data plans (think rural areas).

Performance improvements such as compressing images and limiting auto-play media can immediately improve usability.

Writing meaningful alt text for images is one of the most straightforward accessibility improvements a content team can make. Describing the purpose of an image (not just what it shows) ensures that screen reader users receive the same contextual information as sighted users.

Disclaimer: Avoid relying on small fixes for a prolonged period of time. While these elements are important, they’re not a replacement for a complete accessibility audit.

The conversation is shifting. We’re moving from a basic level of awareness (“Accessibility matters”) to actual implementation (“How do we actually do this, and do this well?”). There is still a long way to go, but it’s promising to see that we’re moving in the right direction.

There’s also growing recognition that accessibility, performance, and sustainability are not separate conversations. They’re interconnected parts of responsible digital practice.

For organizations working to fight climate change, improve access to education, advocate for equality, or protect human rights, the work is fundamentally about dignity. It’s about expanding access, shifting power, and caring for people in meaningful ways.

So it’s worth asking: shouldn’t the digital spaces these missions occupy reflect those same values?

If we believe in justice, inclusion, and equity in the real world, our websites should embody those principles, too. Accessibility goes beyond a technical add-on; at its core, it’s about care. It’s about making sure people can participate fully, whether they’re donating, learning, applying, reading, or simply trying to understand your work.

That’s where the work gets interesting.

Because accessibility isn’t separate from your mission. It’s an extension of it.