Skip to main content
European Commission logo
AccessibleEU

Tiešsaistes aptauju platformu piekļūstamība - Accessibility of Online Survey Platforms

Study

Details

Publication date
6 October 2025
Author
The Ombudsman of the Republic of Latvia in cooperation with Ltd ‘Turn Digital
Country
Latvia
Language
  • Latvian
Year
  • 2025

Description

The study provides an objective overview of the accessibility of online survey platforms used in Latvia, identifies the most frequent shortcomings, identifies risks related to the possible exclusion of certain groups of society from surveys, and provides recommendations for improving the situation. 

Of the seven platforms chosen by the Ombudsman as the most frequently used Latvian public opinion surveys, only one company agreed to provide access to test its platform. In addition, the survey uses the Central Statistical Bureau (CSB) survey platform. Thus, in the actual evaluation, 7 platforms were analysed – five publicly available, one professional platform from the list recommended by the Ombudsman and the CSB management survey platform (CSB, Kantar, ArcGIS Survey123, LimeSurvey, Google Forms, VisiDati, Microsoft Forms).

The study uses the web content accessibility guidelines WCAG 2.1 and the internationally recognised standard EN 301 549. The assessment is based on technical examination, practical testing with users with visual disabilities and expert analysis to ensure that the results reflect both compliance with regulatory requirements and actual usability.

The results of the study confirm that accessibility on online survey platforms in Latvia and internationally is still not sufficient. While some positive solutions have been recorded across several platforms and user tests have assessed the usability of simpler forms, most of the weaknesses identified concern the basic elements of input fields, labels, contrast and error handling.

Main conclusions:

  • The results of the study confirm that none of the online survey platforms evaluated fully complied with WCAG 2.1 level AA requirements. The accessibility of the basic elements of the most significant discrepancies is fixed – identification of the purpose of form fields, provision of alternative text, contrast requirements, language marking and error handling;
  • The greatest accessibility risks are found in persons with visual impairments (both partial and complete), as well as those with cognitive, language or learning disabilities. These groups were affected on all platforms.
  • Platforms with wider functionality (e.g. ArcGIS Survey123, LimeSurvey) found a higher number of nonconformities, indicating that additional question types and interactive solutions increase accessibility risks.
  • Publicly available platforms (Google Forms, Microsoft Forms) generally provide acceptable usability in simple questionnaires, but significant problems remain in more complex question types and media use.
  • In turn, among professional platforms, especially the system developed by the CSB, showed significant shortcomings in both the technical and user tests, which indicate insufficient provision of accessibility in the solutions of the state administration level.
  • The study shows that accessibility is not just a technical issue: in the case of atypical and complex issues, accessibility can be significantly improved through a simple and understandable explanation that is programmatically linked to the issue and accessible by assistive technologies.

The study highlights the need for both short- and long-term measures to ensure equal access to surveys and compliance with regulatory requirements, and provide recommendations to the public sector, the private sector, research companies, platform developers, educational institutions and survey authors. At the same time, the need for the practical involvement of people with disabilities in both testing and development is emphasised to ensure that survey tools and content are adapted to real needs and that all respondents have equal opportunities to participate in surveys.

Disclaimer:
Accessible EU is not responsible for the accessibility of content provided by third parties. 
If the acquisition or download of the referenced publications involves any cost, Accessible EU is not responsible for it and does not obtain any type of benefit from the associated sale. 

Files