Fourth Annual 'E-Government' Survey: Readability is Problem for State, Federal Government Web Sites

From:
http://www.ascribe.org/cgi-bin/spew4th.pl?ascribeid=20030912.145641&time=16%2051%20PDT&year=2003&public=1


   PROVIDENCE, R.I., Sept. 12 (AScribe News) -- Most state and federal
government Web sites are not fully accessible to American citizens
because they are written at too high a grade level, according to the
fourth annual e-government analysis conducted by researchers at Brown
University.
       Darrell M. West, director of the Taubman Center for Public Policy
at Brown University, and a team of researchers led by Joanne Chiu and
Erica Dreisbach examined 1,603 state sites (an average of 32 sites per
state) and 60 federal sites. Financial support for the project was
provided by Brown University. Research was completed during June and
July 2003. Previous e-government studies were released in 2000, 2001 and
2002.

       Researchers evaluated readability levels by employing the
Flesch-Kincaid test, a standard reading evaluator tool used by the U.S.
Department of Defense. The test computes reading level by dividing the
average sentence length (number of words divided by number of sentences)
by the average number of syllables per word (number of syllables divided
by the number of words).

       The average readability of American state and federal Web sites
is at the eleventh-grade level, well above the comprehension level of
many Americans. According to national literacy statistics, half of
Americans read at the eighth-grade level or lower. This year's analysis
of government Web sites found 67 percent at the twelfth-grade level and
only 12 percent at the eighth-grade level or lower.

       There are some differences between state and federal sites.
Sixty-eight percent of state sites read at the twelfth-grade level,
while 63 percent of the federal sites do so. Agency type also matters,
although not always in a manner consistent with the particular audience
served by the Web site. Researchers tested a theory that agencies
serving a more highly educated clientele would gear their Web sites to a
higher level than those serving people with less formal education.

       Agencies presumably geared toward the less educated, however, did
not have lower grade-level readability. For example, corrections
departments report the highest percentage 83 percent) of Web sites
written at the twelfth-grade level. Other agencies that have a high
percentage of sites written at the twelfth-grade level include budget 81
percent), economic development 79 percent), elementary education 74
percent), housing 69 percent), health 69 percent), human services 67
percent) and taxation 46 percent).

       The study also examined disability accessibility for users with
vision or hearing impairment. Using the online "Bobby" service [at
http://bobby.watchfire.com], researchers at Brown evaluated the actual
accessibility of Web sites using two different measures: compliance with
the Priority Level One standards recommended by the World Wide Web
Consortium (W3C) and compliance with the legal requirements of Section
508 of the U.S. Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Sites were judged to be
either in compliance or not in compliance based on the results of these
two tests.

       In this year's study, 33 percent of state and federal sites
satisfied the W3C standard of accessibility, and 24 percent met the
guidelines for Section 508. Federal sites 47 percent) are more likely
than state sites 33 percent) to meet the W3C standard of accessibility.
Researchers found little difference between state sites 24 percent) and
federal sites 22 percent) in meeting Section 508 accessibility
standards.

       Foreign language access is an area of improvement in state and
federal e-government. The percent of Web sites with foreign language
translation or publications in a foreign language is 13 percent, up from
7 percent last year. However, there is a wide discrepancy this year
between state and federal Web sites, with 12 percent of state Web sites
and 40 percent of federal Web sites offering foreign language
translation.

       The study ranks the 50 states and various federal agencies on
overall e-government performance. Using measures such as online
services, attention to privacy and security, disability access, foreign
language translation, Web site personalization and e-mail
responsiveness, the research team rated the various state sites and
compared their performance to last year.

       The top ranking state is Massachusetts with 46.3 points out of a
possible 100, followed closely by Texas 43), Indiana 42.4), Tennessee
41.1), and California 41.1). The states achieving the lowest rankings
are Nebraska 31.3), New Mexico 30.9), and Alaska 30.3). The following
table shows where each state ranked in 2003, with the previous year's
ranking or score in parentheses.

       Overall State e-Government Ratings in 2003 (previous year's data
in parentheses) Rank Site Rating on

       100-pt scale

       1 24-Massachusetts 46.3 45.6)

       2 6-Texas 43 52.8)

       3 12-Indiana 42.4 51.5)

       4 1-Tennessee 41.4 56)

       5 3-California 41.1 54.8)

       6 19-Michigan 40.6 48.2)

       7 11-New York 40.5 51.6)

       7 5-Pennsylvania 40.5 52.9)

       9 13-Florida 40.3 51.5)

       10 44-Kentucky 40 42)

       11 16-Illinois 39.7 49.3)

       11 22-Missouri 39.7 46.3)

       13 2-New Jersey 39.6 55)

       14 9-South Dakota 39.5 51.9)

       15 32-Arizona 39.1 44.2)

       16 7-Washington 38.6 52.4)

       17 27-Maryland 38.1 44.9)

       17 10-Utah 38.1 51.7)

       17 15-Virginia 38.1 49.6)

       20 23-Kansas 38 45.6)

       20 17-North Carolina 38 48.6)

       22 4-Connecticut 37.9 53.3)

       23 14-New Hampshire 37.6 51.1)

       24 41-Delaware 37.4 42.4)

       24 34-Maine 37.4 43.7)

       24 21-Ohio 37.4 46.4)

       27 37-Minnesota 36.8 43.3)

       28 43-Louisiana 36.6 42.3)

       29 20-North Dakota 36.4 46.9)

       30 39-Idaho 35.9 42.8)

       31 38-Georgia 35.8 43.1)

       32 8-Nevada 35.7 51.9)

       33 35-Rhode Island 35.3 43.5)

       34 18-Oregon 34.9 48.5)

       35 28-Iowa 34.6 44.9)

       36 46-Wisconsin 34.2 40.4)

       37 30-Arkansas 34 44.5)

       38 29-Oklahoma 33.2 44.9)

       39 47-Colorado 33.1 40)

       40 50-Wyoming 33 34.8)

       41 25-Montana 32.7 45.5)

       41 26-South Carolina 32.7 45.4)

       41 36-West Virginia 32.7 43.5)

       44 42-Vermont 32.3 42.4)

       45 45-Hawaii 32.1 41.9)

       46 49-Alabama 31.9 35.8)

       47 48-Mississippi 31.5 37.4)

       48 40-Nebraska 31.3 42.6)

       49 33-New Mexico 30.9 44.2)

       50 33-Alaska 30.3 44.1)

       Among federal sites, the FirstGov portal ranks first with 84 out
of a possible 100 points, followed by the Federal Communications
Commission 73), Social Security Administration 68), Internal Revenue
Service 68), and the Library of Congress 68). The federal sites that had
the lowest ratings are the various Circuit Courts of Appeal. The
following table lists the ranking of federal agencies in 2003, with last
year's rank or score in parentheses.

       Overall Federal E-Government Ratings in 2003 (previous year's
rank in parentheses) Rank Site Rating on

       100-pt scale

       1 7-FirstGov portal 84 90)

       2 1-Federal Communications Comm. 73 92)

       3 6-Social Security Administration 69 80)

       4 9-Internal Revenue Service 68 76)

       4 18-Library of Congress 68 68)

       4 17-U.S. Postal Service 68 68)

       7 4-Department of Treasury 64 84)

       7 29-Securities and Exch. Comm. 64 60)

       9 27-Housing/Urban Development 62 64)

       10 34-Consumer Prod. Safety Comm. 57 60)

       11 23-Department of Agriculture 56 68)

       11 33-Department of Defense 56 60)

       11 28-General Services Administration 56 64)

       11 26-National Science Foundation 56 64)

       11 25-Small Business Administration 56 64)

       16 5-Department of State 54 84)

       17 43-Food and Drug Administration 53 52)

       19 19-Federal Trade Commission 52 68)

       19 14-Health and Human Services 52 72)

       21 22-Department of Education 51 68)

       21 10-Department of Transportation 51 76)

       23 12-Department of Commerce 50 76)

       23 3-Environ. Protection Agency 50 84)

       25 21-Department of Energy 49 68)

       25 2-Department of Labor 49 88)

       27 15-General Accounting Office 47 72)

       27 41-Department of Veterans Affairs 47 52)

       29 31-Federal Election Commission 46 60)

       30 24-Central Intelligence Agency 45 68)

       30 38-Federal Reserve 45 56)

       32 40-Congressional Budget Office 44 56)

       32 8-NASA 44 76)

       32 36-Office of Mgmt. and Budget 44 56)

       35 13-House of Representatives 42 72)

       36 58-5th Circuit Court of Appeals 41 32)

       36 44-Equal Employment Opportunity 41 52)

       36 42-Government Printing Office 41 52)

       39 20-Department of Justice 49 68)

       40 39-Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. 40 56)

       40 30-National Endowment Humanities 40 60)

       40 46-National Transportation Safety 40 48)

       43 (na) Dept. of Homeland Security 38 (na)

       43 45-National Labor Relations Board 38 48)

       45 32-Department of the Interior 36 60)

       45 16-U.S. Senate 36 68)

       45 50-Supreme Court 36 40)

       45 35- U.S. Trade Representative 36 56)

       49 48-11th Circuit Court of Appeals 34 48)

       50 49-10th Circuit Court of Appeals 33 48)

       50 51-Federal Circuit Court of Appeals 33 40)

       52 54-3rd Circuit Court of Appeals 32 40)

       52 37-National Endowment for the Arts 32 56)

       54 56-1st Circuit Court of Appeals 29 36)

       54 52-9th Circuit Court of Appeals 29 40)

       56 57-7th Circuit Court of Appeals 28 32)

       57 55-2nd Circuit Court of Appeals 25 40)

       57 53-6th Circuit Court of Appeals 25 40)

       59 47-4th Circuit Court of Appeals 24 48)

       59 59-8th Circuit Court of Appeals 24 24)

       In the conclusion of their report, West and his research team
suggest several means to improve e-government Web sites. Their
recommendations include:

       - Sites should strive for clear and simple language that is
easily understood by the American public.

       - More attention needs to be devoted to disability access so that
sight- and hearing- impaired citizens can have access to online
information and services.

       - Claims of W3C and Bobby disability compliance on the Web site
should be verified on a regular basis.

       - Web sites should include clear, well-marked privacy policies
and not simply disclaimers or liability statements. A detailed privacy
policy ensures both legal protection for users and comprehension by
users.

       - The privacy policy should be on the portal page of the Web site
and easy to find.

       - Services should be conveniently clustered together on the
portal page rather than scattered throughout the Web site.

       Web sites should always include a link back to the portal page to
make for easy navigation.

       - Each Web site should be organized and uncluttered to help users
access the services and information they want.

       - Translation into other languages should be easy to find and
use.

       - Within-site searches should yield meaningful results and the
search engine should be up to date (i.e., no broken links or outdated
Web sites).

       For more information about the results of this study, please
contact Darrell West at 401-863-1163 or see the full report at
www.insidepolitics.org. The appendix of that report provides
e-government profiles for each of the 50 states and the federal
agencies.

Received on Saturday, 13 September 2003 15:16:04 UTC