Conference Carolinas websites ranked by digital experience

Rankings, grades, and the most common failures for 12 Conference Carolinas member websites, from ScanGov homepage scans.

  • Sites: 12
  • Last scan: 11/8/2026

Members of the Conference Carolinas (NCAA Division II), from the NCAA membership directory. Conferences change membership every year; this list follows the directory's current academic year.

B 87

Average overall score of 10 fully scanned Conference Carolinas member sites

5th

of 96 conferences, ranked by average overall score

10 of 12

Conference carolinas member sites fully scanned. We couldn't fully scan 2, so they're listed without grades

B 85

Average overall score of all 2,687 fully scanned education sites

How Conference Carolinas overall scores are distributed

Smoothed distribution of the 10 fully scanned Conference Carolinas member sites, score 0 to 100. Height shows how many sites score near each value.

Distribution of 10 scores. The data table lists counts by score range.

  • Conference Carolinas average
  • All education average
View the data table
How Conference Carolinas overall scores are distributed
Score rangeSites
0 to 90
10 to 190
20 to 290
30 to 390
40 to 490
50 to 590
60 to 690
70 to 792
80 to 893
90 to 1005

Conference Carolinas by overall grade, compared with all education sites

Share of fully scanned sites in each grade band. Conference Carolinas: 10 sites. All education: 2687 sites.

  1. Conference CarolinasA (90 to 100): 50% (5 sites)B to C (70 to 89): 50% (5 sites)
  2. All education sitesA (90 to 100): 25% (659 sites)B to C (70 to 89): 73% (1,965 sites)D to F (below 70): 2% (63 sites)
  • A (90 to 100)
  • B to C (70 to 89)
  • D to F (below 70)
View the data table
Conference Carolinas by overall grade, compared with all education sites
GroupA (90 to 100)B to C (70 to 89)D to F (below 70)
Conference Carolinas50% (5)50% (5)0% (0)
All education sites25% (659)73% (1,965)2% (63)

Conference Carolinas average score by indicator, compared with all education sites

Average of the 10 fully scanned Conference Carolinas member sites, score 0 to 100. The comparison covers 2687 fully scanned education sites.

  1. Accessibility91All education: 91
  2. Botability94All education: 89
  3. Security86All education: 85
  4. Usability75All education: 68
  5. Readability40All education: 56
  • Conference Carolinas
  • All education
View the data table
Conference Carolinas average score by indicator, compared with all education sites
IndicatorConference Carolinas averageAll education average
Accessibility9191
Botability9489
Security8685
Usability7568
Readability4056

Top 3 Conference Carolinas member sites by overall score

#1 in Conference Carolinas · U.S. education rank 5

University of North Carolina at Pembroke

A 96 overall

  • Accessibility A
  • Botability A
  • Security B
  • Usability B
  • Readability A

#2 in Conference Carolinas · U.S. education rank 8

Converse University

A 93 overall

  • Accessibility A
  • Botability A
  • Security B
  • Usability A
  • Readability F

#2 in Conference Carolinas · U.S. education rank 8

Young Harris College

A 93 overall

  • Accessibility B
  • Botability A
  • Security A
  • Usability A
  • Readability A

Most common failures by indicator

The check Conference Carolinas member sites fail most often in each indicator. Each indicator page lists the top five.

Conference Carolinas members by overall score

Conference Carolinas members ranked by overall score
Rank Site Indicator grades Grade
1 uncp.edu
University of North Carolina at Pembroke U.S. rank 5
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade B
  • Readability grade A
A
2 converse.edu
Converse University U.S. rank 8
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade A
  • Readability grade F
A
2 yhc.edu
Young Harris College U.S. rank 8
  • Accessibility grade B
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade A
  • Usability grade A
  • Readability grade A
A
3 ferrum.edu
Ferrum College U.S. rank 9
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade A
  • Readability grade A
A
4 king.edu
King University U.S. rank 10
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade B
  • Readability grade F
A
5 swu.edu
Southern Wesleyan University U.S. rank 14
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade A
  • Usability grade F
  • Readability grade A
B
6 fmarion.edu
Francis Marion University U.S. rank 17
  • Accessibility grade B
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade C
  • Readability grade F
B
6 ngu.edu
North Greenville University U.S. rank 17
  • Accessibility grade C
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade C
  • Usability grade A
  • Readability grade F
B
7 shorter.edu
Shorter University U.S. rank 24
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade F
  • Readability grade F
C
8 lmc.edu
Lees-McRae College U.S. rank 30
  • Accessibility grade B
  • Botability grade B
  • Security grade D
  • Usability grade F
  • Readability grade F
C
erskine.edu
Erskine College
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We couldn't fully scan your site because it responded without any page content. Status 995 -
umo.edu
University of Mount Olive
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We weren't able to fully scan your site. Status 999 -

About this data

ScanGov scans the homepage of each college and university site on our higher education list. Scores come from the checks in the ScanGov standards. Sites were scanned between 10/27/2026 and 11/8/2026. Each site's report shows its own scan date. A site counts as fully scanned when its homepage loaded and sent us its page content. Averages, grade shares, failure rates, and ranks use fully scanned sites only. We could not fully scan 2 sites. They did not respond, blocked the scanner, or sent no page content. They appear in the table without grades, with their scan status, and are left out of every figure. Grades follow the ScanGov grade scale. Rank follows the ScanGov ranking method. The full dataset, with every county's raw results, is in the ScanGov data repository.

Plans Demo