New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference: usability rankings

Usability scores, grades, and the most common failures for 11 New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference member websites, from ScanGov homepage scans.

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

Members of the New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference (NCAA Division III), from the NCAA membership directory. Conferences change membership every year; this list follows the directory's current academic year.

C 77

Average usability score of 11 fully scanned New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference member sites

5th

of 96 conferences, ranked by average usability score

11 of 11

New england women's and men's athletic conference member sites fully scanned

D 68

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

How New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference usability scores are distributed

Smoothed distribution of the 11 fully scanned New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference member sites, score 0 to 100. Height shows how many sites score near each value.

Distribution of 11 scores. The data table lists counts by score range.

  • New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference average
  • All education average
View the data table
How New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference usability scores are distributed
Score rangeSites
0 to 90
10 to 190
20 to 290
30 to 390
40 to 490
50 to 591
60 to 692
70 to 793
80 to 893
90 to 1002

New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference by usability grade, compared with all education sites

Share of fully scanned sites in each grade band. New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference: 11 sites. All education: 2687 sites.

  1. New England Women's and Men's Athletic ConferenceA (90 to 100): 18% (2 sites)B to C (70 to 89): 55% (6 sites)D to F (below 70): 27% (3 sites)
  2. All education sitesA (90 to 100): 11% (289 sites)B to C (70 to 89): 42% (1,124 sites)D to F (below 70): 47% (1,274 sites)
  • A (90 to 100)
  • B to C (70 to 89)
  • D to F (below 70)
View the data table
New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference by usability grade, compared with all education sites
GroupA (90 to 100)B to C (70 to 89)D to F (below 70)
New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference18% (2)55% (6)27% (3)
All education sites11% (289)42% (1,124)47% (1,274)

Top 3 New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference member sites by usability score

#1 in New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference · U.S. education rank 1

Mount Holyoke College

A 100 usability

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

#2 in New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference · U.S. education rank 2

Wheaton College (Massachusetts)

A 93 usability

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

#3 in New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference · U.S. education rank 4

Clark University

B 87 usability

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

Most common usability failures among New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference member sites

Share of the 11 fully scanned New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference member sites failing each check. A site can fail more than one check. Each check links to the sites failing it, or to its standard when we have no list yet.

  1. Open Graph image alt91% (10 of 11 sites)
  2. Time to First Byte (TTFB)45% (5 of 11 sites)
  3. Open Graph image36% (4 of 11 sites)
  4. Page description27% (3 of 11 sites)
  5. Open Graph description27% (3 of 11 sites)
View the data table
Most common usability failures among New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference member sites
CheckShare failingSites failing
Open Graph image alt91%10
Time to First Byte (TTFB)45%5
Open Graph image36%4
Page description27%3
Open Graph description27%3

What each check means

  • Open Graph image alt. The social media preview image has alt text for screen readers. Screen readers cannot describe shared images.
  • Time to First Byte (TTFB). The server sends the first byte of content within 0.8 seconds. Slow server delays everything on your page.
  • Open Graph image. The page has a preview image for social media cards. Shared links have no image on social media.
  • Page description. The page has a meta description that summarizes its content for search results. Search results do not show what your page does.
  • Open Graph description. The page has a description for social media previews. Shared links have no description on social media.

Every education site with one problem

New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference members by usability score

New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference members ranked by usability score
Rank Site Checks passed Grade
1 mtholyoke.edu
Mount Holyoke College U.S. rank 1
16 of 16 checks pass A
2 wheatoncollege.edu
Wheaton College (Massachusetts) U.S. rank 2
15 of 16 checks pass A
3 clarku.edu
Clark University U.S. rank 4
14 of 16 checks pass B
3 wellesley.edu
Wellesley College U.S. rank 4
14 of 16 checks pass B
4 web.mit.edu
Massachusetts Institute of Technology U.S. rank 9
13 of 16 checks pass B
5 emerson.edu
Emerson College U.S. rank 13
12 of 16 checks pass C
5 uscga.edu
U.S. Coast Guard U.S. rank 13
12 of 16 checks pass C
5 wpi.edu
Worcester Polytechnic Institute U.S. rank 13
12 of 16 checks pass C
6 babson.edu
Babson College U.S. rank 20
10 of 16 checks pass D
6 salve.edu
Salve Regina University U.S. rank 20
10 of 16 checks pass D
7 smith.edu
Smith College U.S. rank 25
8 of 16 checks pass F

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 10/26/2026 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. 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