Showing Northwest Conference member sites. All education sites
Members of the Northwest Conference (NCAA Division III), from the NCAA membership directory. Conferences change membership every year; this list follows the directory's current academic year.
A 94
Average accessibility score of 9 fully scanned Northwest Conference member sites
4th
of 96 conferences, ranked by average accessibility score
9 of 9
Northwest conference member sites fully scanned
A 91
Average accessibility score of all 2,687 fully scanned education sites
How Northwest Conference accessibility scores are distributed
Smoothed distribution of the 9 fully scanned Northwest Conference member sites, score 0 to 100. Height shows how many sites score near each value.
Distribution of 9 scores. The data table lists counts by score range.
- Northwest Conference average
- All education average
View the data table
| Score range | Sites |
|---|---|
| 0 to 9 | 0 |
| 10 to 19 | 0 |
| 20 to 29 | 0 |
| 30 to 39 | 0 |
| 40 to 49 | 0 |
| 50 to 59 | 0 |
| 60 to 69 | 0 |
| 70 to 79 | 0 |
| 80 to 89 | 2 |
| 90 to 100 | 7 |
Northwest Conference by accessibility grade, compared with all education sites
Share of fully scanned sites in each grade band. Northwest Conference: 9 sites. All education: 2687 sites.
- A (90 to 100)
- B to C (70 to 89)
- D to F (below 70)
View the data table
| Group | A (90 to 100) | B to C (70 to 89) | D to F (below 70) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Northwest Conference | 78% (7) | 22% (2) | 0% (0) |
| All education sites | 66% (1,765) | 33% (888) | 1% (34) |
Top 3 Northwest Conference member sites by accessibility score
#1 in Northwest Conference · U.S. education rank 1
Willamette University
A 100 accessibility
- Accessibility A
- Botability A
- Security B
- Usability F
- Readability F
#2 in Northwest Conference · U.S. education rank 2
Whitman College
A 97 accessibility
- Accessibility A
- Botability B
- Security B
- Usability B
- Readability F
#3 in Northwest Conference · U.S. education rank 3
Linfield University
A 96 accessibility
- Accessibility A
- Botability C
- Security B
- Usability D
- Readability A
What each check means
- Background and foreground colors have a sufficient contrast ratio. Text and background colors meet minimum contrast ratios. Users with low vision cannot read your text.
- Touch targets have sufficient size and spacing. Buttons and interactive elements are large enough to tap easily on touch screens. Users with motor disabilities struggle to tap small buttons.
- Image elements have [alt] attributes. Images have descriptive alt text or are marked as decorative. Screen reader users cannot identify or interact with elements.
- Links have a discernible name. Links have unique, descriptive text so users know where they go. Screen reader users cannot identify or interact with elements.
- Heading elements appear in a sequentially-descending order. Page headings follow a logical order without skipping levels. Keyboard users cannot efficiently navigate your site.
Northwest Conference members by accessibility score
| Rank | Site | Checks passed | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
willamette.edu
Willamette University U.S. rank 1 |
31 of 31 checks pass | A |
| 2 |
whitman.edu
Whitman College U.S. rank 2 |
33 of 34 checks pass | A |
| 3 |
linfield.edu
Linfield University U.S. rank 3 |
28 of 29 checks pass | A |
| 3 |
pacificu.edu
Pacific University U.S. rank 3 |
31 of 32 checks pass | A |
| 3 |
pugetsound.edu
University of Puget Sound U.S. rank 3 |
29 of 30 checks pass | A |
| 3 |
whitworth.edu
Whitworth University U.S. rank 3 |
29 of 30 checks pass | A |
| 4 |
plu.edu
Pacific Lutheran University U.S. rank 6 |
28 of 30 checks pass | A |
| 5 |
georgefox.edu
George Fox University U.S. rank 12 |
27 of 31 checks pass | B |
| 5 |
lclark.edu
Lewis & Clark College U.S. rank 12 |
28 of 32 checks pass | B |
About accessibility
Meet WCAG standards so every type of user can use your website.
Why it's important
People with disabilities need equal access to information and services online.
Risks
- People with disabilities cannot use your site.
Guidance
What we use to grade accessibility:
Standards
- [accesskey] values are unique
- [aria-*] attributes match their roles
- Uses ARIA roles only on compatible elements
- button, link, and menuitem elements have accessible names
- ARIA attributes are used as specified for the element's role
- Deprecated ARIA roles were not used
- Elements with role="dialog" or role="alertdialog" have accessible names
- [aria-hidden="true"] is not present on the document <body>
- [aria-hidden="true"] elements do not contain focusable descendents
- ARIA input fields have accessible names
- ARIA meter elements have accessible names
- ARIA progressbar elements have accessible names
- Elements use only permitted ARIA attributes
- [role]s have all required [aria-*] attributes
- Elements with an ARIA [role] that require children to contain a specific [role] have all required children
- [role]s are contained by their required parent element
- [role] values are valid
- Elements with the role=text attribute do not have focusable descendents
- ARIA toggle fields have accessible names
- ARIA tooltip elements have accessible names
- ARIA treeitem elements have accessible names
- [aria-*] attributes have valid values
- [aria-*] attributes are valid and not misspelled
- Buttons have an accessible name
- The page contains a heading, skip link, or landmark region
- Background and foreground colors have a sufficient contrast ratio
- <dl>'s contain only properly-ordered <dt> and <dd> groups, <script>, <template> or <div> elements
- Definition list items are wrapped in <dl> elements
- Document has a <title> element
- ARIA IDs are unique
- No form fields have multiple labels
- <frame> or <iframe> elements have a title
- Heading elements appear in a sequentially-descending order
- <html> element has a [lang] attribute
- <html> element has a valid value for its [lang] attribute
- <html> element has an [xml:lang] attribute with the same base language as the [lang] attribute
- Image elements have [alt] attributes
- Image elements do not have [alt] attributes that are redundant text
- Input buttons have discernible text
- <input type="image"> elements have [alt] text
- Form elements have associated labels
- Links are distinguishable without relying on color
- Links have a discernible name
- Lists contain only <li> elements and script supporting elements (<script> and <template>)
- List items (<li>) are contained within <ul>, <ol> or <menu> parent elements
- The document does not use <meta http-equiv="refresh">
- [user-scalable="no"] is not used in the <meta name="viewport"> element and the [maximum-scale] attribute is not less than 5
- <object> elements have alternate text
- Select elements have associated label elements
- Skip links are focusable
- No element has a [tabindex] value greater than 0
- Tables have different content in the summary attribute and <caption>
- Touch targets have sufficient size and spacing
- Cells in a <table> element that use the [headers] attribute refer to table cells within the same table
- <th> elements and elements with [role="columnheader"/"rowheader"] have data cells they describe
- [lang] attributes have a valid value
- <video> elements contain a <track> element with [kind="captions"]
- All heading elements contain content
- Identical links have the same purpose
- Document has a main landmark
- Elements with visible text labels have matching accessible names
- Tables use <caption> instead of cells with the [colspan] attribute to indicate a caption
- <td> elements in a large <table> have one or more table headers
- Image aspect ratio
- Valid doctype
- Character encoding
Grades/scores
ScanGov
About this ranking
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 11/7/2026 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.