University of Minnesota: usability rankings

Usability scores, grades, and the most common failures for 5 University of Minnesota campus websites, from ScanGov homepage scans.

  • Sites: 5
  • Last scan: 11/8/2026

Showing University of Minnesota sites. All education sites

Campuses of the University of Minnesota. The system office site is listed but not averaged, since it is not a campus homepage.

B 82

Average usability score of 5 fully scanned University of Minnesota campus sites

2nd

of 57 systems, ranked by average usability score

5 of 5

University of minnesota campus sites fully scanned

D 68

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

How University of Minnesota usability scores are distributed

Smoothed distribution of the 5 fully scanned University of Minnesota campus sites, score 0 to 100. Height shows how many sites score near each value.

  • University of Minnesota average
  • All education average
View the data table
Score rangeSites
0 to 90
10 to 190
20 to 290
30 to 390
40 to 490
50 to 590
60 to 692
70 to 790
80 to 891
90 to 1002

University of Minnesota by usability grade, compared with all education sites

Share of fully scanned sites in each grade band. University of Minnesota: 5 sites. All education: 2687 sites.

  1. University of Minnesota
  2. All education sites
  • A (90 to 100)
  • B to C (70 to 89)
  • D to F (below 70)
View the data table
GroupA (90 to 100)B to C (70 to 89)D to F (below 70)
University of Minnesota40% (2)20% (1)40% (2)
All education sites11% (289)42% (1,124)47% (1,274)

Top 3 University of Minnesota campus sites by usability score

#1 in University of Minnesota · U.S. education rank 1

University of Minnesota-Duluth

A 100 usability

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

#1 in University of Minnesota · U.S. education rank 1

University of Minnesota-Twin Cities

A 100 usability

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

#2 in University of Minnesota · U.S. education rank 9

University of Minnesota-Morris

B 81 usability

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

Most common usability failures among University of Minnesota campus sites

Share of the 5 fully scanned University of Minnesota campus 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 alt60%
  2. Open Graph type60%
  3. Page description40%
  4. Open Graph description40%
  5. Open Graph image40%
View the data table
CheckShare failingSites failing
Open Graph image alt60%3
Open Graph type60%3
Page description40%2
Open Graph description40%2
Open Graph image40%2

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.
  • Open Graph type. The page declares its content type for social media cards. Social media shows wrong content type.
  • 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.
  • Open Graph image. The page has a preview image for social media cards. Shared links have no image on social media.

Every education site with one problem

University of Minnesota campuses by usability score

Rank Site Checks passed Grade
1 d.umn.edu
University of Minnesota-Duluth U.S. rank 1 		16 of 16 checks pass A
1 twin-cities.umn.edu
University of Minnesota-Twin Cities U.S. rank 1 		16 of 16 checks pass A
2 morris.umn.edu
University of Minnesota-Morris U.S. rank 9 		13 of 16 checks pass B
3 r.umn.edu
University of Minnesota-Rochester U.S. rank 17 		11 of 16 checks pass D
4 crk.umn.edu
University of Minnesota-Crookston U.S. rank 20 		10 of 16 checks pass D

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 11/1/2026. 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