Top of the League Table and best site overall was the CSA; with the Privy Council in second place. At the bottom of the table, representing the poorest site overall was HM Treasury. [Overall the same as last month]

Accessibility
15 sites passed tests [100%] for compliance with the requirements of Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) guidelines [an improvement from last month], 12 sites failed on virtually all pages [with less than 10% of pages complying]. and 4 sites failed on every page. Overall this is again an improvement on last month’s report.

eGMS
In testing sites for compliance with the government’s standards for eGMS (electronic government meta data standard) UK Sport is the first site with 100% compliance [both mandatory and recommended] 2 sites are virtually fully compliant (with over 90% compliance) and 3 sites are 0.4% and 2.38% compliant, the remaining sites have none of the mandatory data, and failed on every single page.

Function and Performance Findings
- CSA and Department of Health had the lowest number of errors; consumer.gov.uk again had the highest number of errors with over 585.
- Site with the lowest number of warnings [poor html] was Crown Prosecution Service; Work Train (again) had the highest number of warnings with over 23,000 - in terms of website quality, this was the worst site.
- 49% of the sites tested passed basic metadata tests for their front page.
- Site with the fastest overall server response time was Privy Council, where average page response was 0.043 seconds. The site with the slowest server response time was (again) the Rail Regulators, with an average page response of over 11 seconds per page.
- Site with the highest download speed was the E-Envoy, and the Rail Regulators had the slowest download speed of the sites tested – on average this was 95 times slower than the best site.

Tests were carried out on the top 250 pages of each site and were completed on the 10th June 2004. A free copy of your own site summary is available on request. Our next report will be produced around the 20th July 2004.

Our findings take into account site size; e.g. a website with 10 pages and 1 error scores the same as a website with 100 pages and 10 errors, as both have the same page/error ratio of 10:1. Ratings are based on the many millions of website tests conducted.

Accessibility compliance is for automated testing only and doesn’t indicate 100% DDA compliance, manual tests are also required.