Evaluating usability on content-rich nonprofit websites

By Karen Heredia and Laura S. Quinn

For many websites packed with important content, usability isn’t just about whether a form works—it’s about whether people can actually find and understand the information they need. That’s especially true when it comes to usability for content-rich nonprofit websites, where the stakes are high. Visitors often rely on these sites to access critical data, find support during stressful times, or connect with essential services. If your site is hard to read or navigate, people might not just get frustrated—they might lose access to the help they need.

Evaluating text-heavy websites requires a different approach than testing interactive tools or feature-rich apps. That’s where a “heuristic evaluation” can help. It gives experienced reviewers a structured way to assess how well a site supports typical users in lifelike situations, using practical usability principles. Jakob Nielsen’s classic usability heuristics are well known and work very well for software and form-heavy sites, but content-rich nonprofit websites need a modified set of guidelines—ones that emphasize plain language, clear paths, and helping users absorb large amounts of information with less effort.

Drawing from our work on text-heavy websites—especially in the legal aid world—we’ve created a this set of evaluation criteria. The complete framework below contains seven categories with over 60 individual heuristics. In this article, we’ll start with an overview of how to use these heuristics to improve your own site, and then walk through the categories one by one.

(Or check out the version of this article specifically geared for legal websites:  Evaluating usability on legal content websites).

Doing an Website Evaluation with these Guidelines

These heuristics can be used in multiple ways, from lightweight application in everyday work to comprehensive evaluations:

For a comprehensive evaluation

The most effective way to use these heuristics is through scenario-based evaluation:

1. Create representative scenarios: Develop realistic scenarios that reflect your users’ situations (e.g., “Maria is facing eviction next week and needs immediate legal help. She’s on a mobile phone, in a loud room on a break from her job as a bartender.” Or, in another context, “Jon is casually staying on top of interesting stories about climate change, on a small laptop while watching TV. He’ll sometimes sign a petition or send an online letter to his representative if it seems compelling.”) Try to define a set of scenarios that considers a cross-section of different topic areas, mobile vs. desktop, and other things that affect the user’s experience. For one complex site, we used about 20 scenarios to evaluate a reasonably representative selection of flows.

2. Evaluate each pathway: Step through each scenario considering the seven heuristic categories.

3. Document issues: Record where the experience fails to meet the heuristic standards.

4. Prioritize improvements: Focus on addressing critical barriers first.

This task-based approach ensures you’re evaluating your website from your users’ perspective rather than simply checking boxes.

For quicker checks

Even without conducting a full evaluation, organizations can apply these specialized heuristics in several ways:

• Select just 2-3 critical pathways that users commonly need to complete (e.g., a researcher is looking to find a specific piece of data; a legislative aid wants to know your stance on a bill)

• Apply these heuristics during design phases of new features or websites

• Train staff to recognize these principles in their everyday content creation

• Use the heuristics as a checklist when reviewing new content

Even small, targeted improvements guided by the right heuristics can dramatically increase access to vital information.

The Detailed Heuristics

These guidelines are designed to be used by someone with at least some background in websites and user experience, and therefore, they use some terms that might not be familiar to beginners (i.e. calls to action; visual hierarchy). Laura’s goal is to link explanations for the guidelines that might not be immediately clear, but in the meantime, Google may be your friend to understand some of these “terms of art.”

1. Guide users through clear pathways

Every site needs intuitive navigation. What’s more, in the nonprofit sector, visitors can arrive with urgent needs and high stress levels. Clear pathways become essential when users may be in crisis or have limited time to navigate complex systems.

1. Site purpose is immediately clear on landing pages; it’s easily findable from all interior pages

2. Clear calls to action guide users forward

3. It’s always clear to the user what’s going on

4. Navigation labels clearly convey what you’ll see when you follow a link

5. The user is able to find their way to a specific page/section again

6. Users can easily find next steps

7. Crisis/emergency paths are prioritized

8. It’s easy for a user to tell approximately how long a website process is, where they are in the process, how far they have left to go, and what to do next

9. Dead ends are eliminated and the visitor is presented with alternative actions

10. Users can easily start over if needed

11. Functionality works in the same way as similar functionality on other sites

12. Success and error states are clearly communicated; error messages are clear and helpful

2. Present clear and accessible content

Too much content, especially in the human services space, suffers from inaccessible language and terminology. This category emphasizes plain language, appropriate reading levels, and dignity-preserving communication.

1. Instructions are available in plain language

2. Content accommodates different literacy levels, with reading levels appropriate for target audiences

3. Abbreviations are consistently formatted with periods where appropriate

4. Content remains accessible when images are disabled

5. Technical terms and jargon are not used unless needed; if important, they are consistently explained

6. Forms and processes use active voice and clear directives

7. Language choices respect dignity and agency (e.g., “person experiencing homelessness” rather than “homeless person”); person-first language is used appropriately

8. Terminology is consistent with community preferences (e.g., respecting preferences between terms like Hispanic/Latino/Latinx)

9. Language acknowledges user challenges while maintaining dignity

10. Plain language is used in privacy policies and consent forms

3. Create A clear visual hierarchy

Visual hierarchy through graphic design is a critical guide to help visitors scan through information-rich webpages.

1. Important actions are visually prominent

2. Headers establish clear visual hierarchy and aid scanning

3. Interface elements have consistent styling

4. Visual noise and clutter are minimized

5. Critical content appears high on the page

6. Icons follow standard web conventions

7. Important UI elements stand out from the rest of the page

4. Support multi-device access

Ensure the site works efficiently and effectively across desktop/mobile devices and connection speeds. Many visitors rely on smartphones as their primary internet device. Low income or rural users can have limited data plans or unreliable connections.

1. Content is readable on mobile screen sizes without zooming

2. Click zone/tap targets are sufficiently sized for mobile interaction

3. Forms are highly usable on mobile devices

4. Pages load reliably on slow connections

5. All functionality works on mobile devices

6. Users can recover from making mistakes/being in the wrong place on every device

5. Design for accessibility and inclusion

Many sites have visitors from a diverse populations with varying abilities, languages, and technical skills.

1. All functionality can be accessed via keyboard navigation

2. Color contrast meets WCAG AA standards

3. Font sizes, alt tags, and header flow all follow accessibility standards

4. Language switching controls are prominent and consistent

5. Links use text that describes the destination page rather than generic “click here” phrases

6. Consider needs of neurodivergent users

7. Content is gender-neutral, and avoids stigmatizing or outdated language

8. Images present a diverse view of the website community

6. Design intuitive interactive elements

Make forms, buttons, and other interactive elements easy to understand and use.

Examples:

1. Field labels are clear and descriptive

2. Form fields clearly indicate required information

3. Field formats are clearly indicated (e.g., date formats)

4. Form validation prevents common mistakes

5. Form fields use inclusive options and language (i.e. allow accent marks in a user’s name)

6. Error messages are compassionate, clear, and helpful

7. Complex forms are broken into logical steps, in a natural order

8. Complex forms minimize repetitive information entry

9. The user can move backwards reasonably seamlessly, and undo

10. It’s clear whether an interaction was successful or not

11. Privacy, confidentiality and how/when a user’s information will be shared and with who is clearly explained

7. Organize content for clear understanding

Present information in a logical, digestible way that prioritizes visitor needs and comprehension. This starts with understanding how visitors think about a topic, what questions they have, and what information will be most useful.

Examples:

• Concepts are explained to the user clearly and with enough detail that they can accurately answer questions

• Content hierarchy (for instance, what is discussed first) reflects user priorities

• Headers are designed to allow users to quickly scan the page

• Related resources are clearly grouped and linked

• Processes are explained step-by-step

• Lists are organized in logical, user-centered order