Plain Language and Accessibility Audit for Public Knowledge Bases
Audit civic knowledge base articles to ensure plain language compliance, accessibility standards, and statutory accuracy for citizens.
Use this template when preparing citizen-facing knowledge bases for accessibility compliance audits or public service portal migrations. It helps knowledge managers identify jargon, readability blockers, and structural navigation gaps across community-facing articles.
Role: Senior Public Sector Knowledge Architect with deep expertise in civic communications and WCAG digital accessibility standards.
Context
- Public Agency: {{agency_name}}
- Primary Citizen Demographics: {{target_constituency}}
- Reviewed Content Sample: {{sample_article_batch}}
- Regulatory & Statutory Mandates: {{statutory_framework}}
- Required Target Reading Level: {{target_reading_level}}
- High-Volume Public Inquiries: {{top_citizen_queries}}
Task
Produce a comprehensive Plain Language and Accessibility Audit Report evaluating the provided citizen knowledge base articles, identifying clarity barriers, statutory misalignment, and structural readability gaps, while providing actionable remediation blueprints.
Method
- Analyze {{sample_article_batch}} against the target grade level defined in {{target_reading_level}} using recognized readability indices.
- Cross-reference article terminology against {{statutory_framework}} to detect obsolete legal references or misstated compliance rights.
- Evaluate the content structure for accessibility barriers, such as missing hierarchical headings, non-descriptive hyperlink text, and complex tabular data.
- Map article content against {{top_citizen_queries}} to determine if answers resolve citizen intent within the first two paragraphs.
- Identify agency jargon, administrative acronyms, and passive phrasing that impair comprehension for {{target_constituency}}.
- Formulate plain-language rewrite examples for the three most problematic article excerpts.
- Prioritize remedial action items by combining citizen impact severity and statutory compliance risk.
Constraints
- MUST adhere strictly to the plain-language threshold specified in {{target_reading_level}}.
- MUST NOT recommend omitting legally required procedural disclaimers under {{statutory_framework}}.
- Technical accessibility recommendations MUST align with WCAG 2.1 Level AA criteria.
- Avoid speculative assumptions regarding undocumented public agency policies.
Output format
Deliver an evaluation report structured as follows:
- Executive Summary (under 200 words)
- Readability & Linguistic Barrier Matrix (table: Article Title, Current Grade Level, Jargon Identified, Citizen Risk)
- Statutory & Structural Compliance Gaps (bulleted by mandate)
- Remediation Demonstrations (3 side-by-side 'Original vs. Plain-Language' rewrites)
- Prioritized Action Plan (categorized into Immediate, 30-Day, and 60-Day milestones)
Self-review
- Confirm every variable in {{sample_article_batch}} and {{statutory_framework}} is evaluated.
- Ensure all rewrite demonstrations explicitly demonstrate plain-language principles without losing legal meaning.
- Verify that the report adheres strictly to the prescribed section ordering and length limits.
Explicit role, a named task, and discrete steps the model can follow.
Background, inputs and variables the model needs before it starts.
Hard boundaries — what the model must and must not do.
A named, field-level shape for the response.
Ordered work items that force analysis before an answer.
Length and structure that travel across frontier models.
Signal density — instruction weight without padding.
Documented variables so the scaffold adapts to new inputs.
Quality bar, assumptions and behaviour when inputs are thin.
How much real usage the template has behind it.