Writing accessible copy for public audiences

Readability sits at the heart of equitable communication. In health, education and the wider charity landscape, people often come to information at moments of stress, urgency or limited capacity, and clarity becomes a matter of access. Writing at a reading age of 9–11 years (GOV.UK) is simply an acknowledgement of how people actually read. The average UK adult reads at this level, and even highly literate readers benefit from concise, well-structured copy because it reduces cognitive load. Clear writing helps people act quickly, understand their choices and feel confident they’ve interpreted information correctly.

Readable content also supports people who process information differently. Neurodivergent readers often benefit from shorter sentences and predictable structures, while people with English as a second language rely on direct sentence construction and familiar vocabulary. When information is dense or convoluted, the burden of interpretation shifts unfairly onto the reader. Readability hands that responsibility back to the writer, where it belongs.

There is also a practical dimension. Clear copy reduces enquiries, prevents misunderstandings and lowers the cost of service delivery. It strengthens trust because people understand what you mean the first time they read it. In public-facing organisations, that trust is essential. When your language is open, efficient and human, readers feel respected rather than excluded.

Readability is ultimately about dignity. It ensures that no one is shut out of information that affects their rights, health or opportunities. It treats clarity as a design decision, not a compromise. When you write in a way that everyone can follow, you signal that everyone is welcome, and that their ability to engage with your work matters.

Testing readability is the point where accessible writing stops being theory and becomes evidence. It tells you whether your content works for real people, not just for the person who wrote it. In public-facing organisations, particularly in health, care and the voluntary sector, this testing is essential. People often approach information with limited time, competing pressures, or heightened emotion. Readability testing ensures that your message lands cleanly, without assumptions about literacy, cognitive processing or subject knowledge.

Digital tools offer a useful starting point. Apps like Hemingway or Readable break down sentence length, structure and complexity, and provide an indicative reading age. These scores highlight dense sections, long sentences and unnecessary adverbs or jargon. They help you spot patterns in your writing that create barriers, but they are a guide, not a verdict. A high score doesn’t always mean inaccessible content; equally, a low score doesn’t guarantee clarity. Automated tools can’t judge nuance, tone, cultural references or whether the reader will understand the task you’re asking them to complete.

A stronger approach pairs automated assessment with user testing. Reading your copy aloud is one of the simplest and most effective checks. If you stumble over a sentence, it’s likely a reader will too. Listening for rhythm, clarity and logic helps you identify the parts that need tightening or restructuring. Running content through a screen reader goes a step further. This exposes issues that visual reading can hide, unclear headings, confusing lists, poor sequencing or wording that doesn’t make sense when heard rather than seen. Screen reader playback also highlights punctuation choices that affect flow.

The most valuable insight comes from testing with real people. Ask colleagues unfamiliar with the content to read a draft and explain it back to you. If they can’t summarise it quickly, it’s not clear enough. When possible, test with a small group from your intended audience. For NHS or charity communications, that might mean patients, parents, volunteers or frontline staff. Their interpretation reveals whether the content works in the real world, where people are busy, distracted or under pressure. Even a short 10-minute session can uncover misunderstandings that a readability score would never detect.

Testing readability also strengthens inclusivity. Neurodivergent readers may flag issues with sequencing or ambiguity. People who speak English as a second language can identify unfamiliar idioms or complex constructions. Older readers may struggle with long paragraphs or dense layouts. Each of these insights leads to improvements that benefit everyone, not just the group who raised them.

The final stage is iteration. Good readability testing feeds back into your process: edit, test again and adjust. Build readability checks into your sign-off workflow so they become a habitual part of content creation rather than an afterthought. This normalises clarity as a shared responsibility across teams, not just the domain of communications specialists.