Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health (ForensiCare)
Insights
Google Lighthouse Performance
The Google Lighthouse performance score is a metric that measures the speed and performance of a website. It’s an overall score that ranges from 0 to 100 and is generated based on a number of different performance metrics, such as the time it takes for a website to load, the time it takes for a website to become interactive, the size of the resources used by the website, and other factors that impact the user experience.
A high performance score in Google Lighthouse indicates that a website is fast and responsive, which can lead to a better user experience and improved search engine rankings. On the other hand, a low performance score can indicate that a website is slow and unresponsive, and can negatively impact the user experience.
- Mobile Performance
- 84%
- Desktop Performance
- 96%
Core Web Vitals
Core Web Vitals are a set of specific factors that Google considers important in a webpage’s overall user experience. Core Web Vitals are made up of three specific page speed and user interaction measurements: Largest Contentful Paint, First Input Delay, and Cumulative Layout Shift.
Vital | Mobile | Desktop | Target |
---|---|---|---|
Largest Contentful Paint | 3.3 s | 1.0 s | < 2.5 s |
First Input Delay | 200 ms | 60 ms | < 100ms |
Cumulative Layout Shift | 0 | 0.002 | 0.1 |
Opportunities
Optimise images
By optimising the following images, roughly 6 MB could be removed from the transfer size, about 83%. This would reduce the CO2 generated per page load from 1.85g grams to 0.31 grams.
Images should be optimised for the web for several reasons:
- Reduced file size: Optimizing images can result in a smaller file size, which can help to reduce the amount of data that needs to be downloaded. This can lead to faster page load times and improved performance.
- Improved user experience: Optimising images can help to improve the overall user experience, as pages with optimised images load faster and are more responsive.
- Lower emissions: Optimising images can help to reduce the emissions associated with data transfer, as less data needs to be transmitted over the network.
- Better accessibility: Optimising images can make them more accessible to users with slower connections or limited data plans.
Foresnicare_Apsley-1985-4-1.jpg | 2 MB | 28% | 2 MB |
TEHBEP-Oct-22-1536x780.png | 2 MB | 26% | 2 MB |
Stephane-Shepherd-web.png | 915 KB | 13% | 846 KB |
Tessa-Maguire-web-graphic-1-1536x780.png | 832 KB | 12% | 754 KB |
forensicare_footerIMG.png | 245 KB | 3% | 198 KB |
forensicare_headerIMG.png | 245 KB | 3% | 197 KB |
CFBS-Annual-Research-Report-2021-22-1536x780.png | 147 KB | 2% | 111 KB |
Screen-Shot-2016-09-05-at-4.39.08-pm.png | 138 KB | 2% | 125 KB |
ResearchEducation.png | 127 KB | 2% | 113 KB |
OurServices.png | 121 KB | 2% | 111 KB |
forensicarelogo_col.png | 33 KB | 0% | 15 KB |
Replace icon font files
Font icons can have a negative impact on performance and emissions because they can increase the size of the page and the amount of data that needs to be downloaded. Some specific reasons why font icons can be bad for performance and emissions include:
- Increased file size: Font icons are typically included as part of a web font, which can be a large file that needs to be downloaded. This can increase the overall size of the page, leading to slower load times and higher emissions.
- Inefficient rendering: Web fonts are sometimes loaded and rendered inefficiently, which can result in slow performance and higher emissions.
- Unused icons: Font icons often include a large number of icons that may not be used on a particular page, increasing the file size and leading to inefficient use of resources.
While icon fonts are still widely used on the web, and they can be a useful tool for adding icons to a website. it is a dated practice when there are better options such as SVG icons, which can be more efficient and have a lower impact on performance and emissions.
Font | Size |
---|---|
fontawesome-webfont.woff2 | 71 KB |
fa-solid-900.woff2 | 78 KB |
First Contentful Paint
First Contentful Paint (FCP) is a performance metric that measures the time it takes for the first piece of content to be rendered on the screen when a user navigates to a web page. This content can be any visual element on the page, such as text, images, or a background color.
FCP is important because it directly affects the perceived speed of a website, and can impact user engagement and conversion rates. A faster FCP can lead to a better user experience and improved performance.
Here are a few ways you can optimise your FCP:
- Optimise images: Large, unoptimised images can slow down a page’s FCP. You can optimise images by compressing them, reducing their dimensions, and choosing the right format for each image.
- Minimise HTTP requests: Each resource requested by a web page, such as images, scripts, and stylesheets, requires a separate HTTP request. Minimising the number of HTTP requests can help to reduce the time it takes for a page to render.
- Prioritize critical content: Prioritizing critical content, such as above-the-fold content, can help to ensure that users see something on the screen quickly, even if the rest of the page is still loading.
- Reduce server response time: A slow server response time can significantly impact FCP. Optimizing server-side code and server settings can help to reduce response times and improve FCP.
- Use a performance monitoring tool: There are many tools available that can help you monitor your website’s performance, including FCP. These tools can help you identify performance issues and track your progress as you implement optimizations.
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 64% | 99% |
Timing | 2.6 s | 0.6 s |
Largest Contentful Paint
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 71% | 94% |
Timing | 3.3 s | 1.0 s |
Total Blocking Time
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 99% | 100% |
Timing | 70 ms | 10 ms |
Speed Index
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 54% | 73% |
Timing | 5.5 s | 1.7 s |
Time to Interactive
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 92% | 100% |
Timing | 3.5 s | 0.8 s |
Max Potential First Input Delay
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 68% | 100% |
Timing | 200 ms | 60 ms |
First Meaningful Paint
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 85% | 99% |
Timing | 2.6 s | 0.6 s |
Eliminate render-blocking resources
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 41% | 81% |
Insight | Potential savings of 1,530 ms | Potential savings of 230 ms |
Properly size images
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 0% | 4% |
Insight | Potential savings of 2,048 KiB | Potential savings of 5,796 KiB |
Reduce unused CSS
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 33% | 66% |
Insight | Potential savings of 307 KiB | Potential savings of 303 KiB |
Serve images in next-gen formats
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 22% | 19% |
Insight | Potential savings of 646 KiB | Potential savings of 4,163 KiB |
Reduce initial server response time
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Fail |
Insight | Root document took 940 ms | Root document took 640 ms |
Avoid enormous network payloads
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 74% | 3% |
Insight | Total size was 3,242 KiB | Total size was 7,187 KiB |
Serve static assets with an efficient cache policy
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 21% | 7% |
Insight | 10 resources found | 16 resources found |
Avoid an excessive DOM size
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Score | 89% | 89% |
Insight | 823 elements | 823 elements |
Largest Contentful Paint image was not lazily loaded
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Pass |
Insights
Carbon footprint
The carbon footprint of a website can be calculated by estimating the amount of energy consumed by the data center hosting the website, as well as the energy consumed by users accessing the site. Factors that can influence a website’s carbon footprint include the size of the site, the amount of traffic it receives, and the technology and hosting infrastructure used to host the site.
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Green Hosting | No | No |
Dirtier than | 70% | 88% |
CO2 per page load | 0.84g | 1.85g |
CO2 wasted per page load | ~0.8g | ~1.7g |
Transfer size | 3.17MB | 7.02MB |
Size wasted | 2.93 MB | 6.27 MB |
Opportunities
Optimise images
By optimising the following images, roughly 6 MB could be removed from the transfer size, about 83%. This would reduce the CO2 generated per page load from 1.85g grams to 0.31 grams.
Images should be optimised for the web for several reasons:
- Reduced file size: Optimizing images can result in a smaller file size, which can help to reduce the amount of data that needs to be downloaded. This can lead to faster page load times and improved performance.
- Improved user experience: Optimising images can help to improve the overall user experience, as pages with optimised images load faster and are more responsive.
- Lower emissions: Optimising images can help to reduce the emissions associated with data transfer, as less data needs to be transmitted over the network.
- Better accessibility: Optimising images can make them more accessible to users with slower connections or limited data plans.
Foresnicare_Apsley-1985-4-1.jpg | 2 MB | 28% | 2 MB |
TEHBEP-Oct-22-1536x780.png | 2 MB | 26% | 2 MB |
Stephane-Shepherd-web.png | 915 KB | 13% | 846 KB |
Tessa-Maguire-web-graphic-1-1536x780.png | 832 KB | 12% | 754 KB |
forensicare_footerIMG.png | 245 KB | 3% | 198 KB |
forensicare_headerIMG.png | 245 KB | 3% | 197 KB |
CFBS-Annual-Research-Report-2021-22-1536x780.png | 147 KB | 2% | 111 KB |
Screen-Shot-2016-09-05-at-4.39.08-pm.png | 138 KB | 2% | 125 KB |
ResearchEducation.png | 127 KB | 2% | 113 KB |
OurServices.png | 121 KB | 2% | 111 KB |
forensicarelogo_col.png | 33 KB | 0% | 15 KB |
Replace icon font files
Font icons can have a negative impact on performance and emissions because they can increase the size of the page and the amount of data that needs to be downloaded. Some specific reasons why font icons can be bad for performance and emissions include:
- Increased file size: Font icons are typically included as part of a web font, which can be a large file that needs to be downloaded. This can increase the overall size of the page, leading to slower load times and higher emissions.
- Inefficient rendering: Web fonts are sometimes loaded and rendered inefficiently, which can result in slow performance and higher emissions.
- Unused icons: Font icons often include a large number of icons that may not be used on a particular page, increasing the file size and leading to inefficient use of resources.
While icon fonts are still widely used on the web, and they can be a useful tool for adding icons to a website. it is a dated practice when there are better options such as SVG icons, which can be more efficient and have a lower impact on performance and emissions.
Font | Size |
---|---|
fontawesome-webfont.woff2 | 71 KB |
fa-solid-900.woff2 | 78 KB |
Dirty hosting
This page generated ~1.85grams of CO2
By moving to a host using renewable energy, this could be reduced to ~1.61grams of CO2.
Sustainable web hosting refers to hosting services that are designed to minimise their impact on the environment and to promote sustainability. This can include using renewable energy sources, reducing waste and emissions, and implementing best practices for energy efficiency.
Sustainable web hosting providers aim to reduce their carbon footprint by using energy-efficient server hardware, data centres, and networking equipment, as well as implementing environmentally friendly policies and practices. For example, some providers may use renewable energy sources, such as wind or solar power, to power their data centres, or they may use high-efficiency cooling systems to reduce energy consumption.
Insights
Google Lighthouse Accessibility
The accessibility score in Google Lighthouse is a metric that measures how well a website is designed for users with disabilities. The score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better accessibility.
Google Lighthouse evaluates a website’s accessibility based on a number of different factors, such as the presence of alternative text for images, the use of semantic HTML, the ability to navigate the page using only a keyboard, and the use of appropriate color contrasts.
A high accessibility score in Google Lighthouse indicates that a website is well-designed for users with disabilities and provides an inclusive user experience. On the other hand, a low accessibility score can indicate that a website has barriers that make it difficult or impossible for some users to access and use the content.
In automated testing, this page scored 80% for accessibility on desktop. Keep in mind that automated accessibility testing is not perfect and that manual tests, use case testing, or usability testing should be completed as well.
- Mobile Accessibility
- 69%
- Desktop Accessibility
- 60%
Opportunities
Background and foreground colors do not have a sufficient contrast ratio.
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Fail |
[id]
attributes on active, focusable elements are not unique
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Pass | Fail |
Heading elements are not in a sequentially-descending order
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Fail |
Image elements do not have [alt]
attributes
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Fail |
Form elements have associated labels
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Pass |
Links do not have a discernible name
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Fail |
[user-scalable="no"]
is used in the <meta name="viewport">
element or the [maximum-scale]
attribute is less than 5.
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Fail |
No element has a [tabindex]
value greater than 0
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Pass |
Insights
Google Lighthouse Best Practices
Google Lighthouse evaluates a website’s best practices based on a number of different factors, such as the use of HTTPS encryption, the use of efficient caching policies, the implementation of modern web technologies, and the avoidance of deprecated technologies.
A high best practices score in Google Lighthouse indicates that a website is well-designed and follows best practices for web development, which can lead to better performance, security, and accessibility. On the other hand, a low best practices score can indicate that a website has room for improvement in terms of following best practices.
- Mobile Best Practices
- 92%
- Desktop Best Practices
- 100%
Google Lighthouse SEO
Google Lighthouse evaluates a website’s SEO based on a number of different factors, such as the presence of title and description tags, the use of header tags, the presence of structured data, the use of image alt tags, and the use of crawlable links.
A high SEO score in Google Lighthouse indicates that a website is well-optimized for search engines, which can help to improve its visibility in search results and increase its organic traffic. On the other hand, a low SEO score can indicate that a website has room for improvement in terms of its optimization for search engines.
While a high SEO score can help to improve a website’s visibility in search results, it’s not a guarantee of higher rankings, as search engine algorithms take many other factors into account when determining the ranking of a website.
- Mobile SEO
- 82%
- Desktop SEO
- 83%
Google Lighthouse PWA
The Progressive Web App (PWA) score in Google Lighthouse is a metric that measures the quality of a website as a progressive web app. The score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better performance and functionality as a PWA.
A progressive web app is a type of web application that combines the best features of both web and native apps, providing users with a fast, reliable, and engaging experience on any device.
Google Lighthouse evaluates a website’s PWA performance based on several key factors, such as the availability of a service worker, the presence of a web app manifest, the ability to install the app on the home screen, and the performance of the app under poor network conditions.
- Mobile PWA
- 33%
- Desktop PWA
- 25%
Opportunities
Security headers to set
HTTP security headers are special HTTP headers that can be added to a website’s response to help improve its security. They are important because they can help to protect a website and its users from various security threats, such as cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks, cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks, and other types of malicious activity.
It’s important to note, however, that implementing HTTP security headers is just one aspect of a comprehensive security strategy, and that other measures, such as regular software updates, secure coding practices, and regular security audits, are also important for maintaining a secure website.
Header | Set |
---|---|
strict-transport-security | Yes |
content-security-policy | No |
x-frame-options | No |
x-content-type-options | No |
referrer-policy | No |
permissions-policy | No |
It's important to note, however, that implementing HTTP security headers is just one aspect of a comprehensive security strategy, and that other measures, such as regular software updates, secure coding practices, and regular security audits, are also important for maintaining a secure website.
Links are not crawlable
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Fail |
Image elements do not have [alt]
attributes
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Fail |
Serves images with appropriate resolution
Mobile | Desktop | |
---|---|---|
Grade | Fail | Pass |