How to choose an accessible font

Typography can often be an overlooked part of a charity’s visual identity. But, if you think about how an audience interacts with a charity (social posts, fundraising packs and of course websites), the typography might be the brand element they engage with the most. It can carry tone, build trust, and importantly, help people make sense of information. If people can’t easily read what you’ve written, your message might not land, no matter how strong it is.

Choosing an accessible typeface is about removing barriers. It helps more people understand, engage with, and act on your content. For charities, especially, that clarity directly supports impact. 

In this blog, we share why accessible typefaces matter, how we review options as brand designers, and a few examples that strike a strong balance between clarity and character.

Choosing a typeface that is truly accessible goes beyond how the content visually looks. An accessible typeface has the power to remove small frustrations that add up quickly. It can mitigate users having to squint at text, potentially losing their place, or needing to work harder than expected just to understand what’s being said. For a charity audience, those moments matter even more so. When someone is looking for support, information, or reassurance, clear and readable text helps them feel at ease. It signals care and respect for their time, their needs, and their experience.

From the charity’s perspective, accessible typography supports impact in practical and emotional ways. It helps messages land more clearly, builds trust through consistency and clarity, and reduces the risk of people disengaging before they’ve found what they need.

When we review potential typefaces, we look beyond how a font appears in a specimen. We look at how it performs from a single character level all the way through to long pages of content. This means keeping a few of the conditions in mind, such as:

Sans versus serif

We often hear from clients that serif typefaces are a no-go when it comes to accessibility. But the research is split when it comes to readability, with the argument for sans-serif or serif more nuanced.

Sans-serif typefaces are often a strong choice for digital content. Their simpler letterforms tend to stay clear at smaller sizes and on lower-resolution screens. But sometimes, over-simplicity can become a problem, which we’ll explore later in this section.

Serif fonts can still work well, particularly for headings where the character details can be celebrated. But they need to be chosen carefully. Subtle, consistent serifs with minimal stroke contrast are far more accessible than highly decorative alternatives.

Stroke contrast
Put simply, stroke contrast is the difference between thick and thin parts of a letter. Extreme contrast can cause thin strokes to disappear at small sizes or on lower-quality screens, impacting readability. More even stroke weights tend to be more robust across formats, making them a safer and more flexible choice for accessible design systems.

Simplicity
Overall, simplicity is a good thing when it comes to accessibility. Decorative or highly stylised fonts may work in logos or short headlines, but they rarely hold up for longer content. Typefaces with consistent structures, predictable rhythms, and minimal visual distraction can greatly improve readability.

However, text characters can be oversimplified to the point where it starts to cause issues, rather than solve them.

Letter mirroring and imposters
Certain letters, such as ‘b’ and ‘d’, or ‘p’ and ‘q’ can often appear mirrored. This can make reading more difficult for people with dyslexia. Fonts that introduce small differences in shape, weight, or terminals help these letters feel more distinct and easier to decode, improving overall readability. 

In typography, the term ‘imposter’ refers to characters which look similar. Some examples we look at are ‘I’, ‘l’, and ‘1’, ‘O’ and ‘0’, ‘rn’ and ‘m’. When these characters are too similar, misreading becomes more likely, especially in data, URLs, and form fields, where a user may be using a mix of letters and numbers.

Character counters
Counters are the internal spaces in letters like ‘o’, ‘e’, ‘a’, and ‘c’. Larger counters make letterforms easier to recognise, particularly at small sizes or for users with reduced vision. Tight or closed counters can cause letters to blur together, especially on screens or in low-contrast environments.

Capitalisation
Another point that comes up regularly when talking with our clients is that of capitalisation. It’s widely understood that all-caps text slows reading and increases effort. This is mainly because capitalisation removes the familiar word shapes created by ascenders and descenders.

However, for some charities, all-caps text can be a core element of their identity. In this case, we look to find balance, such as using all-caps for short headings and lower case for longer headings and body copy. For example, the brand we created for Transport For All featured capitalised headings – a nod to DIY protest posters and tonally fitting for their ‘in your face’ attitude.

Tracking
Tracking – or the space between letters – is another detail we review when selecting a typeface. Balanced letter spacing allows the eye to move comfortably across a line of text, improving flow and comprehension. Typefaces with very tight default tracking can cause readability issues, with certain characters blending into one another at smaller sizes. Condensed typefaces are more prone to this issue, as not only can the tracking be tight, but the letters themselves are much narrower. 

As with capitalisation, this isn’t to say condensed or tightly-tracked typefaces can’t be used. They should, however, be used with care and attention to detail, as shown in our brand development work for Galapagos Conservation Trust. Wanting to create a bolder, more modern identity to reflect their transformative work, a condensed typeface was selected. To avoid legibility issues, tracking and line-heights were adjusted to improve readability.

The good news is that more and more typefaces are now designed with accessibility in mind. Below are two of our personal favourites:

Atkinson Hyperlegible
Developed by the Braille Institute to support readers with low vision. Its letterforms are deliberately shaped to make characters easier to tell apart, improving clarity and comprehension, especially at smaller sizes or in challenging reading conditions.

Lexend
Lexend was designed to make reading feel easier and less tiring. Created with dyslexic and struggling readers in mind, it focuses on reducing visual stress and improving reading flow. In practice, it works well for everyone, helping content feel calmer, clearer, and more approachable.

Summary
Accessible typography isn’t about stripping out personality. It’s about making deliberate choices that balance clarity and character. As designers, our role is to find that balance. We look for typefaces that are easy to read across audiences, devices, and contexts, while still expressing the tone and values of the organisation behind them. By keeping these points in mind, we can help charities communicate more clearly, while removing unnecessary barriers for everyone.