Accessibility Statement

Film Permits Nepal is an independent, privately operated production-support service based in Kathmandu. We are not a government office, we do not issue permits, and we do not hold any regulatory authority. What we do is help international productions prepare, organise, and review the documents and planning materials that a filming project in Nepal typically needs. This accessibility statement explains how we try to make our website usable for as many people as possible, including those who rely on assistive technology, and how you can reach us if any part of the site presents a barrier.

We believe that clear, well-structured information should be available to every producer, line producer, coordinator, journalist, and researcher who visits us, regardless of how they browse the web. Many of the people who use our pages are planning complex shoots from another country, sometimes on slow connections, sometimes on small screens, and sometimes using screen readers, magnification, or keyboard-only navigation. Accessibility is therefore not an afterthought for us: it is part of writing a service page that actually helps.

This statement sets out the standard we aim for, the technologies we support, the limitations we currently know about, how to report a problem, and how quickly we try to respond. It also explains the boundaries of what accessibility means on a content and document-preparation website like ours. We keep this statement under review and update it as the site changes. If you find something that does not work for you, we want to hear about it, because real feedback from real visitors is the most reliable way for us to improve. The contact details are near the end of this page.

Our accessibility commitment

Film Permits Nepal is committed to making its website available to the widest possible range of visitors. We treat accessibility as an ongoing responsibility rather than a one-time task. Our pages are read by people around the world who are planning film, documentary, television, commercial, and photography projects in Nepal, and a meaningful proportion of them rely on assistive technology or browse in conditions that make design choices matter a great deal.

This commitment is grounded in a simple idea: the information we publish is only useful if people can actually reach it. A production coordinator using a screen reader to compare document requirements deserves the same clarity as someone reading on a large desktop monitor. A journalist on a slow mobile connection in a remote area should still be able to load the essential text. A person with low vision using high magnification should be able to follow our planning tables without losing their place.

We approach accessibility across several dimensions. Structurally, we aim for pages that use meaningful headings, logical reading order, and descriptive links so that navigation by keyboard or screen reader is predictable. Visually, we aim for readable type sizes, sufficient colour contrast, and layouts that adapt to different screen widths. In terms of content, we write in plain, direct international English, we answer the main question first, and we avoid unnecessary jargon so that meaning is easy to extract.

We also recognise that accessibility is never finished. Standards evolve, browsers and assistive technologies change, and our own content grows as we add and revise pages. For that reason we describe below not only what we aim for but also the limitations we currently know about, so that you have an honest picture rather than an idealised one. If your experience does not match what we describe here, that gap is exactly what we want to close, and the fastest way to help us is to tell us what happened.

Accessibility target and standard

Our target is to align our website as closely as we reasonably can with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, commonly referred to as WCAG, at the widely used AA conformance level. These guidelines are the international reference point for web accessibility, and they are organised around four principles: content should be perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust. We use those principles as a practical checklist when we design pages, write content, and review changes.

We describe this as a target rather than a certified guarantee, and we want to be precise about that distinction. We have not commissioned a formal third-party accessibility certification, and we do not claim one. What we can say honestly is that we design and review with these guidelines in mind, that we test key pages against common accessibility checks, and that we treat any reported barrier as something to investigate and fix. Claiming full, audited conformance would overstate our position, and this statement is written to reflect reality rather than marketing.

In practice, aiming for the AA level shapes several concrete choices. We aim for text contrast that remains legible for people with moderate low vision. We aim for content that can be operated using a keyboard alone, without requiring a mouse. We aim for structure that assistive technology can interpret, so that headings, lists, and tables convey meaning rather than being purely visual. We aim for content that reflows when text is enlarged or when the screen is narrow, so that people are not forced to scroll horizontally to read a sentence.

Because our site is a content and planning resource rather than a complex web application, many of the more demanding interactive accessibility requirements apply to us in a lighter form. We do not ask visitors to complete elaborate multi-step transactions on the public pages, which reduces the number of places where interaction barriers can arise. Where we do offer interactive elements, such as contact forms, we aim to label them clearly and to make error messages understandable. If any element falls short of the target described here, please treat this statement as an invitation to tell us.

Supported browsers and technologies

We design our website to work with current, widely used web browsers and assistive technologies. In general, if you are using a recent version of a mainstream browser on a desktop, laptop, tablet, or phone, you should be able to read and navigate our pages. We recommend keeping your browser reasonably up to date, because newer versions handle modern web standards and accessibility features more reliably.

On the assistive-technology side, we aim to support the common screen readers, screen magnifiers, and voice-control and keyboard-navigation tools that people use across different operating systems. Because there are many possible combinations of browser, operating system, and assistive technology, we cannot test every single pairing, but we design against standard, well-supported web patterns so that mainstream combinations work as expected. Standards-based markup is the most reliable way to serve a wide range of tools, and that is the approach we take.

We also build our pages to be responsive, meaning the layout adapts to the size of your screen. On a narrow phone screen, content stacks into a single readable column; on a wider screen, it can use more horizontal space. This responsive behaviour helps people who zoom in heavily, because the content reflows rather than forcing side-to-side scrolling. It also helps visitors on small or older devices, which matters for an audience that often plans shoots while travelling.

There are a few things worth noting about older or unusual setups. Very old browsers that no longer receive security updates may not render our pages correctly, and we generally do not optimise for browsers that their own makers have retired. Similarly, browser extensions that heavily modify page content, aggressive content blockers, or highly customised configurations can sometimes interfere with layout or scripts in ways we cannot anticipate. If you rely on a specialised configuration and something does not work, let us know what you use, because that detail helps us reproduce and understand the problem.

How we structure content for readability

Good accessibility begins with good structure, and structure is something we can control directly in how we write and lay out each page. We organise our pages around a clear hierarchy of headings so that both sighted readers and screen-reader users can understand how a page is divided and can jump to the part they need. A person navigating by headings should be able to move through a page in a logical order without getting lost.

We write in a direct style that answers the main question first and then adds detail. This helps everyone, but it is especially valuable for people using screen readers or reading on small screens, because they do not have to wade through preamble to reach the substance. Short to medium paragraphs, meaningful subheadings, and lists where they genuinely help all reduce the effort required to extract meaning. Where we present comparisons or checklists, we use tables or lists so that related information stays grouped and is easier to interpret with assistive technology.

Links are written to make sense on their own. Rather than relying on vague phrases, we aim for link text that describes where the link goes, because screen-reader users often navigate by pulling up a list of links out of context. Descriptive link text means that list remains useful instead of being a series of identical, meaningless entries.

We also try to keep our language plain and our sentences clear. Our audience is international, and English is a second or third language for many of our visitors. Plain language is an accessibility feature in its own right: it lowers the cognitive load for people with reading-related disabilities, for non-native speakers, and for anyone reading quickly under time pressure. Because our subject involves regulatory topics where certainty is limited, we also use careful, conditional wording. That honesty is deliberate, and it means you can trust that where we are confident we say so, and where a fact depends on your specific situation we say that too, rather than presenting guesswork as fact.

Visual design and contrast

Visual presentation has a large effect on who can comfortably read a website. We aim for text that is large enough to read without strain and for colour combinations that provide sufficient contrast between text and its background. Adequate contrast is one of the most common accessibility issues on the web, and it affects a wide range of people, including those with low vision, colour vision deficiencies, and anyone reading on a screen in bright sunlight.

We try not to rely on colour alone to convey meaning. If a piece of information matters, we aim to express it through text or structure as well, so that someone who cannot distinguish certain colours does not miss anything. For example, where we indicate a status or a category, we accompany any colour cue with a written label. This redundancy is a standard accessibility practice and it benefits far more people than it costs.

Our layouts are built to reflow when text is enlarged. If you increase the text size in your browser or zoom the whole page, content should rearrange itself to remain readable rather than overflowing off the edge of the screen. Wide elements such as tables are placed in containers that can scroll on their own where needed, so that enlarging the page does not force the entire body to scroll sideways. The goal is that a person using heavy magnification can still read a full line of text without constant horizontal scrolling.

We are also mindful of visual calm. We avoid unnecessary motion, flashing, or distracting animation, which can cause problems for people with vestibular conditions or photosensitivity and which simply makes content harder to focus on for everyone. Our pages are meant to feel document-like and steady rather than busy. If any part of the site feels visually overwhelming, hard to read, or low in contrast on your device, that feedback is genuinely useful and we would like to receive it.

Keyboard and assistive-technology navigation

Not everyone uses a mouse or a touchscreen. Some people navigate entirely with a keyboard, some use switch devices, and some use voice commands that map onto keyboard actions. We aim to make our pages operable through the keyboard alone, so that you can move through links, headings, and any interactive controls in a logical order and activate them without needing a pointing device.

A key part of keyboard accessibility is a visible focus indicator, which is the highlight that shows which element is currently selected as you move through a page. We aim to preserve a clear focus indicator so that keyboard users always know where they are. We also aim for a sensible focus order, meaning that as you move forward through a page, focus travels through elements in an order that matches the visual and logical flow rather than jumping around unpredictably.

For screen-reader users, we rely on standards-based markup so that headings are announced as headings, lists as lists, and tables with their relationships intact. When content is structured semantically rather than styled to merely look structured, assistive technology can interpret it correctly. This is why we favour clean, conventional markup over visual tricks. It is also why we write descriptive headings and link text, since those are the primary landmarks screen-reader users navigate by.

Where we include images that carry meaning, we aim to provide text alternatives so that their content is available to people who cannot see them. Purely decorative images are treated so that they do not clutter the experience for screen-reader users. We recognise that our alternative text will not always be perfect, particularly on older pages, and improving it is part of our ongoing remediation work. If you encounter an image whose meaning is not available to you, or a control you cannot reach or operate with your keyboard or screen reader, please describe it to us and we will prioritise a fix.

Documents, downloads, and third-party content

Some of the material connected to a production-support service exists as documents rather than web pages. Where we offer downloadable files such as checklists or planning templates, we aim to make them as accessible as we reasonably can, but we want to be honest that document accessibility can lag behind web-page accessibility. Certain file formats, especially those generated from design or scanned sources, can be difficult for assistive technology to read well.

Where a downloadable document is important, our aim is to ensure the same information is also available as accessible text on the website itself, so that no one is forced to rely on a file format that may not work with their tools. If you need a document in a different or more accessible format, you can ask us and we will do our best to provide an alternative, such as a plain-text or web version of the same content.

We also occasionally reference or rely on third-party services and content that we do not fully control. For example, an embedded map, an external form provider, or a video hosted elsewhere may carry its own accessibility characteristics that differ from the rest of our site. We try to choose reputable, standards-aware providers, but we cannot guarantee the accessibility of content and tools produced by others. Where a third-party element presents a barrier, we would still like to know, because we can often find an alternative way to convey the same information directly.

Because our core service involves reviewing and preparing your own documents, it is worth noting that the documents you send to us are handled privately and are not published to the public website. Nothing in this accessibility statement changes how we protect your material. If accessibility of a shared document affects how you can work with us during a review, tell us early and we will adapt our process, for instance by discussing content by phone or by providing summaries in a format that suits you.

Known limitations

We would rather be candid about the gaps in our accessibility than pretend they do not exist. Being an independent service with a growing set of pages, we know that not every element of the site currently meets the target we have set for ourselves. Listing our known limitations is itself an accessibility practice, because it tells you what to expect and where you may need to ask us for help.

At present, the areas where we are most likely to fall short include the following. Some older pages may use text alternatives on images that are less descriptive than we would like. Certain wide planning tables, while readable, can be demanding to navigate with a screen reader because of the amount of related information they contain. Any content that comes from third-party providers, such as embedded forms or maps, may not match the accessibility level of the rest of the site. And on very old or heavily customised browser setups, layout and interaction may not behave as intended.

We also acknowledge that our testing, while regular, is not exhaustive. We cannot test every combination of browser, operating system, and assistive technology, and automated checks catch only a portion of real-world accessibility issues. Some barriers only become apparent when a real person using a specific tool encounters them. That is precisely why visitor feedback is so valuable to us and why we treat reports as a priority rather than a nuisance.

None of these limitations is acceptable to us as a permanent state. We list them so that you know where problems are more likely, and so that you can hold us to the commitment of fixing them. If you rely on assistive technology and hit one of these rough edges, the remediation process described below explains how we respond, and in the meantime our team is happy to convey any information you need through a channel that works for you, including email or a phone conversation.

How to report an accessibility barrier

If any part of our website is difficult or impossible for you to use, please tell us. We treat accessibility reports seriously and we want to make it easy to raise them. You do not need to use technical language or identify the exact cause; a plain description of what you were trying to do and what went wrong is enough for us to begin investigating.

The most useful reports include a few simple details, though none of them are mandatory. It helps to know which page you were on, ideally the page title or the web address. It helps to know what you were trying to do, such as read a particular table, follow a link, or submit the contact form. And it helps to know a little about your setup, such as the browser you were using, whether you were on a phone or a computer, and whether you use any assistive technology such as a screen reader or magnifier. Even one of these details moves us forward.

You can reach us using the contact methods on our contact page. When you get in touch about accessibility, mentioning that your message concerns an accessibility barrier helps us route it to the right person quickly and prioritise it appropriately. We aim to acknowledge accessibility reports promptly and to keep you informed as we look into the issue.

We also welcome more general feedback about how we could make the site easier to use, not only reports of things that are broken. If you have a suggestion, a preference, or a description of what would work better for you, we would like to hear it. Our audience spans many countries, languages, and browsing conditions, and the more we understand about how people actually use our pages, the better we can serve everyone. Reporting a barrier is never a burden to us; it is one of the most direct ways you can help us improve.

Our remediation process

When we receive an accessibility report, we follow a straightforward process to make sure it is understood, addressed, and closed out properly. The first step is acknowledgement. We aim to confirm that we have received your message so that you are not left wondering whether it reached us. At this stage we may ask a clarifying question if we need a little more detail to reproduce the problem.

The second step is investigation. We try to reproduce the barrier you described, ideally using a similar setup to yours. Reproducing an issue is the most reliable way to understand its cause and to confirm that any fix actually works. Some issues are simple and quick to identify, such as a missing text alternative or an unclear link. Others, particularly those involving specific assistive-technology combinations, can take longer to pin down, and we may come back to you to ask for more information.

The third step is prioritisation and repair. We weigh how much a barrier affects people and how many visitors are likely to encounter it. A barrier that blocks access to essential information for assistive-technology users is treated with high priority. Where a fix is straightforward, we make it as soon as we reasonably can. Where a fix is more involved, or depends on a third-party provider, we schedule it and, where possible, offer an interim way for you to get the information you need in the meantime.

The final step is follow-up. Where you have given us a way to reply, we aim to let you know when we have addressed the issue, and we welcome you to tell us whether the fix worked for you. We also record recurring themes so that we can improve our general practices, not just individual pages. If an issue cannot be fully resolved, for example because it sits within a third-party tool we do not control, we will be honest about that and will look for an alternative route to the same information. Throughout, our goal is that no visitor is left without the content they came for.

Accessibility and our content honesty policy

Accessibility is closely connected to another value we hold strongly: honesty about what we know. Our website deals with regulatory topics where specific facts, such as fees, processing times, and which authority applies, depend heavily on your particular locations and activities and can change over time. We deliberately avoid asserting precise regulatory figures or a single named issuing authority as settled fact, because doing so could mislead you. Instead, we use conditional wording and we verify specifics against current official sources during your actual review.

This matters for accessibility because clarity and honesty reduce cognitive barriers. When content overstates certainty, readers have to do extra work to figure out what they can actually rely on, and that burden falls hardest on people who are already navigating other barriers. By stating plainly where a fact is confirmed and where it depends on circumstances, we make the content easier to trust and easier to act on for everyone.

It also means that the most important, decision-relevant information on our site is expressed in plain text rather than hidden inside images, graphics, or files that assistive technology may struggle with. Regulatory guidance, document checklists, and process explanations are written out so that a screen-reader user receives the same substance as a sighted reader. We consider this alignment between accessibility and honesty to be a feature of how we write, not a coincidence.

Finally, this honesty extends to accessibility itself. We do not claim a certification we have not earned, we do not claim full conformance we cannot verify, and we do not hide our known limitations. We would rather tell you exactly where we stand and invite you to hold us to improving. If you ever feel that our content is unclear, overstated, or inaccessible in a way that affects your ability to plan, that is a signal we take seriously, and you are welcome to raise it alongside any other accessibility feedback.

Mobile and low-bandwidth considerations

A large share of our visitors reach us on mobile devices, and many are planning shoots from locations where internet connections are slow, intermittent, or expensive. We treat these conditions as an accessibility matter in their own right, because a page that only works well on a fast connection and a large screen excludes a meaningful part of our audience.

Our pages are built to be responsive, so the layout adapts to the width of your device and content stacks into a single, readable column on a phone. Tap targets such as links and buttons are sized to be usable with a finger, and text remains legible without requiring you to pinch and zoom to read a basic sentence. We aim for reading comfort on small screens rather than cramming desktop layouts onto phones.

We also try to keep our pages reasonably light. Because our core value is clear text and well-organised information rather than heavy multimedia, most of what matters on our pages is text, which loads quickly even on constrained connections. We avoid unnecessary large files that would slow down loading or consume data that a traveller may be paying for by the megabyte. This restraint benefits everyone, but it is especially important for visitors in remote areas of Nepal and for international users on mobile roaming.

There are limits to what we control. If a connection is extremely slow, some elements may take time to appear, and third-party embedded content may load more slowly than our own pages. If you regularly access our site under difficult connection conditions and find particular pages hard to load or use, we would like to know which ones, because that helps us decide where to simplify further. Our aim is that the essential information you need to plan a production remains reachable even under modest conditions, and feedback from real-world low-bandwidth use is one of the best guides we can get.

Alternative ways to get information

The website is not the only way to reach the information we provide. If any page presents a barrier you cannot get past, or if you simply prefer a different channel, you can contact our team directly and we will convey the relevant information in a way that works for you. We would rather answer your question through a comfortable channel than have you struggle with a page.

For example, if a planning table is difficult to interpret with your assistive technology, we can talk you through its contents or send the same information as a plain list in an email. If a downloadable document does not work with your reader, we can provide a plain-text version. If you would find it easier to discuss your production by phone or by a messaging channel rather than by reading pages, you are welcome to arrange that. Our contact page sets out how to reach us and what information is helpful to prepare.

This flexibility is part of how we think about accessibility. Standards-based web pages are our first line of effort, but human assistance is always available as a complement. A production-support service is, at its heart, a relationship between people, and we are happy to adapt our communication to your needs. That includes language considerations as well; we work with an international audience and will do our best to communicate clearly across language differences.

We want to be clear that using an alternative channel never changes the substance of what we tell you. The same honest, conditional guidance about permits, documents, and planning applies whether you read it on a page or hear it in a conversation. And whatever channel you choose, the confidentiality of the information you share with us is preserved. If the standard website route does not serve you well, please treat the direct contact route as a fully supported option rather than a fallback of last resort.

Keeping this statement up to date

Accessibility is not static, and neither is this statement. We review it periodically and whenever we make significant changes to the website, so that it continues to reflect how the site actually behaves rather than an outdated snapshot. When we revise the statement, we aim to update the review date shown below so that you can see how current it is.

Several things can prompt a review. Adding new pages or new types of content may introduce new accessibility considerations that we need to describe. Changing the design or layout of the site can affect contrast, structure, or navigation in ways worth re-checking. Feedback from visitors frequently reveals issues we had not spotted, and addressing them often leads us to update both the site and this statement. And as accessibility standards and assistive technologies evolve, we revisit our target and our practices to keep pace.

We keep an internal record of accessibility issues that are reported and how they were resolved. This helps us notice patterns, avoid repeating mistakes, and steadily raise the baseline quality of our pages rather than fixing the same kind of problem again and again. While we do not publish a detailed public log, we are happy to discuss the status of a specific issue you have raised.

We view this statement as a living commitment rather than a formality. Its purpose is not to tick a compliance box but to tell you honestly where we stand, what we are working towards, and how to get help or push us to do better. If you return to this page in future and find that something we describe no longer matches your experience, whether better or worse, we would welcome hearing about it. The review date below tells you when we last confirmed the accuracy of this statement.

Scope of this statement

This accessibility statement applies to the public website of Film Permits Nepal. It describes our approach to making our own web pages usable and our commitment to responding when they are not. It is written to help you understand what to expect and how to get support, and it should be read alongside our other trust and policy pages, which cover related topics such as document security, corrections, and how we verify the information we publish.

There are boundaries to what this statement can cover. It does not extend to external websites we may link to, which have their own accessibility characteristics and their own statements. It does not govern the accessibility of third-party tools embedded in our pages beyond our efforts to choose reasonable providers and to offer alternatives where those tools present barriers. And it is not a legal warranty of conformance; it is an honest description of our target, our practices, and our known gaps.

It is also worth restating the nature of our service so that the scope is clear. Film Permits Nepal is an independent private company. We are not a government body and we do not issue permits or grant any form of official permission. Accessibility of this website concerns your ability to read our guidance and to work with us; it does not touch on any official process, and nothing here should be read as a statement about the accessibility of government services or systems, which are outside our control.

Within these boundaries, our commitment is genuine and specific: to design and write our pages so that as many people as possible can use them, to be honest about where we fall short, to respond constructively when you report a barrier, and to keep improving over time. If you are ever unsure whether a particular concern falls within the scope of this statement, simply contact us and ask. We would rather receive a question that turns out to be outside our scope than have you assume there is no one to help.

Accessibility need	What we aim to provide	What may still help	How to get support
Screen-reader use	Meaningful headings, descriptive links, and standards-based structure so content is announced correctly	Some older images may have weaker text alternatives that we are improving	Report the page and element, and we can also read content to you or send plain text
Low vision and magnification	Readable type, sufficient contrast, and layouts that reflow when text is enlarged	Very wide tables can be demanding at high magnification	Ask us to summarise a table or send it as a simple list
Keyboard-only navigation	Operable links and controls, a visible focus indicator, and a logical focus order	Third-party embedded elements may behave differently	Tell us which control you could not reach and we will investigate
Slow or mobile connections	Responsive layouts, light pages, and essential information as plain text	Embedded third-party content may load slowly	Contact us for the same information by email or phone
Reading and language ease	Plain, direct international English with the main answer first	Regulatory topics use careful conditional wording by necessity	Ask us to explain anything that is unclear in your preferred channel
Documents and downloads	Key information also available as accessible web text, not only files	Some file formats are less friendly to assistive technology	Request a plain-text or web version of any document you need

Frequently asked questions

What accessibility standard does your website aim for?

We aim to align our website as closely as we reasonably can with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines at the widely used AA conformance level. These guidelines are organised around content being perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust, and we use those principles when we design and review pages. We describe this as a target rather than a certified guarantee, because we have not commissioned a formal third-party audit. Where any element falls short of that target, we treat a report of it as a priority to investigate and fix.

Have you been formally certified as accessible?

No, and we prefer to be honest about that. We have not commissioned an external accessibility certification, and we do not claim audited conformance. What we can say truthfully is that we design and write with accessibility guidelines in mind, that we run regular checks on key pages, and that we respond to reported barriers. Claiming a certification we do not hold would mislead you, which is contrary to how we approach all of our content.

Which browsers and assistive technologies do you support?

We design for current versions of mainstream browsers on desktops, laptops, tablets, and phones, and we aim to support the common screen readers, magnifiers, and keyboard and voice navigation tools across major operating systems. Because there are so many possible combinations, we cannot test every pairing, so we build against standards-based web patterns that work reliably across mainstream setups. Keeping your browser up to date generally gives the best experience. If you use a specialised configuration and something does not work, tell us what you use so we can reproduce it.

How do I report an accessibility problem?

Contact us through the methods on our contact page and mention that your message concerns an accessibility barrier so we can route and prioritise it quickly. A plain description of what you were trying to do and what went wrong is enough to get us started. It also helps, though it is not required, to tell us the page, your browser or device, and any assistive technology you use. We aim to acknowledge accessibility reports promptly and to keep you informed as we look into the issue.

What happens after I report a barrier?

We follow a four-step process: we acknowledge your report, we try to reproduce the issue using a setup similar to yours, we prioritise and repair it based on how much it affects people, and we follow up where you have given us a way to reply. Simple issues such as a missing text alternative are often fixed quickly. More involved issues, or ones inside third-party tools, can take longer, and in the meantime we will offer an alternative way for you to get the information you need.

What are the known limitations of your site right now?

Some older pages may have less descriptive text alternatives on images, and certain wide planning tables can be demanding to navigate with a screen reader because of how much related information they hold. Content from third-party providers, such as embedded forms or maps, may not match the accessibility of the rest of the site, and very old or heavily customised browsers may not render pages as intended. We list these openly so you know where problems are more likely, and we treat closing these gaps as ongoing work.

Can I get information in a different format if a page does not work for me?

Yes. If any page or document presents a barrier, contact us and we will convey the same information in a way that suits you. For example, we can talk you through a table, send its contents as a plain list, or provide a plain-text version of a downloadable document. You are also welcome to discuss your production by phone or email rather than by reading pages. Using an alternative channel never changes the substance of our guidance, and your information stays confidential either way.

Does this statement cover websites you link to?

No. This statement applies to our own public website. External websites we link to have their own accessibility characteristics and their own statements, and we do not control them. Similarly, third-party tools embedded in our pages, such as maps or external forms, carry their own accessibility behaviour beyond our efforts to choose reasonable providers and offer alternatives. If a linked site or embedded tool blocks you from information you need, tell us and we can usually convey that information another way.

How does accessibility relate to your policy on not overstating regulatory facts?

They reinforce each other. Our subject involves fees, timelines, and authority questions that depend on your specific locations and activities and can change, so we use careful, conditional wording and verify specifics against current official sources during your review rather than asserting numbers as settled fact. This honesty reduces the mental effort readers spend figuring out what they can rely on, which is itself an accessibility benefit. It also means decision-relevant information is written in plain text rather than hidden in images or files that assistive technology may struggle to read.

Is the website usable on slow connections and mobile devices?

We design for this because many of our visitors plan shoots from areas with slow or intermittent internet. Our pages are responsive, so they stack into a readable single column on phones, and we keep pages reasonably light by focusing on clear text rather than heavy multimedia. Essential information loads quickly even on constrained connections. Third-party embedded content may load more slowly, and if you regularly use the site under difficult conditions we would like to know which pages are hardest, so we can simplify them further.

Do you avoid animation and flashing content?

Yes. We avoid unnecessary motion, flashing, and distracting animation, which can cause difficulty for people with vestibular conditions or photosensitivity and which makes content harder to focus on for everyone. Our pages are intended to feel document-like and steady rather than busy. If you encounter any element that moves or flashes in a way that causes you difficulty, please report it and we will address it, because that kind of barrier is one we consider serious.

Does contacting you about accessibility affect the confidentiality of my documents?

No. Nothing in this accessibility statement changes how we protect the material you send us. Documents you share for a review are handled privately and are not published to the public website. If accessibility affects how you can work with a document during a review, tell us early and we will adapt our process, for instance by discussing content by phone or providing summaries in a format that works for you. Confidentiality applies regardless of which communication channel you choose.

How often do you update this accessibility statement?

We review it periodically and whenever we make significant changes to the website, and we update the review date shown on the page when we revise it. Reviews can be prompted by new pages or content, design changes, visitor feedback, or evolving accessibility standards and assistive technologies. We keep an internal record of reported issues and their resolutions so we can notice patterns and steadily raise our baseline. The review date tells you when we last confirmed that this statement matches how the site actually behaves.

Are you a government accessibility service or authority?

No. Film Permits Nepal is an independent, privately operated production-support service. We do not issue permits, grant official permission, or hold any regulatory authority, and nothing on this page concerns the accessibility of government services or systems, which are outside our control. This statement is solely about your ability to read our guidance and work with us through our website. If you need an official process, that is a separate matter, and we can help you understand how to prepare for it without ever claiming to be the body that runs it.

Request permit support