Accessibility Audit. Findings you can act on.

We test your existing site against WCAG 2.2 AA and hand you the findings — what fails, where, how serious it is, and what fixing it involves. You can give the report to us, to your current developer, or to nobody at all. It is yours either way.

We grow your business with

CROturn traffic into leads

SEOrank & get found

GEOwin generative search

AEOget cited by AI answers

Why audit first

Most organizations need evidence before they can fund the fix

Accessibility work rarely gets approved on principle. It gets approved when someone can show a board, a funder or a legal team what specifically fails and what the exposure is. An audit turns "we should probably look at accessibility" into a scoped, costed piece of work.

It is also the honest entry point. Committing to a full rebuild before anyone has tested the current site means guessing at the scope. We would rather tell you that eleven templates need work and the rest is fine than sell you a redesign you may not need.

Method

What the audit actually covers

Automated tooling catches a meaningful share of issues. The rest only surface when a person drives the interface the way an assistive-technology user would — so we do both.

✓

Automated testing across the site to catch systematic failures at scale

✓

Manual keyboard passes on the journeys that matter — apply, donate, pay, register, contact

✓

Screen-reader testing on those same journeys, not just the homepage

✓

Heading order, landmark structure and reading order as assistive technology encounters them

✓

Form labelling, error handling and required-field announcements

✓

Colour contrast at the sizes and states you actually ship, including hover and focus

✓

Zoom and reflow behaviour at 200% and on a phone

✓

Third-party embeds and key PDFs, flagged separately because you may not control them

Deliverable

What you get

A written report listing each issue, where it occurs, which WCAG success criterion it maps to, how severe it is, and what remediation involves. Grouped by template rather than by page, so a single fix covering two hundred pages is described once.

We separate what is fixable in the build, what is inherited from a third-party embed, and what needs a content decision from your team — captions, alt text, plain-language rewrites. Those last ones are usually the cheapest wins and the ones vendors forget to mention.

If a solicitation asks for a VPAT or an Accessibility Conformance Report, tell us up front and we will scope that as a deliverable. If you want us to do the remediation afterwards, we can, but the audit stands on its own and is not priced as a lead-in.

Reading

Accessibility guides

Blog

Questions

Audit questions

Do we have to use you for the remediation?

No. The report is written so any competent developer can work from it. Plenty of organizations audit with us and fix in-house or with their existing vendor.

Can an overlay widget fix what you find?

No. Overlays cannot repair heading order, unlabelled fields, focus traps or contrast failures in the underlying markup, and they have been named in accessibility litigation. The fixes have to happen in the site.

How long does it take?

It depends on how many distinct templates the site has rather than how many pages. We will give you a timeline when we scope it, and we would rather quote accurately than fast.

Is a free automated scan enough?

It is a start, and it will find real issues. But automated tooling cannot tell you whether a form is usable with a screen reader or whether your alt text is meaningful, and those are the failures people actually complain about.