Professional practice

Accessibility audit methodology

A transparent process for turning accessibility requirements into reproducible findings, practical fixes, and accountable retest outcomes.

How an engagement works

The exact sample and technology matrix vary by product and package. They are agreed in writing rather than implied by a generic “full compliance” promise.

  1. 01

    Scope and success conditions

    Define the product, page or workflow sample, target standard, conformance level, supported platforms, account states, exclusions, deliverables, and retest terms.

  2. 02

    Automated and structural review

    Use automated rules and code inspection to identify efficiently detectable issues, then validate findings before reporting them.

  3. 03

    Manual interaction testing

    Test keyboard operation, focus, forms, errors, semantics, zoom, reflow, contrast, pointer interactions, media, dynamic updates, and relevant screen-reader behavior.

  4. 04

    Evidence and reporting

    Document reproducible steps, expected and actual behavior, user impact, relevant WCAG mapping, severity, screenshots or code context, and remediation direction.

  5. 05

    Remediation and retest

    Support implementation as agreed, retest the original failure against the defined environment, and distinguish fixed, partially fixed, not fixed, and not retested outcomes.

Automation and AI

Automated rules are useful for speed and repeatability. AI may help organize information or draft explanations. Neither replaces manual interaction testing, user-impact analysis, or professional judgment.

Potential automated findings are validated before they are represented as confirmed issues. Tool output alone is not described as certification or proof of legal compliance.

What an audit does not guarantee

  • It does not guarantee that every possible barrier has been found outside the agreed sample.
  • It is not legal advice and does not replace advice from qualified counsel.
  • It represents the tested version, environment, standard, and date.
  • It does not prevent future regressions after product or content changes.
  • A conformance statement requires appropriate scope and evidence, not merely an issue count.

Typical deliverables

  • executive summary with scope, limitations, risk themes, and recommended priorities
  • issue register with reproducible evidence and WCAG references
  • severity and user-impact classification
  • browser and assistive-technology matrix used for the engagement
  • remediation guidance appropriate to the agreed package
  • retest status when retesting is included