Accessibility, made actionable
We test the journeys your users and buyers depend on, repair barriers at the source, and leave your team with retested evidence, not a scanner dump or a magic-widget promise.
Built for teams whose digital products serve the public.
The evidence loop
Automation gives breadth. Human testing finds meaning, interaction, and context. Engineering changes the experience. Retesting proves whether it improved.
Choose representative pages, shared components, and tasks such as apply, pay, book, enroll, or submit.
Combine automated coverage with keyboard, zoom and reflow, semantics, and targeted assistive-technology review.
Turn evidence into prioritized, developer-ready changes across code, content, documents, and third-party flows.
Record outcomes, remaining limitations, ownership, and safeguards that reduce regression risk after release.
Engagement path
One accountable path from diagnosis through implementation, with scope and limitations stated plainly.
Best first step
One critical flow or 5-10 representative pages, examined with automation and focused manual testing.
Typical scope $2,500-$6,000
Usually 7-10 business days after access and scope confirmation.
Implement
Fix defined barriers in the existing product, or rebuild when architecture, design-system, or CMS debt makes repair uneconomic.
Scope the repairSustain
Scheduled automated checks, sampled manual regression testing, release support, training, and issue-aging reports.
Plan ongoing coverageDocument
Evidence for procurement disclosures, plus remediation and QA for PDFs and forms. A completed VPAT is an ACR, not a certification.
Discuss the evidenceCurrent US context
We use WCAG 2.2 AA as a forward-looking engineering target where appropriate, while testing and reporting against the version actually named by the applicable rule or contract.
Current compliance date for public entities serving 50,000 or more people. Every special district government uses the 2028 date, regardless of population.
Current compliance date for covered recipients of HHS financial assistance with 15 or more employees.
Later dates apply to smaller covered entities and, under Title II, all special district governments. Coverage and exceptions remain fact-specific.
These dates reflect 2026 interim final rules. The cited rules codify WCAG 2.1 Level A and AA, not 2.2. Existing accessibility duties continue during implementation periods, and requirements may change. This page is general information, not legal advice.
Plain-language primer
Both federal rules driving current deadlines point to the same technical standard. Here is what it covers, and what it does not.
DOJ's ADA Title II rule (28 CFR part 35) and HHS's Section 504 rule (45 CFR part 84) both incorporate the Level A and Level AA success criteria of the static June 2018 version of WCAG 2.1 — not 2.2. We test and report against the version your rule or contract actually names, and treat WCAG 2.2 AA as a forward-looking engineering target, not a claim of legal compliance.
Neither rule requires a specific vendor, scanner, or overlay widget. They require that the experience itself — the markup, focus order, labels, contrast, and structure — meets the named success criteria.
Dates reflect the 2026 interim final rules that extended both original compliance dates by one year. Existing nondiscrimination and effective-communication duties continue during the extension. This is general information, not legal advice; confirm applicability with qualified counsel.
What shows up in almost every audit
Ungated field guide
Use this before an RFP, renewal, redesign, or ACR request. Read it free, right here, no email required.
Prefer a formatted, shareable PDF? Get it free belowReadiness / 06 questions
Which standard and version is named? Capture the law, contract, RFP, or customer requirement rather than assuming.
Which complete journeys matter most? Include authentication, payment, forms, documents, and third-party handoffs.
Can keyboard and assistive-technology users finish them? A clean automated score cannot answer this.
Who can change the source? Name owners for code, content, PDFs, design systems, and vendors.
Is every claim backed by dated evidence? Record versions, environments, methods, defects, and limitations.
How will fixes be retested? Define acceptance criteria and preserve before-and-after evidence.
WCAG.World / ADA-WCAG readiness checklist
Print or save this. No email required. wcag.world
Concrete, developer-actionable checks - grouped the way WCAG groups them.
Perceivable
Operable
Understandable
Robust
Process
Human-tested findings, not just a scan - observed behavior, impact, a source-level fix, and retested evidence for each issue, plus a VPAT/ACR your procurement team can actually use.
Free 5-minute automated audit, or talk to a human: wcag.world
Free tools and downloads
Real documents, not a lead-gen trick. Enter a work email and the file downloads immediately — we store the email so a human can follow up, nothing more.
Fastest next step
Enter a URL and get a real automated scan, right here in your browser — score, full-page screenshot, and the top issues found, in plain English. No sales call required to see the results.
Takes under a minute. No email needed to see your score.
Free · email required
The same six questions as above, formatted as a printable PDF you can circulate internally or attach to an RFP response.
Free · email required
Three real-format findings — observed, impact, repair, retest — so you can see exactly what a Priority Journey Review delivers before you buy one.
Free · email required
A realistic two-week first sprint for turning an existing findings list into shipped, retested fixes.
Premium · $49
The full deadline, coverage, and exceptions breakdown for both federal rules — built for briefing leadership or scoping procurement.
Packages & ranges
Every engagement is scoped on a short call before we quote a fixed number. These ranges show where comparable work has landed.
Landing (1 page)
WCAG 2.1 AA audit of one landing page, findings report in evidence-card format, a prioritized fix list, and one re-test round after fixes ship.
Typical range $500-$1,500
Scope this pageWebsite (3 pages)
Audit of up to 3 key pages — for example home, contact, and a form or checkout — a consolidated report, risk-based prioritization, and a 30-minute consult.
Typical range $1,500-$3,500
Scope 3 pagesCorporate site (10+ pages)
Full site audit — automated scan plus manual review of key flows like navigation, forms, and media — a detailed remediation roadmap, a VPAT/ACR document, and support for your dev team.
Typical range $5,000-$15,000+
Scope a full siteStandalone product
A formal audit-only report with no follow-up remediation — sized to meet a compliance deadline (Title II / Section 504) and sellable on its own.
Typical range $2,000-$7,500
Scope a compliance auditOngoing
Monthly monitoring plus re-checks after each release, for sites and products that ship often.
Typical range $500-$2,000 /month
Discuss a retainerThese are indicative ranges based on comparable engagements, not a quote — final pricing is scoped to your page count, flow complexity, and deadline after a short call. This page is general information, not legal advice, and no engagement guarantees a specific compliance outcome.
See it, don't just read it
Turn on WCAG mode in the header, then try the panel below — every control here is a real, keyboard-operable element, not a screenshot.
Before
After
Try it yourself · 3 live controls
Resize and re-space this passage — the same kind of control WCAG mode applies site-wide.
Public entities must test the journeys people actually rely on — not just run a scanner and call it done.
Have a clear, natural voice read the same passage aloud.
Status should never rely on color alone. Toggle to see the fix.
Fit call
Tell us what is driving the work. We will use the call to determine whether a focused review, remediation sprint, rebuild, or another specialist is the honest fit.