Skip to content
Accessibility

What an accessibility audit involves

What gets tested in a WCAG audit, why automated scans miss most of it, what the report should contain, and what the whole thing costs.

4 min read
What an accessibility audit involves. An article by Athabasca Solutions.

An accessibility audit is what you buy when an opinion is not enough: a contract requires conformance, a funder asked, or a complaint arrived. It produces evidence, and evidence has a particular shape.

Here is what a real one involves, and how to tell it apart from a scan report with a logo on it.

The part that is automated, and why it is the small part

Automated tools genuinely help. They catch missing alt attributes, some contrast failures, missing form labels, and structural errors, across every page at once. They are fast, cheap, and worth running continuously.

They also detect a minority of the issues that actually matter, and the proportion is not close. The things they cannot judge are exactly the things that block people:

  • Whether alt text is meaningful rather than merely present. “image1.jpg” passes the check.
  • Whether a custom control can actually be operated, rather than merely announced.
  • Whether the reading order makes sense.
  • Whether an error message is understandable.
  • Whether a keyboard user can escape a dialog.

A page can pass every automated check and be impossible to use. That is not a hypothetical; it is the normal outcome for sites built with component libraries that produce technically valid but unusable markup.

The part that is manual

Keyboard-only testing. The mouse goes away. Every task on the site is attempted with Tab, Enter, arrows and Escape. Can you navigate, complete the form, close the modal, and always see where you are?

Screen reader testing. Real assistive technology, not a simulation. NVDA on Windows and VoiceOver on Mac and iOS, because they behave differently and users have preferences.

Zoom and reflow. The page at 200% and at 400% zoom, and at narrow widths. Content should reflow rather than requiring horizontal scrolling, and nothing should be cut off or overlap.

Task-based walkthroughs. Not “audit the site” but “book an appointment”, “find the phone number”, “submit the enquiry”. Barriers show up in tasks, not in page inventories.

This manual work is most of the cost and nearly all of the value.

What the report should contain

  • Every finding tied to a specific WCAG 2.1 AA success criterion, because that is what a contract or a regulator will ask about.
  • Severity by who is blocked, not by how hard it is to fix. “A screen reader user cannot complete checkout” and “a decorative image lacks empty alt” are not peers.
  • The exact location, with the page, the element and how to reproduce it.
  • A recommended fix per finding, specific enough for a developer to act on.
  • What was tested and what was not. A sample of pages and flows, named. An audit that implies whole-site coverage from ten pages is overclaiming.

If the report is a tool export with the tool’s branding, that is a scan, not an audit, and it should be priced like one.

Scope: how many pages

Auditing every page of a large site is wasteful, because templates repeat. A sensible scope is the page types plus the critical journeys: home, a content page, a listing, a form, the checkout or enquiry flow, and anything unusual.

Fixing a template fixes every page using it, which is why type coverage beats page count.

What happens afterwards

The audit is not the deliverable that matters. The fixes are.

Insist on two things. Findings written so your own developers could act on them without the auditor. And a retest, against the original findings, so there is evidence the work landed. An audit with no retest produces a document and no change, which is the most common way this money gets wasted.

What it costs

For a small business site, an audit of the page types and main journeys is a matter of days, and it should be fixed price. Remediation is separate and scoped from the findings, because nobody can price the fixes before knowing what they are.

Beware anything advertised as a one-day full accessibility audit for a flat low fee. Manual testing takes the time it takes, and a price that implies otherwise is describing a scan.

Before you buy one

If you have no legal obligation and nobody has asked, an audit may be premature. Doing the seven fixes that matter most removes the majority of real barriers for a fraction of the cost, and you can audit later if an obligation arrives. Whether one applies to you is in the rules Canadian businesses should know.

If you need a proper audit with a report you can hand to somebody, tell us what the site is and what triggered the requirement.

Related: the fixes that matter most, accessibility rules in Canada, and our accessibility work.

Further reading

Sections covered in What an accessibility audit involves: The part that is automated, and why it is the small part, The part that is manual, What the report should contain, Scope: how many pages, What happens afterwards, What it costs, Before you buy one
The shape of the argument, in order.

Get new articles by email

One email when something new goes up, roughly twice a month. Plain writing on what software costs and what is worth building. No sequences, no sales calls, and one click to leave.

We use it for the newsletter and nothing else. Unsubscribe any time.

Have something you need built?

Tell us what the problem is. You will get an honest read on whether it is worth building, what it would take, and roughly what it would cost. No pitch deck, no pressure.

Replies within one business day. Mon to Fri, 9am to 5pm MT.

Call Start a project