Know exactly where your site stands against WCAG 2.1 AA.
An audit a person actually performed, written up against the specific success criteria, with every finding traced to the page and element it came from. Fixed scope, agreed in writing before anything starts. We do not sell a compliance guarantee — nobody honestly can, and anyone offering you one is telling you something else about how they work.
The deadline
Which date applies to you
The Department of Justice's ADA Title II rule sets WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the technical standard for state and local government web content and mobile apps. In April 2026 the Department extended both compliance dates by one year. The standard itself did not change.
Extended from April 24, 2026.
Extended from April 26, 2027.
Verify both against the rule itself — 28 CFR Part 35, Subpart H, as amended by the Department's April 2026 interim final rule. The superseded dates still circulate widely and read exactly like current ones.
What you get
An audit, a report, and a re-check
Three stages, the same on every engagement. It is the reason a finding can be checked rather than taken on faith.
Audited by a person, not just a scanner
A scanner decides some criteria outright and cannot decide most of them. Whether alt text describes the image, whether focus order follows the visual order, whether a label reads correctly to a browser and wrongly to a screen reader — those need someone to operate the page the way an affected user would. That manual pass is the actual work, and it is what a scanner report cannot substitute for. Vendor coverage percentages are worth reading with the denominator in view: the share of success criteria a tool can decide and the share of total findings it catches are different numbers, and the second one is dominated by colour contrast.
A conformance report you can act on and hand over
Findings written against the specific success criteria they fail, severity-ranked, each one traced to the page and element it came from, with what a fix would involve. Your developers can work from it and your counsel can read it. Where something could not be evaluated, it is reported as UNKNOWN with the reason — never quietly counted as a pass.
Remediation, then re-verification
Pages and documents actually fixed — including PDF backlogs — and then re-checked against the same criteria by the same method. A fix nobody verified is a claim, not a result. If you would rather your own team remediates, the report is written so they can, and we re-check afterward.
The details that matter
The same rules apply here as everywhere else we work.
Which pages, which documents, which criteria, and what the deliverable is — settled before work begins. No open-ended meter and no change-order drift.
Conformance is a measurement against a standard on a date, not a permanent state, and no honest vendor can promise you immunity. You get the report, the method, and verified fixes.
The accessibility conformance report a buyer asks for during procurement, prepared from the audit evidence rather than from optimism.
Anything that could not be reached, rendered, or tested is named and counted, with the reason. The absence of a finding is never presented as a pass.
Evaluation runs against your public site and the documents you send. No system access, no credentials, and nothing written back.
Questions go to whoever performed the evaluation. You will never chase an account rep.
FAQ
Fair questions
Are you certified to do this?
There is no license or industry-wide certification required for accessibility evaluation, and we hold none — we would rather say that plainly than let a logo imply otherwise. What we report against is public and checkable: WCAG 2.1 Level AA, the DOJ Title II rule, and the VPAT format. If your procurement requires delivery under the Section 508 Trusted Tester process specifically, say so on the call — that is a defined process with its own credential, and we will tell you straight whether we can meet it.
Can't a free scanner tell us this?
It can tell you some of it, and you should run one — it is free and it finds real problems. What it cannot do is evaluate the criteria that require judgment about intent and context, which is most of them. Running a scanner and reading its output as a conformance level is the single most common way an entity believes it is further along than it is.
How do you scope and price it?
On a call, because it depends on how many pages and documents are in scope and what you already know about them. Scope and method are agreed in writing at a fixed price before work begins. If the work turns out not to fit, you hear that on the call rather than after an invoice.
What do you need from us to start?
The site address, a sense of which pages and documents matter most to the public, and whoever will receive the findings. If there is an existing audit or complaint, that is useful context — it tells us what has already been looked at.
Can we see a report before committing?
Yes. We can walk you through a sample conformance evaluation on a call so you can see the format, the severity ranking, and how findings are traced — before you decide anything.
Find out where you actually stand
Twenty minutes is enough to scope it — and if an audit is not what you need yet, you will hear that on the call rather than after an invoice.