What an accessibility audit is
A website accessibility audit is a structured review of digital content and interactions to find barriers for people with disabilities. It looks at how people perceive information, navigate pages, understand instructions, and operate controls. An audit may use automated checks, manual inspection, assistive technology, and usability feedback.
“Audit” can mean different levels of work. A quick automated scan is a useful starting point. A more complete evaluation defines its standard, scope, sample of pages and tasks, testing methods, findings, and follow-up. Always check what a provider means by “audit” before comparing proposals.
What an audit should cover
The review should reflect how your website is actually used. Depending on your site, scope may include:
- Important page templates and representative content
- Navigation, menus, dialogs, search, and other interactive controls
- Forms, validation, errors, and confirmation messages
- Purchase, registration, appointment, or support journeys
- Images, video, documents, and third-party components
- Keyboard access, visible focus, zoom, and screen reader behavior
Choose a recognized evaluation target such as WCAG and state the version and conformance level in the scope. W3C’s WCAG Evaluation Methodology (WCAG-EM) describes a process for evaluating a website, including defining its scope, exploring it, selecting a representative sample, evaluating the sample, and reporting findings. A short scan and a full conformance evaluation are different kinds of evidence.
A repeatable audit workflow
1. Define the scope
Write down the website or product, important user journeys, supported languages, page types, documents, and third-party services to include. A homepage-only check will miss issues in account areas, forms, and checkout.
2. Run automated checks
Scan representative templates to find detectable patterns such as missing accessible names, some contrast problems, and invalid markup relationships. Treat these results as leads to verify. Tools can miss barriers and can sometimes report issues that need human context.
3. Review manually
Use a keyboard to complete each selected task. Check that focus order follows the interface, focus is visible, controls work without a pointer, and users can recover from menus and dialogs. Increase zoom and check that content remains available. Use a screen reader to review headings, landmarks, names, instructions, and form feedback.
4. Record evidence and impact
For every finding, record the page or component, steps to reproduce it, expected behavior, actual behavior, users affected, and a suggested next step. Group repeated problems in shared components so one fix can improve many pages. Avoid treating a score as a complete description of severity or usability.
5. Fix and verify
Assign an owner and priority, make the change, then repeat the same test. Check related pages that use the component. Keep unresolved items visible so a passing scan does not erase known manual findings.
Who should conduct the review?
Small teams can begin with a self-review and automated tools. A specialist can help when the site has complex application flows, custom widgets, many documents, or a need for a documented evaluation against a specific standard. Ask prospective providers how they choose pages, test with assistive technology, involve disabled users, report evidence, and validate fixes.
For legal questions, an accessibility audit is not a legal opinion. A technical review can document observed barriers and testing scope, but legal obligations depend on the organization and applicable law. Consult qualified counsel for legal advice.