ADA Compliance Archives /Tag

ADA Title II Conformance Mistakes to Avoid

Let’s start with a familiar scene.

A resident with low vision tries to pay a utility bill online. The button text fades into the background. They zoom in, squint, and finally give up. Across town, a veteran downloads a benefits form—but the PDF won’t open in their screen reader. They call, wait on hold, and eventually hear the same line everyone dreads: “Try again later.”

These moments rarely make headlines, but they happen every day. And they’re exactly what ADA Title II conformance is designed to prevent.

With new deadlines approaching, the clock is officially ticking. The Department of Justice has set clear expectations: every website, mobile app, and digital document must meet WCAG 2.1 Level AA standards to be considered accessible.

Still, even with those expectations in place, many agencies stumble—not from neglect, but from complexity. Outdated systems, legacy PDFs, limited budgets, and competing priorities all pull in different directions.

This guide outlines ten of the most common pitfalls local governments encounter—and how your team can avoid them before small issues grow into time-consuming, costly problems.

1 | Waiting Too Long to Begin ADA Title II Conformance

One of the most common mistakes is simply waiting. Waiting for next year’s budget, a redesign, or until “things calm down.” But accessibility work takes time—often months, sometimes years—especially when legacy systems or vendor-managed platforms are involved. Every delay widens the gap and makes remediation more expensive.

Start Small, but Start Now

Begin with a WCAG 2.1 AA audit that targets your highest-traffic, highest-risk pages—payment portals, permit applications, emergency alerts. Use the findings to build a phased plan: tackle quick fixes first, then move into deeper remediation like PDFs or interactive content.

Momentum matters more than perfection. Each resolved issue moves you closer to meaningful accessibility—and lasting ADA Title II conformance. But while hesitation can stall progress, so can taking the wrong kind of shortcut.

2 | Relying on Widgets or “Quick Fixes”

When deadlines loom, shortcuts start to look tempting. Accessibility widgets and overlays promise instant compliance, but the data tells a different story. Over 20% of ADA web lawsuits in 2024 involved sites using overlays, and many of those tools introduced new barriers for assistive technology users.

Treat Them as Temporary Support at Best

Widgets don’t repair flawed code—they mask it. Pair automated scans with manual testing to catch what machines miss. True accessibility isn’t something you install; it’s something you build, maintain, and test continuously. Even agencies that avoid quick fixes can still lose momentum when they misunderstand what an audit actually means.

3 | Treating the Audit as the Finish Line

An accessibility audit is a starting point, not a success story. It reveals what’s broken but doesn’t fix it. Too often, agencies check the box once the report arrives, assuming the work is done. Six months later, those same issues remain—and the deadline looms closer.

Turn the Audit Into a Roadmap

Assign clear ownership, set realistic timelines, and track each fix to completion. The goal isn’t to admire the findings; it’s to act on them. An audit shines the light, but ADA Title II conformance only comes from follow-through. Once remediation begins, it’s also essential to remember that accessibility extends beyond the desktop experience.

4 | Overlooking Mobile Accessibility

For many residents, your mobile site or app is their primary touchpoint with local government. If that experience isn’t accessible, your services aren’t either. Yet mobile testing often gets pushed aside until the very end—when changes are most expensive to make.

Test Early and Test on Real Devices

WCAG 2.1 includes mobile-specific guidance on touch targets, gestures, and orientation. Make sure forms resize correctly and navigation works without a mouse. Accessibility should follow the user, not the screen size. And while mobile access is crucial, so are the documents that so many residents rely on for daily interactions.

5 | Ignoring Accessibility in Digital Documents

Even when web pages pass compliance checks, PDFs and other downloadable materials often don’t. Forms, meeting agendas, and reports are some of the most common—and most problematic—files on public sites. The DOJ is clear: if a document provides public information or access to a service, it must be accessible.

Audit Your Digital Library

Start with frequently downloaded or required documents. Train staff to tag PDFs correctly or, when possible, convert them to HTML pages. Each accessible file removes another barrier and brings your agency closer to full ADA Title II conformance. Of course, even well-prepared teams can find their progress derailed by one common factor: vendors who don’t share the same standards.

6 | Not Holding Vendors Accountable

Even when third-party vendors manage your website, accessibility responsibility remains yours. Public agencies can’t outsource compliance. That’s why contracts matter as much as code.

Bake Accessibility Into Every Partnership

Specify WCAG 2.1 AA requirements, mandate assistive-technology testing, and require documentation at handoff. Accessibility clauses shouldn’t live in the fine print—they should be measurable deliverables written into the contract. Without vendor accountability, accessibility can erode quietly with each update. And even with vendor alignment, one final validation step ensures your work actually functions as intended.

7 | Skipping Manual and Assistive-Technology Testing

Automated tools are valuable, but they can’t replicate human experience. Navigation traps, mislabeled buttons, and confusing reading order often pass automated checks unnoticed.

Manual Testing Closes That Gap

Use screen readers, voice navigation, magnifiers, and keyboard-only controls to simulate how real people interact with your site. Better yet, invite users with disabilities to test and provide feedback. Their insights catch what automation never will—and validate genuine ADA Title II conformance. Still, even the most accessible site today can fall out of compliance tomorrow without ongoing monitoring.

8 | Neglecting Ongoing Monitoring

Accessibility isn’t a one-time project; it’s ongoing maintenance. A single CMS update or design tweak can reintroduce barriers.

Make Monitoring Routine

Schedule quarterly manual reviews and monthly automated scans. Keep a visible feedback form on your website so residents can report issues directly. Treat accessibility like preventative care: small, consistent checks that protect long-term health. But even with regular testing, the strongest defense is an informed team that knows how to prevent barriers before they happen.

9 | Underestimating Accessibility Training

Technology identifies issues, but people prevent them. Without training, the same mistakes—missing alt text, unlabeled forms, inaccessible PDFs—keep returning.

Invest in Continuous Education

Provide annual, role-specific training for content authors, developers, and procurement staff. Keep it practical: short sessions, clear checklists, and ongoing refreshers. When accessibility knowledge becomes second nature, compliance becomes culture. And when that culture takes root, it’s worth sharing it publicly.

10 | Failing to Publish a Public Accessibility Statement

A public accessibility statement isn’t a formality—it’s a promise. It tells residents, We’re committed, we’re listening, and we want your feedback.

Publish a Concise Statement

Reference your WCAG standard, list contact information for support, and update it at least once a year. This simple gesture builds transparency and trust—cornerstones of inclusive digital governance.

ADA Title II Conformance Is About People, Not Just Policy

Reaching ADA Title II conformance isn’t just about compliance—it’s about people. It’s about ensuring that every resident can access essential public services with independence and dignity.

When your platforms are accessible, seniors can pay their bills without help. Parents can find school updates easily. Veterans can apply for benefits confidently.

That’s not a technical milestone—it’s a civic one.

Start early. Build steadily. Keep accessibility alive through training, monitoring, and accountability. Compliance may be the mandate, but inclusion is the mission.

If your agency is ready to turn goals into measurable progress, schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. We’ll help you navigate these ten pitfalls and build a roadmap for sustainable, equitable access for every resident you serve.

Greg McNeil

September 30, 2025

Legal Compliance

Accessibility, ADA Compliance, ADA Title II, ADA Website Compliance, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
ADA Guidance Documents: Now You See Them, Now You Don’t
You’re ready to make your site accessible, but the “how” still feels scattered—too many opinions, not enough plain steps. You want a path that fits busy days, real budgets, and a team that’s already stretched. Maybe you’ve got a dozen tabs open and the same question lingering: “Where do we start?”

This guide gives you that grounding. We’ll explain why some public resources shifted (including ADA guidance documents) and what hasn’t changed about your responsibilities—then offer a calm, repeatable way to keep improving without the overwhelm.

Behind the Headlines: What Actually Changed

For years, website owners leaned on plain-English materials from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to turn legal text into everyday decisions. In March 2025, the DOJ withdrew a set of those materials—older how-to pages and pandemic-era Q&As. These ADA guidance documents weren’t binding law, but they acted like a friendly sidebar: “Are headings structured so screen readers can move around?” “Do forms have clear labels and announced errors?” “Do videos ship with captions by default?”

The intention was to “streamline.” The result, for many teams, was losing that quick translation layer. The ADA didn’t change. The shortcut explanations did.

What Are ADA Guidance Documents—and Why They Mattered Online

Guidance sits between regulations and real life. It doesn’t create new rules; it shows what good looks like. For web teams, that practicality was gold. It helped product leads, designers, developers, and content editors turn big goals into small, repeatable habits:
- Use semantic headings and landmarks so navigation is predictable.
- Ensure keyboard access works everywhere—and that focus is easy to see.
- Write meaningful alt text and descriptive link text.
- Tie error messages to the right fields and announce them clearly.
- Caption video and provide transcripts for audio.
In short: fewer guesses, fewer do-overs, fewer users getting stuck.

What This Means Day to Day

When the handy reference disappears, hesitation sneaks in. A button ships without an accessible name. Focus gets trapped in a modal. A hero banner looks great but misses contrast by a hair. A form works with a mouse but not a keyboard. None of these are headline news alone; together they slow someone’s day—or stop it. Without familiar ADA guidance documents, teams second-guess what’s “good enough,” and releases start to feel inconsistent.

But the baseline didn’t budge. The ADA still requires effective, equal access online. Courts still enforce it. And people still expect to complete tasks without extra hoops. The safest—and most respectful—move is to keep going, visibly and steadily.

Why Waiting for New Guidance Is Risky

It’s tempting to pause and hope for a new official playbook. Three reasons to keep moving instead:
- Legal exposure. Courts across the U.S. recognize that inaccessible sites and apps can violate the ADA. That trend didn’t reverse.
- Reputation and trust. Accessibility issues show up in reviews and social posts; quiet fixes made early rarely do.
- Real people, real tasks. When login, checkout, or account recovery breaks for assistive-tech users, you’re not just risking a suit—you’re losing customers.
Silence—or withdrawn ADA guidance documents—is not a safety net.

What Web Compliance Looks Like Right Now

Even without those quick-reference pages, your backbone is solid:
- Standards: Treat WCAG 2.1 Level AA as today’s target and map sensible upgrades toward WCAG 2.2. WCAG gives your team a shared, testable language for “accessibility.”
- Process: Fold accessibility into everyday work—requirements, design reviews, coding practices, content checks, QA, and release.
- Evidence: Keep lightweight notes on what you tested, what you fixed, and what’s queued. Perfect isn’t required; active, good-faith effort matters.
A Calm, Practical Web Plan (Built for Busy Teams)

Think “little and often,” not “big and never.” Small habits—kept—beat big intentions that stall.

1) A One-sentence North Star

“Everyone should be able to find, understand, and complete key tasks on our site—without special instructions.” When trade-offs get messy, let that sentence break the tie.

2) Make It Visible In Design

Bake contrast rules, focus styles, and ARIA patterns into your design system. Add a five-item gate to design reviews: contrast, text scaling, focus order, error visibility, and respect for motion/animation preferences. These guardrails prevent expensive rework later.

3) Test Every Release—Quickly And Consistently
- Run an automated scan for the easy wins (contrast flags, missing labels).
- Do a keyboard-only pass for navigation, focus order, skip links, menus, and modals.
- Add a screen-reader spot check (one core task in NVDA or VoiceOver) to confirm headings, landmarks, labels, and announcements make sense.
- Media check: captions/transcripts and no surprise auto-play.
- Ten focused minutes can save hours of cleanup.
4) Prioritize By User Impact

Fix blockers first—anything that keeps someone from starting, finishing, or recovering a task (focus traps, unlabeled inputs, errors that aren’t announced, inaccessible captchas). Then clean up the friction.

5) Write For Clarity

Descriptive link text beats “click here.” Headings should be meaningful and in order. Error messages should be specific and tied to their fields. Plain instructions help everyone, not just screen-reader users.

6) Train in Micro-moments

Skip the marathon. Rotate five-minute refreshers: writing alt text, managing focus in modals, structuring headings, testing keyboard paths. Small lessons stick because people can finish them.

7) Invite Feedback—And Close the Loop

Publish a simple accessibility statement with a real contact path. When someone reports an issue, acknowledge it, fix it, and thank them. That response builds trust and brings problems to you early.

8) Document Just Enough

Keep a rolling log (tickets or a short doc) noting checks, defects, fixes, and what’s next. It’s team memory, proof of progress, and a calmer conversation if you ever need to show your work.

Beyond Compliance: Better Web, Better Business

Compliance is the floor. Inclusion is the opportunity. The same choices that meet WCAG also reduce support friction and lift conversions: clearer forms, reliable focus, readable text, captions that help commuters and quiet-office viewers alike, motion that respects user settings. You don’t need fresh ADA guidance documents to make that case—the impact shows up in your analytics, your reviews, and the quiet relief of users who can simply get things done.

A Clear, Steady Path Forward

Here’s the bottom line: the ADA still stands, and the withdrawn ADA guidance documents didn’t change what “good” looks like online. Rebuild the convenience layer yourself—standards as guardrails, small checks each release, micro-training that sticks, open feedback, and just-enough documentation.

Start small. Keep going. Write down what works. That’s how you protect your brand, respect your users, and give your team a sustainable way to ship accessible experiences. And if a short, expert walkthrough would help you set that cadence, consider scheduling an ADA briefing with 216digital—calm, practical, and focused on your next few steps.
Greg McNeil

September 18, 2025

Legal Compliance

Accessibility, ADA, ADA Compliance, ADA Web Accessibility, WCAG, Website Accessibility
VPAT vs ACR: What’s the Difference and Why It Matters
If you’ve ever been asked for a VPAT or an ACR and felt your stomach drop, you’re not alone. These acronyms often appear in RFPs, procurement conversations, and compliance checklists—and can leave even experienced teams scrambling to figure out what’s actually being requested. Understanding the difference between a VPAT and an ACR isn’t just technical trivia. It can mean the difference between winning a contract, avoiding legal risk, and showing that your organization takes accessibility seriously.

This guide breaks it all down: what a VPAT is, what an ACR is, how they differ, and how to create them with confidence.

Absolutely — here’s that section updated with the requested subheader formatting:

What Is a VPAT?

A VPAT—short for Voluntary Product Accessibility Template—is a standardized document created by the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) to report how well a digital product meets accessibility standards like WCAG, Section 508, and EN 301 549.

Think of the VPAT as a structured questionnaire. It asks you to evaluate your product feature by feature and indicate whether each requirement is supported, partially supported, or not supported, along with explanations. The most recent version is VPAT 2.5, which comes in multiple editions to meet different regulatory needs: WCAG, 508 (for U.S. federal agencies), EU (for European procurement), and INT (for global organizations).

A Typical VPAT Includes
- Product name, version, and date of evaluation
- Standards referenced (WCAG 2.1, Section 508, EN 301 549)
- Testing methods used
- Tables showing conformance levels for each criterion
- Brief remarks or explanations where needed
It’s important to note that the VPAT itself is voluntary—there’s no federal law requiring you to complete one unless it’s part of a procurement process or client request. And because VPATs are self-reported, their quality depends on your honesty and expertise. A VPAT is an essential starting point but doesn’t guarantee real-world usability for people with disabilities. Usability testing and independent audits remain critical for a complete accessibility picture.

What Is an ACR?

An ACR, or Accessibility Conformance Report, is the completed version of a VPAT. If the VPAT is the blank template, the ACR is the filled-in, actionable report. It’s a snapshot of your product’s accessibility at a given point in time, often after thorough testing.

Where the VPAT provides structure, the ACR provides substance. It includes:
- Specific findings for each standard
- Narrative explanations for partial or non-support
- Workarounds or mitigation strategies
- Planned remediation timelines
How Testing Builds Trust

The strongest ACRs are grounded in a variety of testing methods, not just automated scans. Manual code reviews can catch nuanced issues that tools miss. Testing with assistive technologies like screen readers, magnifiers, or voice input tools reveals how real users navigate your product. Including results from usability sessions with people who have disabilities can also add powerful credibility. Documenting these methods in your ACR shows buyers and procurement teams that your results are thorough, reliable, and rooted in real-world experience.

Comparing VPAT vs. ACR: Core Differences

Although the terms are sometimes used interchangeably, VPATs and ACRs play different roles:
- Template vs. Report: The VPAT is the empty template; the ACR is the completed, shareable report.
- Level of Detail: A VPAT lists conformance levels, but an ACR goes deeper with context, user impact notes, and remediation plans.
- Who Creates Them: VPATs are often drafted internally by product or compliance teams. ACRs may be internally created or validated by third-party auditors to add credibility.
- Audience: VPATs are useful for internal planning and tracking. ACRs are intended for procurement officers, enterprise buyers, and compliance teams who need assurance that accessibility has been tested and documented thoroughly.
This distinction is crucial—submitting only a VPAT when an RFP requests an ACR could disqualify you from consideration.

Best Practices for Creating VPATs and ACRs

Getting these documents right takes more than filling out a form. Follow these practices to create credible and effective reports:
- Use the Latest Template: Work from VPAT 2.5 or later to align with current standards like WCAG 2.1 or 2.2.
- Be Transparent About Gaps: Overstating conformance can hurt credibility. Clearly indicate “Partially Supports” or “Does Not Support” when needed, and explain why.
- Add Detailed Remarks: Go beyond a yes/no answer. Include context on who is impacted, how severe the issue is, and whether a fix is planned.
- Document Testing Methods: Specify whether testing involved automated tools, manual reviews, assistive technology testing, or user testing. This adds weight to your ACR findings.
- Update Regularly: Accessibility isn’t one-and-done. Refresh your VPAT and ACR with each major release or remediation cycle so they reflect the current state of your product.
Procurement-ready Checklist
- Product name, version, and date are clearly listed
- Standards cited (WCAG, 508, EN 301 549) match buyer requirements
- Conformance ratings are accurate and supported with evidence
- Testing methods and tools are documented in plain language
- Known issues, workarounds, and fix timelines are included
- Jargon is avoided—language is clear for non-technical readers
- Document is reviewed and refreshed with each major product update
Conclusion: Building Confidence Through Transparency

The VPAT gives you the structure, but the ACR brings it to life. Together, they are essential for demonstrating conformance, preparing for procurement, and showing that you take inclusion seriously.

At 216digital, we view accessibility documentation not as a burden, but as a pathway to trust and opportunity. A well-crafted ACR helps you thrive in competitive markets by proving your commitment to accessibility and inclusion.

If you’d like guidance on creating either document—or aligning both with the latest standards—schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. Our team will walk you through every step, from drafting a VPAT to publishing a credible ACR, helping you move from paperwork to real-world accessibility.
Greg McNeil

September 11, 2025

Legal Compliance, Testing & Remediation

Accessibility, ACR, ADA Compliance, Legal compliance, Section 508, VPAT, WCAG, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
Accessibility for Websites: Why One Version Is Enough
You may have heard this before—or even thought it yourself: “If our main site is too complex, we’ll just build a simple, text-only version for people who use assistive technology.”

On the surface, that seems like a smart fix. If making your main site accessible feels overwhelming, why not create a separate version that looks simpler and easier to use? For years, many businesses believed this was the shortcut to meeting ADA requirements without reworking their entire website.

But here’s the problem: a separate “accessible site” is not the best answer—legally, ethically, or practically. Real accessibility for websites means making your main site usable for everyone, not sending people to a stripped-down side door.

Why the “Separate Accessible Site” Myth Lives On

So why do people still think a second site is a good idea? One reason is that it feels easier. Making changes to an existing site can seem complicated and costly, while building a quick, text-only version looks faster and cheaper.

There’s also the idea that people who are blind or have low vision “just need text.” That thinking misses the bigger picture. Accessibility for websites covers much more than plain text—it’s about making sure every feature, tool, and piece of content can be used by everyone, no matter their ability.

Why It Fails: Standards and Legal Risk

This is where the shortcut starts to unravel. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) apply to all web content, not just simplified versions. Nowhere do the guidelines suggest that a simplified, alternate version of a site fulfills compliance.

Take color contrast, for example. WCAG requires a minimum contrast between text and background across every page. Even if you create a plain version, your main site still has to meet those standards.

The U.S. Department of Justice agrees. In April 2024, new rules made it clear that public entities can’t offer inaccessible main sites with “alternate” accessible versions, except in rare situations where no other option is possible. Courts have backed this up, too. In one case, DOT vs. SAS, an airline was fined $200,000 after trying to meet accessibility rules with a separate assistive site. In the end, they still had to fix their main site.

In short, accessibility for websites isn’t about offering an alternate route. It’s about making sure the front door works for everyone.

The Real Problems With Dual-Site Strategies

Even if the legal side didn’t matter, the practical downsides are hard to ignore.

Keeping two sites in sync is a constant challenge. Every blog post, product update, or policy change must be added to both. It’s all too easy for the “accessible” version to fall behind, leaving users with outdated or incomplete information.

Then there’s the user experience itself. Imagine being told you can’t use the same website as everyone else—that you have to go through a different door. That separation feels unwelcoming, even insulting. Most users don’t want fewer features; they want the same experience, just built in a way they can use.

And here’s another snag: text-only sites often cut out interactive tools, forms, or multimedia. For someone who needs keyboard-friendly navigation, that’s not helpful—it’s limiting. In trying to fix one barrier, you end up creating new ones.

Finally, a dual-site setup complicates your own operations. Analytics, personalization, and user tracking get split in two, which makes it harder to understand how people interact with your brand online.

Why Building Accessibility Into the Main Site Works Better

When you build accessibility into your main site, everyone benefits.

Captions help people who are deaf or hard of hearing, but they also help anyone watching a video in a noisy environment. Alt text helps people using screen readers, but it also boosts your site’s SEO. Clear navigation supports users with motor disabilities, but it also makes the site faster for power users who prefer keyboard shortcuts.

Accessibility for websites also saves money in the long run. Many fixes—like adding alt text, adjusting headings, or improving color contrast—are low-cost and sometimes even free. Building accessibility into your normal workflow prevents expensive, large-scale repairs later.

Most importantly, an accessible main site builds trust. It shows customers that your brand is modern, inclusive, and committed to fairness.

Are There Times a Separate Version Is Okay?

Only in rare situations. If you’re using a third-party tool that can’t be fixed right away, a temporary alternate version may help. But it should be:
- Clearly linked and easy to find
- Fully equal in content and function
- Phased out as soon as your main site is fixed
Think of it like a patch, not a permanent solution. The goal should always be accessibility for websites built directly into the primary site.

Building an Accessibility-First Mindset

So what should you do instead? Shift your thinking from “quick fix” to “accessibility-first.”

Start by auditing your current site against WCAG. Find the biggest barriers and prioritize fixing those. Build new features with progressive enhancement so they’re usable by everyone from the start. Test with real users, not just automated tools—especially people with disabilities whose feedback will reveal issues you can’t see yourself.

And most importantly, make accessibility part of your normal workflow. Fold it into design reviews, QA testing, and content updates. Keep users in the loop by being transparent about your efforts. Progress is valuable, and users will notice your commitment.

Conclusion: One Site, For Everyone

The idea of a “separate accessible version” might look like an easy answer, but in practice, it creates more problems than it solves. It’s harder to maintain, sends the wrong message, and leaves users without the features they need.

True accessibility for websites means one site that includes everyone. It’s about designing digital spaces where people don’t need a back door—they walk through the same front door as everyone else.

If you’re ready to leave alternate versions behind and move toward an accessibility-first strategy, consider scheduling an ADA briefing with 216digital. We’ll show you how WCAG works in real-world practice, point out your greatest opportunities, and help you make your main site truly accessible—for everyone.
Greg McNeil

August 13, 2025

Legal Compliance

Accessibility, ADA Compliance, ADA Web Accessibility, WCAG Compliance, WCAG conformance, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
ADA Compliance for State and Local Governments
A resident tried to renew their license, apply for benefits, or register to vote. They found the page—but the form wouldn’t load properly. The labels were missing, the buttons didn’t work with their keyboard, or the error messages didn’t make sense. After a few tries, they gave up. Frustrated, unheard, and now one step further from the help they needed.

It’s not a rare story.

When digital government services don’t work for everyone—especially for people using assistive technology—the problem cuts deeper than bad UX. It means someone in your community got left out of a public service. Maybe they missed a deadline. Maybe they called your office, overwhelmed and confused. Or maybe they didn’t say a word, just silently lost faith that their government sees them.

ADA compliance isn’t a nice-to-have or a compliance checkbox. It’s how public agencies build trust, deliver on their mission, and make sure no one gets shut out. And while it can feel like one more thing on a very long list—it’s not out of reach. Even with tight budgets, limited time, and a small team, meaningful progress is possible.

Start at the Foundation: Build In, Don’t Bolt On

Your website is probably the front door to half your services. License renewals, benefit applications, emergency alerts—it all lives online now. So when that door doesn’t open for someone using a screen reader or navigating with a keyboard, the message is clear: this wasn’t built for you.

And that kind of message doesn’t just frustrate users—it breaks down trust. It also creates extra work for your staff, drives up support requests, and opens the door to compliance issues. It’s a lose-lose.

The good news? You don’t need a blank slate or a full redesign to make things better. Start where you are, work with what you’ve got, and shift the mindset from “we’ll fix it later” to “let’s make this part of how we work.”

What the Law Actually Says (And Why It’s Not Just About Lawsuits)

Let’s clear up the legal side. Yes, digital accessibility is required—and yes, those requirements have recently gotten more specific.

Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act now includes digital services. As of April 2024, the DOJ’s final rule requires public sector websites and digital tools to follow WCAG 2.1, Level A and AA. That gives you a defined standard—and frankly, a clearer path forward.

Then there’s Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, which applies to any public service receiving federal funds. If your agency touches education, healthcare, or housing, this rule probably applies to you too.

And don’t forget the state-level picture. States like California, Colorado, Minnesota, and Illinois have passed their own accessibility laws, some of which go further than federal standards.

Still, accessibility isn’t just about avoiding legal trouble. It’s about showing residents that your agency is committed to fair access—online, offline, everywhere. Compliance is important. But inclusion is what makes the effort worthwhile.

WCAG Sounds Complex—But It Boils Down to Four Core Ideas

You don’t have to memorize the entire Web Content Accessibility Guidelines to start improving accessibility. At its core, WCAG is built on four principles—think of them as your north star:
- Perceivable: Can people see or hear the content?
- Operable: Can they interact with it using a keyboard, screen reader, or voice commands?
- Understandable: Is the information clear, consistent, and logical?
- Robust: Does the site work across different browsers, assistive tech, and platforms?
When you keep these in mind while building or updating a digital tool, you’re already making smarter choices.

Okay, But How Do You Start with ADA Compliance?

Let’s say you don’t have a dedicated accessibility specialist. Maybe your web team is small. Maybe you wear six hats and accessibility feels like a seventh. Here’s how to make headway anyway:

Use tools that do the first pass for you.

Platforms like WAVE, axe, and Google Lighthouse can scan your site for issues like missing alt text, poor color contrast, and unlabeled form fields. These won’t catch everything, but they’ll give you a solid to-do list—especially for easy wins that make a big difference.

Triage by Traffic

Start with the digital spaces that matter most: your homepage, your most-used forms, and any system residents rely on during an emergency. These are the areas where accessibility problems cause the biggest real-world consequences—and where fixes bring the biggest impact.

Teach What Matters To The People Who Touch the Work.

ADA compliance isn’t just an IT concern. Content editors need to know how to structure text. Designers need to understand color contrast and readable fonts. Even procurement officers should be including accessibility language in contracts. A little role-specific training goes a long way.

Make It Routine, Not A One-time Fix

Build ADA compliance into your processes—not just your projects. Add it to your publishing checklist. Review older content during updates. Make it part of procurement, design reviews, and form testing. When it becomes second nature, you avoid the scramble later.

The Payoff Isn’t Just ADA Compliance—It’s Better Public Service

ADA compliance improves your service delivery across the board. It helps more people use your tools the way they were intended—without needing to call, email, or show up in person. It also reduces the burden on your staff and helps build public trust.

And yes, there are cost benefits. When you design with accessibility from the beginning, you avoid expensive rework and reduce your legal exposure. But even more than that, you create digital spaces that feel fair, usable, and modern—qualities your community notices.

You Don’t Have to Do It All Today—Just Take the First Step

If you’re still thinking, “We’re not ready,” that’s okay. You don’t have to overhaul everything overnight. ADA compliance is a journey—and the first steps are often the most impactful.

Start with what you can. Get curious about what’s working (and what’s not). Loop in the people who use your site. And if you need help? Ask for it.

At 216digital, we offer ADA briefings, a simple, no-pressure way to understand your obligations, identify risks, and plan your next steps.Because digital inclusion isn’t just a standard to meet—it’s a way to serve your community better.
Greg McNeil

July 10, 2025

Legal Compliance

Accessibility, ADA Compliance, ADA Title II, ADA Website Compliance, state accessibility laws, Title II, Website Accessibility
How to Design Accessible Icons that Users Love
Icons are everywhere—on mobile apps, websites, dashboards, and devices. They’re small, but they do big things. Icons help us find a menu, delete a file, or save something for later. Designers love them for good reason: they’re stylish, space-saving, and often universal. But here’s the question—are they really accessible to everyone?

It’s easy to focus on how icons look, but what about how they function for people using screen readers, people with low vision, or anyone who relies on keyboard navigation? In this article, we’ll take a closer look at the benefits and challenges of using icons, the common accessibility mistakes, and the steps designers and developers can take to create accessible icons that improve user experience without sacrificing style.

Why Icons Matter (Beyond Aesthetics)

Well-designed icons help users make sense of content faster. According to research aligned with WCAG guidance, familiar icons can support users with reading or cognitive challenges by serving as helpful visual cues. A simple “trash can” icon can quickly signal delete. A “magnifying glass” screams search. When paired with labels, these accessible icons create a faster and clearer experience for all users.

Saving Space on Smaller Screens

Icons also shine when space is tight—especially on mobile. Instead of cramming menus or actions into text links, icons can simplify the interface and reduce visual clutter. When used thoughtfully, accessible icons help you keep things clean while making the site easier to use.

Common Accessibility Challenges with Icons

Ambiguity: One Icon, Many Meanings

Icons aren’t always as clear as we think. A heart icon might mean “like,” “save,” or “favorite.” Without proper labeling, users may misinterpret its purpose. WCAG requires that all non-text elements, including icons, have text alternatives that clearly explain what they do. Accessible icons must carry meaning that’s clear—both visually and programmatically.

Decorative Icons That Get in the Way

Not every icon needs to be “read.” Some are purely decorative—like flourishes in a logo or background design. But if these aren’t properly hidden from screen readers, they add clutter and confusion. WCAG recommends using aria-hidden= "true" or similar methods to hide decorative icons. That way, screen reader users don’t have to sift through unnecessary details.

Size, Contrast, and Clickability

Icons that are too small or faint are hard to see or click—especially for users with motor or vision challenges. WCAG suggests a touch target size of at least 44×44 pixels. Icons should also meet contrast guidelines (at least a 3:1 ratio against the background). And if someone’s using a keyboard to navigate, your icons must have clear focus indicators and be easy to tab to.

Best Practices for Creating Accessible Icons

1. Label Every Interactive Icon

Icons that do something—like opening a menu or submitting a form—need a clear label. You can add a visible text label, a hidden <span> for screen readers, or an aria-label attribute. For example:
```
<button aria-label= "Open menu">
  <svg aria-hidden="true" width="24" height="24" role="img">
    
  </svg>
</button>
```
This makes sure your accessible icons work for both sighted and non-sighted users.

2. Hide Decorative Icons Properly

If an icon doesn’t add meaning, it shouldn’t be read by assistive technology. Use:
```
<span aria-hidden="true">
  <svg></svg>
</span>
```
Or:
```
<svg role="presentation"></svg>
```
This keeps screen reader output clean and focused on relevant content.

3. Pay Attention to Size, Contrast, and Focus

Accessible icons should be big enough to click easily and bold enough to see. Stick to WCAG’s minimum target size of 44×44 px. Use color contrast of at least 3:1 for non-text icons. And don’t forget to add a visible focus style for keyboard users—like a border or shadow:
```
button:focus {
  outline: 2px solid #000;
  outline-offset: 2px;
}
```
4. Stay Consistent

Use the same icon for the same action across your site. If a magnifying glass opens search in one place, don’t use it for zoom somewhere else. Consistency helps users feel confident in what each icon means—and that’s what accessible icons are all about.

5. Avoid Icon Fonts and Emojis

While they may seem handy, icon fonts can confuse screen readers. Emojis can also be read out in unexpected ways. It’s safer and more predictable to use SVG icons with proper labels.

6. Test in the Real World

Use tools like Lighthouse, or WAVE to catch basic issues. Then test manually: try navigating with a keyboard, check screen reader output, and validate that your icons have the right labels and focus states. Real-world testing is essential to making sure your accessible icons actually work.

A Closer Look: Two Icon Examples

The Right Way to Do a Menu Icon

Let’s say you’re building a mobile menu. Instead of just throwing in a hamburger icon, here’s how to make it accessible:
```
<button aria-label= "Open menu">
  <svg aria-hidden="true" width="24" height="24">
    
  </svg>
</button>
```
With proper labeling, contrast, sizing, and keyboard focus styles, this is a perfect example of accessible icons done right.

Clarifying a Heart Icon

Got a heart icon to save a product? Don’t leave users guessing. Add supporting text:
```
<button aria-label= "Save to favorites">
  <svg aria-hidden="true" width="24" height="24">
    
  </svg>
</button>
```
This helps screen readers speak the correct action and helps all users understand what it does.

Looking Ahead: The Future of Icon Accessibility

Think Global

Icons don’t always mean the same thing across cultures. Something that makes sense in the U.S. may not be clear in Japan or Brazil. When designing accessible icons, test with a global audience if your site serves one.

Customize and Personalize

If you’re creating custom icons for your brand, take extra care with labeling and testing. Better yet, offer users the ability to switch between icons, text, or both—especially for key actions. It’s all about giving people choices that fit their needs.

Final Thoughts: Make Icons That Include Everyone

Icons are powerful little tools. They help us move faster, understand more, and make the web a little smoother. But for them to work for everyone, they need to be designed with care.

That means using accessible icons that have clear labels, hiding decorative ones, following size and contrast rules, being consistent, and testing thoroughly. These steps don’t take away from good design—they enhance it.

At 216digital, we work with design and development teams to review their UI patterns and create accessible experiences—icons included. If you’re ready to take the next step in making your digital spaces more inclusive, let’s talk. Schedule your ADA accessibility briefing today and let us help you turn thoughtful design into inclusive action.
Greg McNeil

June 26, 2025

How-to Guides

Accessibility, Accessible Design, ADA Compliance, Graphic Designer, How-to, Website Accessibility
How Courts Are Addressing Serial ADA Plaintiffs
In recent years, federal courts—particularly in New York—have seen a wave of ADA Title III lawsuits targeting website accessibility issues. While the Americans with Disabilities Act was designed to protect the rights of people with disabilities, a growing number of cases have been brought by serial ADA plaintiffs—individuals who file dozens of near-identical lawsuits across various businesses, often seeking attorney’s fees rather than pursuing real accessibility improvements.

Now, two recent federal court decisions—Fernandez v. Buffalo Jackson Trading Co. (S.D.N.Y., April 14, 2025) and Black v. 3 Times 90, Inc. (E.D.N.Y., April 15, 2025)—are signaling a turning point. Both rulings reflect a trend toward stricter judicial scrutiny and a renewed focus on standing. The message from the courts is becoming clear: claims must be backed by credible, specific allegations of harm—not just boilerplate language.

1. The Rise of Serial ADA Plaintiffs and Lawsuits

In 2024, more than 2,400 ADA Title III lawsuits were filed in federal court alleging website accessibility barriers—a slight uptick from the year before. But despite the continued volume, filings in New York federal courts dropped by 39% compared to 2022, reflecting a noticeable shift. Just 23 plaintiffs were responsible for over half of the cases, pointing to a strategy rooted more in quantity than in quality—a hallmark of serial ADA plaintiffs.

These lawsuits typically rely on generic language, vague descriptions of barriers, and claims of intent to return that lack meaningful context. Courts are now starting to challenge those claims more directly, pushing back on whether plaintiffs have suffered a legitimate “injury in fact” or have any real intention of using the websites they’re suing over.

2. Fernandez v. Buffalo Jackson Trading Co., LLC

In this case, Felipe Fernandez, who is legally blind, sued Buffalo Jackson Trading Co., claiming that he couldn’t complete a purchase of a leather jacket due to accessibility barriers on the company’s website. He pointed to issues like missing alt text and form labels, and stated that he intended to return and complete the purchase once the issues were resolved.

The Court’s Response

Judge John Cronan didn’t dismiss the case outright. Instead, he ordered jurisdictional discovery and an evidentiary hearing to explore whether Fernandez actually had standing to sue. His reasoning was grounded in constitutional principles:

“Article III standing is not merely a pleading hurdle—it’s a core constitutional guardrail.”

The court flagged several red flags:
- Fernandez had filed dozens of similar complaints, often within the same week, using the same legal template.
- He claimed to have tried to purchase items ranging from leather jackets to African necklaces to martial arts gear—an unusually wide variety for a single consumer.
- Despite claiming he couldn’t navigate the site, he referenced specific product features, pricing, and even a promotional discount—suggesting that the site may not have been as inaccessible as alleged.
To dig deeper, the court authorized a forensic review of Fernandez’s browsing history and potentially a deposition, signaling a strong interest in validating the sincerity of his claims and patterns consistent with serial ADA plaintiffs.

3. Black v. 3 Times 90, Inc.

In a separate case, plaintiff Jahron Black—also legally blind—filed suit against a Chinese restaurant, claiming he couldn’t access key information on its website, such as the menu and location details. He said he wanted to visit the restaurant “immediately” and often frequented the neighborhood.

Why the Court Dismissed the Case

Judge Natasha Merle dismissed the complaint for lack of standing, even though the defendant had argued mootness due to recent accessibility fixes. The judge found that:
- Black failed to explain how the website’s issues prevented him from visiting the physical location.
- He didn’t attempt to get the same information through other means, like a phone call or search engine—undermining his claim of urgency.
- There was no compelling reason offered for why this particular restaurant mattered, especially given New York City’s wide range of similar dining options.
While not central to the decision, the judge noted that Black had filed 27 similar lawsuits within the previous year, a pattern that mirrors the behavior of serial ADA plaintiffs.

The court concluded that the complaint didn’t show any real intent to return or actual harm, and dismissed the case without leave to amend.

4. Why These Rulings Matter

Together, these decisions point to a more assertive judicial approach to ADA website litigation driven by serial ADA plaintiffs. Courts are no longer content to accept vague allegations and templated filings. Instead, they’re insisting on:
- Specific, credible claims of harm
- Clear intent to return or complete a transaction
- Evidence to support those claims, such as browsing history or meaningful engagement with the site
In Fernandez, the court is even considering deposing the plaintiff and conducting a forensic review of his device—an extraordinary step that shows how seriously judges are taking the issue of standing.

5. What This Means for Plaintiffs, Businesses, and the Courts

For Plaintiffs and Their Attorneys

Courts are demanding more. To pursue these cases in federal court, plaintiffs must provide:
- Documented evidence of actual attempts to use the site
- Specific descriptions of what went wrong and how it impacted them
- A credible reason for why they’d return
Vague complaints and mass filings are less likely to survive a motion to dismiss. They may also trigger closer scrutiny of the plaintiff’s litigation history—especially for known serial ADA filers.

For Businesses

These rulings present an opportunity to push back when faced with questionable lawsuits. Businesses should consider:
- Challenging standing early, especially if the complaint lacks details or appears templated
- Requesting jurisdictional discovery to verify the plaintiff’s claims
- Tracking patterns of repeated filings by the same individuals or firms
Additionally, some plaintiff firms are now shifting lawsuits to state courts, where standing requirements are generally less demanding. Businesses should prepare for this potential change in forum.

For the Legal System

This trend marks a balancing act: protecting the ADA’s intent while discouraging opportunistic litigation. Federal courts are raising the bar for standing in accessibility lawsuits. This reinforces the idea that these cases should address real-world barriers and genuine attempts to engage with businesses—not rely on legal templates meant to generate fees.

6. Looking Ahead

The upcoming hearing in Fernandez could prove to be a watershed moment. If the court finds that Fernandez lacked standing, it would further solidify the trend toward stricter standards. If the case moves forward, it may help define what constitutes credible evidence of harm in ADA website lawsuits.

Either way, these rulings serve as a wake-up call for both sides: businesses must continue improving accessibility, but the legal process must remain focused on real harm—not manufactured complaints.

A Turning Point—and a Call to Act

The landscape for serial ADA plaintiffs is shifting. Courts are drawing a firmer line between legitimate accessibility concerns and litigation that appears more about fees than fairness. For businesses, this means new opportunities to defend against weak claims—but also a strong reminder that proactive, meaningful accessibility improvements remain the best long-term strategy.

As these cases evolve, so too must the approach to compliance and litigation. The stakes are higher, and the scrutiny is sharper. Now more than ever, standing—and sincerity—matter.

Not sure if your site is at risk? Schedule a free ADA briefing with 216digital to assess your exposure and get expert guidance
Greg McNeil

June 12, 2025

Legal Compliance

ADA, ADA Compliance, ADA Lawsuit, ADA Lawsuits, serial ADA plaintiffs
Web Accessibility for Retailers Under Legal Fire
If you’re running an online retail business, digital accessibility might not be the first thing on your to-do list—but it needs to be. In today’s eCommerce landscape, accessibility for retailers isn’t just a best practice—it’s a legal requirement and a smart business move.

Retail websites are complex, dynamic, and frequently updated, which makes them especially vulnerable to accessibility issues. And as more people rely on online shopping to meet daily needs, the stakes are higher than ever. Lawsuits are on the rise, but more importantly, so is the expectation that your site works for everyone.

Product carousels, filters, multi-step checkout processes, popups, modals, and embedded third-party tools all add complexity and make accessibility more difficult.

Why Web Accessibility for Retailers Matters

Retailers have become one of the biggest targets for digital accessibility lawsuits. In fact, in 2024 alone, 77% of all web accessibility lawsuits in the U.S. targeted online retailers—making the industry the most litigated digital sector. These lawsuits aren’t just targeting Fortune 500 brands; regional and mid-market businesses are facing legal action at an increasing rate.

There are several reasons for this:

Retail Websites are Dynamic And Complex

They’re filled with product carousels, filters, multi-step checkout processes, popups, modals, and embedded third-party tools—all of which can be difficult to make accessible. Without proper structure, markup, and ARIA attributes, these elements can become unusable for people relying on screen readers or keyboard navigation.

eCommerce Sites Are Constantly Updated

Product pages change, promotions rotate, and new features are added regularly. These updates often introduce new accessibility problems—especially when not reviewed with accessibility in mind.

Online Shopping is Essential

It’s no longer a luxury; it’s how millions of people access everyday goods and services. If a website prevents someone from completing a purchase due to an accessibility barrier, it becomes a civil rights issue—legally and ethically.

Demand Letters Are Widespread

Each year, hundreds of thousands of demand letters are sent to businesses for digital accessibility violations. These letters signal that a company is excluding people with disabilities, and the reputational damage can be immediate.

Legal and Technical Web Accessibility for Retailers

Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)requires U.S. retailers to ensure accessibility for people with disabilities in all places of public accommodation. In today’s digital world, the courts and the Department of Justice (DOJ) have made it clear: this requirement also applies to websites—especially those that sell goods and services to the public.

Courts and plaintiffs use the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) as the standard for compliance in nearly all accessibility-related lawsuits. The DOJ reaffirmed this approach in 2024, solidifying WCAG as the benchmark for evaluating whether a website is accessible.

The Four Golden Rules of Accessibility: POUR

At the heart of WCAG are four key principles known by the acronym POUR: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust. These form the foundation for accessible digital experiences and help ensure your website works for everyone.
- Perceivable – Users must be able to identify and interact with content. This includes providing text alternatives for images, captions for videos, and other sensory accommodations.
- Operable – The site must support navigation with a keyboard, screen reader, or other assistive tools—without relying solely on a mouse.
- Understandable – Information and functionality should be easy to comprehend and behave in expected ways to avoid confusion.
- Robust – Content must be compatible with a wide range of current and future assistive technologies, such as screen readers or voice commands.
And it’s not just your website. These principles should also extend to digital documents, confirmation emails, customer service interactions, and anything else a user might engage with online.

Common Pitfalls on Retail Websites

Retail sites face some of the most complex accessibility challenges. Here are a few issues that often trigger lawsuits:
- Unlabeled or mislabeled form fields that prevent screen reader users from checking out.
- Broken keyboard navigation makes it impossible for users with motor impairments to complete transactions.
- Missing alt text on product images.
- Low color contrast between text and backgrounds.
- Non-dismissable modals or popups that trap users.
- Checkout flows that break when even one component isn’t accessible.
These barriers frequently appear when using templates, third-party plugins, or custom JavaScript that hasn’t been accessibility-tested. They can completely disrupt the buying experience for users who depend on assistive technologies. Web accessibility for retailers requires a consistent and intentional approach to prevent these obstacles from resurfacing.

What Happens If You’re Sued

Most lawsuits begin with a demand letter—often asking for immediate remediation and a financial settlement. If ignored, this can escalate into a federal lawsuit under the ADA or state-level laws like California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which allows for additional penalties.

Settlements may cover remediation costs and legal fees, but the real damage is often reputational—especially when exclusion of disabled users becomes public knowledge.

Even if your business wins the case, legal defense costs are high. And if your site remains non-compliant, you may be targeted again. With web accessibility for retailers, prevention is significantly less costly than a reactive legal defense.

A Proactive Plan for Retailers

Accessibility isn’t a one-time fix. It’s an ongoing strategy. Here’s how to start with accessibility for retailers:

1. Start with an Audit

Use automated tools like Lighthouse or WAVE for a quick scan. But don’t stop there—manual testing is essential for identifying real-world usability barriers.

2. Fix Key Areas First

Prioritize your homepage, product pages, cart, and checkout. Make sure form fields are labeled, keyboard navigation works, and screen readers can read your content.

3. Address Dynamic Elements

Focus on complex components—like popups, modals, filters, and third-party integrations—that often create the biggest challenges. Use semantic markup and ARIA attributes to support assistive tech.

4. Monitor Continuously

Your site changes frequently. Build accessibility checks into your update process so new features don’t break usability, or use a monitoring service like a11y.Radar.

5. Train Your Team

Give your developers, content editors, and marketing teams the knowledge they need to create inclusive content from the start.

6. Consider Outside Help

Accessibility is nuanced. A qualified team can help you get it right—and keep it that way.

Retailers: Don’t Let Accessibility Be an Afterthought

Web accessibility for retailers is no longer optional. It’s central to building a sustainable, inclusive, and legally safe business. In a digital environment where over 30% of the top 500 eCommerce retailers were sued last year, doing nothing is no longer a risk—it’s a liability.

But there’s a real upside, too. Accessibility leads to better experiences, broader audiences, stronger SEO, and a more trusted brand.

Start now. Audit your site. Fix the gaps. Train your team. Partner with experts. Turn accessibility from a compliance headache into a strategic advantage.

Need Help Making Your Retail Site Accessible?

216digital offers full audits, real-world testing, and proactive monitoring to ensure your site meets WCAG standards and stays lawsuit-resistant. Let’s make your eCommerce experience inclusive—and legally safe—from day one.
Greg McNeil

June 11, 2025

Legal Compliance

Accessibility, ADA Compliance, ADA Lawsuit, ecommerce website, Retail, WCAG, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
Law Firms Aren’t Built for Accessibility Remediation Services
When a demand letter lands in your inbox, or an ADA-related lawsuit hits your desk, your first thought might be to call a lawyer. That’s a natural reaction—after all, legal issues usually call for legal help.

But here’s where things get a little more complicated: if the problem is your website’s accessibility, then legal advice alone won’t fix it. And that’s where many businesses take a wrong turn. Legal teams can guide you through the paperwork, but they’re rarely the ones who dig into your code, address the real barriers, or help you prevent the next lawsuit.

This article walks you through why relying on a law firm to handle accessibility remediation services might not be the best move—and what a smarter, more effective approach looks like.

The Problem: Law Firms Handle Lawsuits—Not Code

Let’s be clear—attorneys have an important role. If you’ve received a demand letter or lawsuit, they can help you respond, negotiate, or represent you in court. But legal involvement doesn’t make the accessibility problem go away. The root issue—your website not working for people with disabilities—still remains. And it’s that issue that continues to carry legal and reputational risk.

Most law firms don’t have in-house technical teams. No developers, no certified accessibility experts, no usability testers. So what happens? They either outsource the actual accessibility remediation services to third-party vendors (often charging a premium along the way) or provide high-level reports filled with checklists that leave your dev team guessing at what to do next.

That means you’re still on the hook for the real work—and possibly paying more for it.

Hidden Risk #1: You’ll Pay More for Less

Law firms typically charge by the hour, which makes sense for legal tasks like reviewing contracts or negotiating settlements. But when they apply those same rates to accessibility-related work—such as interpreting WCAG guidelines, coordinating with vendors, or reviewing audit summaries—it turns into a costly game of telephone.

You end up paying for layers of administrative overhead that slow down progress and don’t actually improve your website.

Worse, you might not even realize where the money is going. Legal fees can pile up quickly without producing the tangible results your business actually needs: a compliant, accessible, functional website. For small to mid-size organizations trying to manage both compliance and budget, this model is hard to justify.

Hidden Risk #2: The Fixes May Not Be Complete

Fixing accessibility isn’t about running a quick scan and addressing a handful of errors. Real remediation requires technical precision, contextual judgment, and manual testing—especially with screen readers and keyboard navigation. It involves understanding how accessibility issues present in code and how they affect the user experience for people with different disabilities.

Many law firms don’t have the tools—or the trained personnel—to go that deep. And their vendor partners often lean heavily on automated tools that only catch surface-level issues.

Here’s what that kind of partial remediation can miss:
- Form fields without accessible labels
- Improper heading structures that confuse screen readers
- Modal windows that can’t be closed without a mouse
- Buttons or links that don’t receive keyboard focus
- Dynamic content changes that don’t alert assistive technologies
These aren’t fringe cases—they’re exactly the kinds of issues that trigger lawsuits. Unfortunately, teams often overlook them when legal experts, rather than technical specialists, lead accessibility remediation efforts.

Hidden Risk #3: No Plan for the Long Term

Even if your legal team manages to patch things up for now, accessibility isn’t a one-and-done situation. Websites evolve. New content is added. Platforms update. If you don’t have an ongoing plan, you risk falling out of compliance all over again—and landing back in legal trouble.

Law firms are built for casework, not for long-term technical oversight. Most won’t offer monitoring services, provide training for your content team, or stay engaged as your digital properties change over time. Without a partner who understands how to maintain accessibility remediation services, you’re left exposed.

That’s why sustainable compliance calls for a proactive strategy—one that goes beyond legal checkboxes and focuses on real-world usability, continuous improvement, and future-proofing your site.

What Proper Accessibility Remediation Services Look Like

To address ADA compliance issues the right way, you need more than legal advice—you need a full-service accessibility team that knows how to diagnose, prioritize, and implement lasting solutions.

Here’s what effective accessibility remediation services typically involve:

1. In-Depth Accessibility Audit

Experienced accessibility professionals start by reviewing your site against WCAG 2.1 A/AA standards using both automated and manual testing. This ensures nothing gets missed. A proper audit covers the following:
- Screen reader testing using tools like NVDA, JAWS, or VoiceOver
- Keyboard-only navigation analysis
- Color contrast checks
- Semantic HTML review
- ARIA role validation for dynamic content
It’s this level of testing that uncovers real usability barriers.

2. A Clear, Actionable Roadmap

Instead of a vague checklist, a solid remediation team will provide a prioritized list of issues, each translated into plain language with clear technical recommendations. The goal is to make it easy for developers to understand what needs to be fixed—and how.

3. Code-Level Fixes

This is the heart of remediation. A professional team doesn’t just point out problems—they roll up their sleeves and solve them. That includes adjusting templates, improving focus states, rewriting inaccessible components, and ensuring your code structure supports screen readers and keyboard navigation.

It’s hands-on work—and it requires skilled front-end developers who understand both accessibility and UX.

4. Real-World Usability Testing

After you make changes, your work isn’t done. Test the updated site again—this time in real-world scenarios using assistive technologies. This step confirms that your remediation efforts actually work for the people they’re designed to support.

5. Documentation & Legal Support

While not a substitute for a legal team, many remediation partners provide helpful documentation—such as accessibility statements, conformance reports (like VPATs), and audit results—that demonstrate your organization’s commitment to accessibility. These materials can also support your response if you’re facing legal scrutiny.

6. Ongoing Monitoring

Even after remediation, your site should be monitored regularly. A good partner will offer scanning tools like a11y.Radar for testing and alerts to catch issues early—before they turn into compliance risks.

Why Accessibility Professionals Are the Better Fit

Accessibility specialists solve the actual problem: they make websites usable for people with disabilities. They work closely with your development, design, and content teams to create solutions that align with your brand, support your UX goals, and meet compliance requirements.

Unlike law firms, accessibility pros don’t just help you react—they help you prepare. Their job is to prevent problems, not just manage them after the fact.

They bring technical knowledge, lived user experience insights, and a collaborative mindset to the table. That’s how you get lasting results—not just legal coverage, but a stronger, more inclusive digital presence.

Conclusion: The Smart Path to Lasting Compliance

If you’re navigating legal pressure because of an inaccessible website, it’s important to act quickly—but also wisely. Legal teams play a role, yes, but true ADA compliance requires more than legal documents and advice. It takes technical expertise, accessibility remediation services, and a long-term plan that goes beyond checking boxes.

The right partner doesn’t just help you respond to a lawsuit—they help you prevent the next one by making your website genuinely usable for everyone. That means fewer legal risks, stronger user trust, and a better experience across the board.

At 216digital, we specialize in real solutions—not just legal responses. From WCAG audits and code-level fixes to usability testing and ongoing monitoring, we help you build and maintain a site that works for everyone.

Schedule an ADA briefing with our accessibility team today to get clear, honest guidance on what your site needs, what’s at risk, and how to move forward confidently. Let’s make your compliance efforts count—for your users and your business.
Greg McNeil

June 4, 2025

Legal Compliance

Accessibility, Accessibility Remediation, Accessibility testing, ADA Compliance, WCAG, Web Accessibility, Web Accessibility Remediation, Website Accessibility
Court Ruling Confirms ADA Title III Covers Websites

As the boundaries between physical and digital business continue to blur, courts are stepping in to clarify what inclusion really means online. One recent ruling, Frost v. Lion Brand Yarn Company, brings that conversation into focus. In February 2025, a Minnesota federal judge ruled that websites qualify as places of public accommodation under ADA Title III. This decision supports what many in the digital and legal communities have long believed: accessibility online deserves consistent attention. While it doesn’t resolve every legal question, it strengthens the case for making digital inclusion part of a responsible business approach.

Frost v. Lion Brand Yarn Company Case

In Frost v. Lion Brand Yarn Company, Clarence and Tammy Frost—both legally blind—alleged that the company’s website was inaccessible to screen reader users. They argued this violated ADA Title III, which prohibits discrimination based on disability in places of public accommodation.

Lion Brand Yarn asked the court to dismiss the case, claiming that its website wasn’t a physical place and therefore didn’t fall under the scope of the ADA.

Court Decision and ADA Title III Interpretation

On February 6, 2025, U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez denied the motion to dismiss. Her decision stated that a website can, in fact, be considered a place of public accommodation under ADA Title III. She emphasized the law’s broad intent and noted that excluding digital spaces would limit access in today’s online world.

Legal Reasoning Behind ADA Title III Decision

Judge Menendez’s ruling follows a growing trend in how courts interpret the ADA. Even though the law was written before websites existed, many judges now recognize that its goals—ensuring equal access—apply in digital spaces, too.

The court explained that ignoring websites under ADA Title III would go against the law’s purpose. If businesses offer goods and services online, people with disabilities must have equal access to those experiences.

Broader Implications of ADA Title III in Digital Accessibility

This case contributes to the growing conversation about whether ADA Title III covers digital platforms.Some courts have said yes, others no—but momentum is building toward broader interpretation. More judges, and the Department of Justice, are saying that websites count.

By viewing digital platforms as essential for communication and commerce, this ruling helps make the case that online inclusion is part of federal disability rights.

The Legal Shift Toward Website Accessibility Under ADA Title III

The Minnesota decision supports what many businesses and advocates have been saying: websites need to be accessible. While there’s still legal gray area, the trend is clear—courts are treating digital inaccessibility more seriously.

Congress didn’t limit ADA Title III to physical places, and courts are using that flexibility to apply it to today’s technology. With websites acting as digital storefronts, accessibility is increasingly expected as a baseline.

Agencies like the Department of Justice also support this view. As websites become central to how businesses operate, they must be designed with accessibility in mind.

Actionable Steps for Compliance with ADA Title III

If your business operates online, now is the time to prioritize accessibility. Here are some practical, proven steps to move in the right direction:

Conduct Accessibility Audits

Use a mix of automated tools and manual checks to find and fix barriers that prevent access.

Implement WCAG Guidelines

Follow the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA to ensure your content is usable for people with disabilities.

Train Development Teams

Make sure developers and designers understand accessibility best practices from the start.

Engage Users with Disabilities

Include people with disabilities in your testing process—they offer insights that no automated tool can.

Maintain Ongoing Compliance

Use tools like a11y.Radar to monitor your site regularly and stay on top of new issues. Accessibility isn’t a one-time fix—it’s ongoing.

Erkan v. David A. Hidalgo, MD, P.C. provides one example of proactive compliance. There, a judge acknowledged that steps taken to address accessibility concerns helped mitigate legal risk. It’s a good reminder that prevention is always better than response.

Implications of ADA Title III for Businesses

This ruling matters most for businesses that sell or provide services online. Failing to address accessibility could lead to legal challenges, negative press, and missed opportunities to connect with customers.

On the flip side, investing in accessibility shows you value all your users. It can improve user experience, increase brand trust, and even open up new markets.

The Time to Act is Now

The Minnesota ruling strengthens the growing understanding that websites are part of the ADA Title III conversation. While not every legal question is settled, businesses have more reason than ever to take accessibility seriously.

If your website serves the public, this case is a signal to act. Not because you’re forced to—but because it’s the right thing to do.

To learn more about how to proactively address ADA conformance, schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital today. Our team of accessibility experts is ready to guide your business through every step of the process, helping you stay ahead of evolving legal standards while building a more inclusive web for everyone.

Greg McNeil

May 23, 2025

Legal Compliance

Accessibility, ADA Compliance, ADA Lawsuits, ADA Title III, Title III, Website Accessibility

1 | Waiting Too Long to Begin ADA Title II Conformance

Start Small, but Start Now

2 | Relying on Widgets or “Quick Fixes”

Treat Them as Temporary Support at Best

3 | Treating the Audit as the Finish Line

Turn the Audit Into a Roadmap

4 | Overlooking Mobile Accessibility

Test Early and Test on Real Devices

5 | Ignoring Accessibility in Digital Documents

Audit Your Digital Library

6 | Not Holding Vendors Accountable

Bake Accessibility Into Every Partnership

7 | Skipping Manual and Assistive-Technology Testing

Manual Testing Closes That Gap

8 | Neglecting Ongoing Monitoring

Make Monitoring Routine

9 | Underestimating Accessibility Training

Invest in Continuous Education

10 | Failing to Publish a Public Accessibility Statement

Publish a Concise Statement

ADA Title II Conformance Is About People, Not Just Policy

Behind the Headlines: What Actually Changed

What Are ADA Guidance Documents—and Why They Mattered Online

What This Means Day to Day

Why Waiting for New Guidance Is Risky

What Web Compliance Looks Like Right Now

A Calm, Practical Web Plan (Built for Busy Teams)

1) A One-sentence North Star

2) Make It Visible In Design

3) Test Every Release—Quickly And Consistently

4) Prioritize By User Impact

5) Write For Clarity

6) Train in Micro-moments

7) Invite Feedback—And Close the Loop

8) Document Just Enough

Beyond Compliance: Better Web, Better Business

A Clear, Steady Path Forward

What Is a VPAT?

A Typical VPAT Includes

What Is an ACR?

How Testing Builds Trust

Comparing VPAT vs. ACR: Core Differences

Best Practices for Creating VPATs and ACRs

Procurement-ready Checklist

Conclusion: Building Confidence Through Transparency

Why the “Separate Accessible Site” Myth Lives On

Why It Fails: Standards and Legal Risk

The Real Problems With Dual-Site Strategies

Why Building Accessibility Into the Main Site Works Better

Are There Times a Separate Version Is Okay?

Building an Accessibility-First Mindset

Conclusion: One Site, For Everyone

Start at the Foundation: Build In, Don’t Bolt On

What the Law Actually Says (And Why It’s Not Just About Lawsuits)

WCAG Sounds Complex—But It Boils Down to Four Core Ideas

Okay, But How Do You Start with ADA Compliance?

Use tools that do the first pass for you.

Triage by Traffic

Teach What Matters To The People Who Touch the Work.

Make It Routine, Not A One-time Fix

The Payoff Isn’t Just ADA Compliance—It’s Better Public Service

You Don’t Have to Do It All Today—Just Take the First Step

Why Icons Matter (Beyond Aesthetics)

Saving Space on Smaller Screens

Common Accessibility Challenges with Icons

Ambiguity: One Icon, Many Meanings

Decorative Icons That Get in the Way

Size, Contrast, and Clickability

Best Practices for Creating Accessible Icons

1. Label Every Interactive Icon

2. Hide Decorative Icons Properly

3. Pay Attention to Size, Contrast, and Focus

4. Stay Consistent

5. Avoid Icon Fonts and Emojis

6. Test in the Real World

A Closer Look: Two Icon Examples

The Right Way to Do a Menu Icon

Clarifying a Heart Icon

Looking Ahead: The Future of Icon Accessibility

Think Global