216digital.
Web Accessibility

ADA Risk Mitigation
Prevent and Respond to ADA Lawsuits

WCAG & Section 508
Conform with Local and International Requirements

a11y.Radar
Ongoing Monitoring and Maintenance

Consultation & Training

Is Your Website Vulnerable to Frivolous Lawsuits?
Get a Free Web Accessibility Audit to Learn Where You Stand
Find Out Today!

Web Design & Development

Marketing

PPC Management
Google & Social Media Ads

Professional SEO
Increase Organic Search Strength

Interested in Marketing?
Speak to an Expert about marketing opportunities for your brand to cultivate support and growth online.
Contact Us

About

Blog

Contact Us

  • How Developer-Led Accessibility Breaks the Fix Cycle

    Accessibility issues tend to surface in the same areas over and over again. Custom components. JavaScript-driven UI states. Forms and dialogs that behave differently depending on the input method. When these issues are addressed late, teams often fall into a familiar pattern: audit findings, rushed fixes, and regressions in the next release. These are common accessibility remediation problems across modern frameworks.

    Developer-led accessibility helps break that cycle by tying accessibility work to the systems that actually create these behaviors. Instead of patching individual pages, teams fix the patterns that generate them.

    We will look at how that plays out in real code, why it leads to more stable releases, and how developers can move accessibility earlier in the workflow without slowing delivery. For many teams, a shift-left accessibility approach reduces rework and makes remediation easier to schedule.

    Where Accessibility Issues Come From in Modern Codebases

    Most production websites are not built from a single source. A rendered page is usually assembled from component libraries, client-side routing, CMS output, third-party scripts, and legacy templates that survived past migrations. The browser does not distinguish between these sources. Assistive technologies only interact with the final DOM and its behavior.

    Many accessibility failures are not obvious in static markup. A WCAG 2.1 Level AA audit often surfaces these issues as failures in names, roles, states, and focus, even when the underlying visual design looks correct. A button may exist but lack a usable accessible name. A dialog may render correctly but fail to manage focus. A form may display errors visually without exposing them programmatically. These issues show up because of how elements are wired together at runtime.

    When issues get fixed at the page level, the underlying pattern doesn’t change. The same component or utility keeps producing the same output, and the problem comes back as soon as new code ships.

    Why Developer-Led Accessibility Creates More Stable Fixes

    When developers lead accessibility remediation, fixes land in places with the most leverage. A change to a shared component, utility, or template improves every instance that depends on it.

    For example, enforcing accessible naming in a button component removes ambiguity for screen reader users across the application. Fixing focus handling in a dialog helper eliminates keyboard traps in any flow that uses it. Correcting label and error relationships in a form input component improves every form without additional effort.

    These fixes line up with how browsers expose accessibility information. Screen readers interpret roles, names, states, and focus order directly from the DOM. When those signals are correct at the component level, behavior stays consistent and is easier to verify during testing.

    The core value of developer-led accessibility is that it treats accessibility as a system property rather than a checklist item.

    In-Source vs Post-Source Accessibility Remediation

    In most production stacks, accessibility issues do not come from a single layer. A page is often the result of React components, older templates, CMS output, and third-party widgets working together. The browser only sees the DOM that falls out of that mix.

    In-source remediation targets the code that generates that DOM. This includes design systems, component libraries, templates, and application logic. It is the most durable option because it prevents the same defect from being reintroduced.

    Post-source remediation applies changes later in the pipeline. This might involve middleware, edge logic, or transformation layers that adjust markup and behavior before it reaches the browser. These fixes still use standard web technologies, but they live outside the primary codebase.

    In-Source Remediation in Shared Systems

    In-source changes work best when a shared component or template is responsible for the defect. If a button component never exposes an accessible name, every new feature that imports it will repeat the same problem. Updating that component once improves every usage and reduces duplicate fixes in the product code.

    The same applies to dialogs, menus, and form inputs. When the base patterns handle names, roles, states, and focus correctly, engineers spend less time revisiting the same problems in each feature.

    Post-Source Remediation in Live Environments

    Post-source work is useful when a team cannot change the source safely or quickly. Older views, vendor widgets, and mixed stacks are common examples. Adjusting the rendered HTML can stabilize heading structure, regions, ARIA, and focus without waiting for a full refactor.

    W3C’s guidance on roles, responsibilities, and maturity models reflects this reality. Both in-source and post-source approaches can be effective when developers own the logic, changes are version-controlled, and results are tested with assistive technologies.

    Most teams need both paths. In-source fixes reduce long-term risk. Post-source fixes stabilize critical paths when upstream systems cannot be changed quickly. Because post-source work sits closer to the rendered output, it is also more sensitive to upstream change and needs clear ownership and a plan for how long each fix will remain in place.

    When Post-Source Remediation Is the Right Approach

    There are common scenarios where fixing issues at the source is not immediately possible. Legacy templates may still power revenue-critical flows. Third-party widgets may ship their own markup and behavior. Ownership of rendered output may be split across teams or vendors.

    In these cases, post-source remediation can address meaningful barriers without waiting for a full refactor. Developers can rebuild heading and landmark structure, normalize ARIA roles and states, reinforce label and error relationships, and stabilize focus order so users can complete tasks without interruption.

    When In-Source Fixes Are Blocked

    Post-source remediation is usually a fit when at least one of these conditions holds:

    • A legacy view still handles checkout, account access, or other critical flows.
    • A third-party component ships markup and behavior you cannot safely fork
    • Multiple systems contribute markup to the same route with no clear upstream owner.
    • A legal or policy deadline lands before refactor work can start.

    In these situations, narrow, well-defined transforms are more reliable than broad rewrites. Small, targeted changes to structure and naming often deliver the most impact for users.

    Keeping Post-Source Work Maintainable

    Post-source logic is still code. It should live in source control, go through code review, and be covered by tests the same way other production changes are. When templates or components evolve, these transforms must be updated. That means monitoring upstream changes and validating the combined result, not just the injected layer on its own.

    Teams that manage this well treat post-source logic as temporary and track which fixes should eventually move upstream. This prevents the remediation layer from becoming a permanent shadow codebase and keeps the focus on stabilizing the experience while longer-term improvements move through the backlog.

    Used this way, post-source remediation acts as a bridge, not a replacement for healthier patterns closer to the source.

    How Automation Supports Developer-Led Accessibility

    Automated accessibility tools are effective at detecting repeatable failures. Missing labels, invalid attributes, color contrast issues, and empty links are all well-suited to automated checks. These tools are useful for regression detection and baseline coverage.

    Automation does not evaluate intent or usability. It cannot tell whether link text makes sense when read out of context, whether focus returns to a logical place after a dialog closes, or whether a live region announces information at a useful moment. Many failures that matter for WCAG 2.1 compliance, especially those related to names, roles, states, and focus, rely on human judgment.

    These decisions require a clear picture of how the interface is supposed to work. Developers already make similar calls around performance, security, and reliability. Accessibility fits into that same category of engineering quality.

    For that reason, developer-led accessibility relies on automation as feedback, not as the final decision-maker.

    Shift-Left Accessibility in Everyday Development

    Moving accessibility earlier doesn’t mean reworking your process. Small, targeted adjustments to your current workflow are often enough.

    Shared components are the most effective leverage point. When buttons, dialogs, menus, and form controls ship with accessible defaults, teams avoid reintroducing the same issues. Code reviews can include quick checks for naming, focus behavior, and keyboard access, the same way reviewers already check for errors or performance concerns.

    Component Defaults That Carry Accessibility

    Most repeat accessibility bugs trace back to a handful of primitives. A button with no useful name. A dialog that loses focus. A form that surfaces errors visually but not programmatically. Each time those show up in product code, they point back to patterns that need to be fixed once in the shared layer.

    Pulling these concerns into components reduces the number of places engineers need to remember the same details. The component carries the behavior. Feature code focuses on user flows.

    Checks That Support, Not Overwhelm

    Automation works best when it supports these habits. CI checks should focus on failures that map clearly to real barriers and provide actionable feedback. Too much noise slows teams down; tight, focused checks help them move faster.

    Late-stage fixes should also feed back into this process. If the same issue keeps appearing in production, it signals a pattern that needs attention closer to the source.

    For most teams, developer-led accessibility ends up looking like other quality practices: defaults in components, a few reliable checks, and reviews that treat accessibility as part of correctness, not an add-on.

    How Developer-Led Accessibility Reduces Rework

    The fix cycle persists when accessibility sits in its own phase. Findings arrive late. Fixes ship under pressure. New features reuse the same patterns, and the next review surfaces similar issues.

    developer-led accessibility changes that pattern by tying remediation to the systems that create UI behavior. Over time, fewer issues reach production. Remediation becomes smaller, more predictable, and easier to schedule. Teams spend less time reacting and more time improving shared foundations.

    Audits and testing still have an important role. Their results become easier to use because findings map directly to components, utilities, and templates that the team already maintains.

    What Sustainable Accessibility Requires in a Development Workflow

    For this approach to work, each team must own its part. Developers define the implementation details. Designers shape interaction models that map cleanly to semantic patterns. QA verifies behavior across input methods. Product and engineering leads plan accessibility alongside feature work instead of letting it slip to the end.

    W3C’s roles and maturity guidance point in the same direction: sustainable accessibility depends on consistent responsibilities, repeatable practices, and room to improve them.

    Testing with assistive technologies remains essential. Tools and guidelines describe requirements, but usage in practice exposes where behavior breaks down. Short testing sessions can uncover issues that static reviews miss and help teams focus on fixes that matter most.

    Once those pieces are in place, developer-led accessibility feels like part of normal development work. Accessibility issues still show up, but they are easier to diagnose, easier to fix, and less likely to come back.

    Sustainable Accessibility in Modern Codebases

    Developer ownership is the most reliable way to keep accessibility work stable across releases. When fixes land in the systems that define structure and behavior, teams reduce rework, shorten remediation cycles, and ship interfaces that behave consistently for everyone. The combination of in-source improvements, targeted post-source work, and regular assistive-technology testing gives teams a clear path to measurable progress without slowing delivery.

    If your team wants help building a roadmap that aligns WCAG 2.1 requirements with your development workflow, 216digital can help you build a roadmap and validation plan. To learn more about how the ADA experts at 216digital can help you build a sustainable ADA and WCAG 2.1 compliance strategy, you can schedule an ADA Strategy Briefing.

    Kayla Laganiere

    December 10, 2025
    Testing & Remediation
    Accessibility, Accessibility Remediation, Web Accessibility Remediation, web developers, web development, Website Accessibility

  • Too Many Cooks in the Website Accessibility Kitchen

    If you’ve ever been in a meeting where someone says, “We need to make the website accessible,” you’ve likely seen what happens next. People nod in agreement and add supportive comments like, We should, We will, or Absolutely.

    But once the meeting ends, something familiar happens. Everyone thinks someone else will take charge.

    It’s like a busy kitchen where skilled chefs come and go, each adding something or making adjustments, but no one is in charge of the recipe. Everyone means well and the ingredients are good, but the final dish never really comes together.

    This is what happens with website accessibility in many organizations. People care, but progress stalls because responsibility is spread out, priorities clash, and no one has the full overview.

    Most teams don’t struggle because they lack motivation. Many are making an effort by reading articles, joining webinars, updating components, and running audits when possible. The real problem is a lack of clear direction and coordination.

    This article explains why accessibility efforts stall when too many people are involved and shows how clearer roles and stronger teamwork turn that chaos into lasting progress.

    Why “Too Many Cooks” Happens in Digital Teams

    When you look at a typical digital team, the kitchen metaphor fits well. Many teams work on the website, but each faces different pressures, expectations, and ways of thinking.

    Compliance teams are focused on risk and timelines. Engineering worries about capacity and technical debt. UX and product teams juggle inclusivity with brand constraints and deadlines. Content and marketing are pushing toward launches, conversions, and SEO. Finance watches budgets and outcomes. Leadership wants clarity on scope, timelines, and how this fits into broader strategy.

    All of these concerns are valid and important. But each team works on its own schedule, uses its own language, and aims for different results.

    As a result, everyone assumes another team will take charge of website accessibility.

    Work moves from one department to another. Decisions are revisited again and again. A simple question like “Who owns this?” can turn into weeks of discussion.

    The Hidden Costs of Website Accessibility Gridlock

    When ownership is unclear, the effects are widespread, even if they aren’t obvious right away.

    Teams create accessibility debt when they layer new pages, features, and campaigns on top of old barriers. Costs rise the longer those issues sit unresolved—especially when a team keeps copying an inaccessible form instead of fixing the original.

    There are also legal and reputational risks. Barriers stay in production longer than planned, making complaints or legal action more likely. Even without lawsuits, trust fades when users keep running into the same problems.

    Revenue takes a hit, too. About 71% to 73% of users with disabilities will abandon a website immediately when barriers make it difficult to use or navigate. That means fewer completed purchases, booked appointments, and sign-ups, even though analytics rarely identify accessibility as the reason.

    Within teams, frustration grows. The unofficial “accessibility person,” usually someone who cares a lot, spends more time seeking approvals and alignment than doing real work. Projects slow down, and the word “accessibility” starts to remind people of stalled projects and extra work.

    Finally, organizations can get stuck in endless planning. Meetings repeat the same questions: What’s our goal? Who owns this? What can we do this quarter? All this back-and-forth has its own cost.

    The point isn’t to make anyone feel guilty. Almost every organization faces these issues. You’re not alone, and you’re not failing. You just don’t have clear ownership structures yet.

    Why Ownership Is Blurry (Even for Teams Who Care)

    This gridlock isn’t caused by a lack of effort. It’s caused by how website accessibility has historically been framed.

    For years, teams treated accessibility as a “last step” before launch, just another item on a checklist. When everyone pushes it to the end, no one owns it from the beginning.

    Leaders often give broad instructions like “Make this WCAG compliant,” but don’t define the scope, metrics, or roles. Each team thinks another group is better suited to lead. Everyone uses different terms: designers talk about usability, compliance teams focus on risk, and marketers care about conversions.

    In practice, this leads to vague tickets like “Fix accessibility issues,” QA findings without a clear owner, and stakeholders disagreeing on priorities because there’s no shared framework.

    This is where responsibility mapping becomes the turning point.

    From Chaos to a Kitchen Brigade: Making Roles Clear

    A great way to break the “too many cooks” cycle is to use accessibility responsibility mapping. The idea is simple: divide accessibility work into clear tasks, then assign who leads, who supports, and who should be consulted.

    It’s not about adding more bureaucracy. It’s about setting clearer expectations.

    The primary owner drives the accessibility task and ensures it is done correctly. Supporting roles contribute the guidance needed to shape the work. Other stakeholders stay involved through consultation or regular updates..

    Take headings, for example. UX or content defines structure. Design expresses hierarchy visually. Development implements correct HTML tags. QA verifies assistive technology behavior.

    Or consider forms: UX handles flow and labeling strategy; content writes the labels; developers programmatically associate everything; QA checks keyboard and screen reader behavior.

    With media, content teams plan captions or transcripts; platform owners ensure video players support accessible controls.

    Responsibility mapping doesn’t add more work. Instead, it spreads tasks to the people best suited for each part. Like a well-run kitchen team, everyone knows their role, but they’re all working toward the same goal.

    How to Put Responsibility Mapping Into Practice

    Getting started is easier than teams expect.

    First, bring together the right people: representatives from design, content, development, QA, and those who handle risk or strategy. Focus the conversation on ownership, not on debating every accessibility issue.

    Next, list the recurring tasks you handle today: components, content operations, media, core flows, and feature releases. For each one, assign a primary owner, supporting roles, and those who should be consulted or informed.

    Then embed this into your actual workflows. Include responsibility fields in ticket templates. Mark design system components with who is responsible for each part. Make it clear who writes and reviews alt text. Start small by applying your new mapping to one important section of the site, like checkout or registration, then refine and expand.

    Even small teams benefit. One person may wear multiple hats, but mapping helps distinguish when they’re acting as a designer, developer, or content author. Expectations become visible and realistic.

    Collaboration Patterns That Make Website Accessibility Easier

    Ownership alone isn’t enough. Teams also need habits that support clarity.

    Start by grounding conversations in real user journeys. Instead of diving into tools or checklists, walk through how someone books an appointment or completes a purchase with a screen reader.

    Catch issues early by building lightweight, recurring touchpoints into design, development, and QA—not at the end.

    Lean on your design system as a shared foundation. Centralize accessible components to prevent barriers from being reintroduced with every new page.

    Treat learning as part of the job. Hold quick internal demos, run short show-and-tells, and celebrate when someone removes a barrier. These small habits turn website accessibility from a burden into a shared craft.

    And don’t forget to celebrate small wins. They build momentum.

    ​

    Keeping the Menu Manageable: Sustainable Progress Over Perfection

    Teams often worry that starting accessibility means the work will never end. But setting priorities helps keep things manageable.

    Begin with the most important flows, like those related to revenue, registration, support, or high-traffic areas. Separate immediate fixes from short-term improvements and long-term changes. Create feedback loops with regular audits, user feedback, and post-release reviews.

    Most importantly, change your mindset: website accessibility is ongoing maintenance. Like performance, security, and SEO, it’s part of keeping the site healthy over time, not just a one-time emergency project.

    Consistent, steady movement beats big, unsustainable pushes every time.

    From Chaotic Kitchen to Well-Run Accessibility Program

    Accessibility efforts stall when there’s no clear leader. But things improve quickly when teams clarify roles, base decisions on real user experiences, and use frameworks that help them follow through.

    If you feel stuck in “too many cooks” mode, start small. Choose one important user flow and map out who owns accessibility at each step. Or gather a few teammates and assign roles for three to five key components.

    If your team has too much on its plate to keep accessibility top of mind, tools like a11y.Radar from 216digital can help. It offers ongoing monitoring, regular scans, and clear dashboards so accessibility stays visible without adding extra work. It quietly finds issues early, before they become rework, barriers, or legal risks, so teams can act on them instead of reacting later.

    You don’t have to choose between moving fast and being accessible. With the right structure, support, and tools, your digital team can work smoothly, and accessibility becomes a natural part of everything you deliver—not just another task to juggle.

    Greg McNeil

    December 9, 2025
    Web Accessibility Remediation
    Accessibility, Accessibility Remediation, Accessibility testing, Web Accessibility, Web Accessibility Remediation, Website Accessibility

  • Building an Accessible Website on a Tight Timeline

    There is a particular kind of nervous energy that comes with a full rebrand and relaunch. The clock is loud. New visuals are on the way. Navigation is changing. Content is being rewritten, merged, or retired. Everyone is juggling feedback from leadership, stakeholders, and real users—all while trying not to break traffic or conversions.

    Under that pressure, it is easy to assume something has to give. Too often, accessibility is pushed into “phase two” or handed to a single champion to figure out later. But it does not have to work that way. With clear goals, reusable patterns, and honest feedback loops, you can ship a fast, stable, truly accessible website even when the deadline feels uncomfortably close.

    This article pulls from a real full rebuild on a compressed schedule: what helped us move faster, what we would adjust next time, and how to keep people and performance in focus as you go. Take what is useful, adapt it to your team, and use it to steady the next launch that lands on your plate.

    Start with Clarity, Not Wireframes

    When time is tight, vague goals turn into stress.

    Before anyone opens Figma or a code editor, pause long enough to write down what “launch” actually means:

    • “Must launch” goals
      The essential pieces: your new homepage, top-traffic templates, core conversion flows, and basic SEO hygiene like titles, descriptions, canonicals, and redirects.
    • “Should” and “Could” items
      Lower-traffic sections, seasonal content, and “it would be nice if…” features. These are valuable, but they belong in phases 2 or 3, not on the critical path.

    Then look at your pages with a bit of distance. Instead of a long list in a ticketing tool, create a small priority matrix that weighs:

    • How much traffic each page receives?
    • How much business value does it drive?
    • Which template family does it belong to (homepage → key landing templates → high-intent pages such as pricing, contact, or product flows)

    From that view, you can sketch a realistic path to launch. Design, content, and development no longer have to move in a straight line. If your base layout and components are stable, teams can work in parallel instead of waiting on each other.

    A few shared tools keep that picture clear for everyone:

    • One spreadsheet tracking pages, owners, components, status, and risks
    • A living IA map with redirects flagged
    • A short daily standup and a twice-weekly issue triage

    It sounds simple, but that shared map is often what keeps work grounded and your accessible website from getting lost inside a noisy project.

    Designing an Accessible Website from Components Up

    On a tight timeline, the design system becomes more than a style guide. It is how you create speed without letting quality slide.

    Rather than designing one page at a time, start with the building blocks you know you will reuse:

    • Hero sections
    • Split content blocks
    • Tab sets
    • Testimonial or quote blocks
    • Carousels or sliders
    • Form layouts, including error states and help text

    For each pattern, accessibility is part of the brief, not an extra pass at the end:

    • Keyboard navigation that follows a sensible order and shows a clear, high-contrast focus state
    • HTML landmarks—header, nav, main, footer—and headings in a clean hierarchy
    • ARIA only where native HTML cannot express the behavior
    • Color, type, and spacing tokens that meet WCAG 2.2 AA, so designers don’t have to check contrast on every decision.

    Some patterns are easy to get almost right and still end up frustrating people. Tabs, carousels, and accordions deserve extra time: arrow-key support and roving tabindex for tabs, visible pause controls for sliders, and aria-expanded states plus motion settings that respect prefers-reduced-motion for accordions.

    Each component gets a small accessibility checklist and a handful of tests. That might feel slower up front. In reality, it frees teams to move quickly later because they trust the building blocks under every new layout.

    Tooling That Gives Your Accessible Website Time Back

    When deadlines are tight, you want people solving real problems, not chasing issues a tool could have caught.

    Helpful habits here include:

    • Local linting and pattern libraries
      Linters for HTML, JavaScript, and ARIA catch common mistakes before a pull request is even opened. A component storybook with notes about expected keyboard behavior and states makes reviews quicker and more focused.
    • Automated checks in CI
      Your pipeline can validate HTML, identify broken links, verify basic metadata, generate sitemaps, and ensure images have alt text where they should.
    • Performance budgets
      Agree on reasonable thresholds for LCP, CLS, and INP. When a change pushes you over those limits, treat it as a real regression, not an item for “later.”

    After launch, continuous accessibility monitoring keeps an eye on real content and campaigns as they roll out. Tools like a11y.Radar helps you see when a new landing page, promo block, or plugin introduces a fresh set of issues, so your accessible website stays aligned with your original intent instead of drifting over time.

    Browser extensions and quick manual checks still matter. They are often where nuance shows up. But letting automation handle the repeatable checks means those manual passes can focus on judgment and edge cases.

    Redirects, Voice, and All the Invisible Decisions

    Relaunches tend to stir up every piece of content you have: long-running blog posts, support docs, landing pages, one-off campaign pages, and forgotten PDFs. How you handle that swirl directly affects real people trying to find what they need.

    Structurally:

    • Map each old URL to a new destination and set permanent redirects.
    • Validate redirects in bulk so you do not discover broken flows after users do.
    • Align internal links and breadcrumbs with your new IA so pathways feel more consistent and less random.

    For the words and media themselves, think about what it feels like to scan a page while using a screen reader, magnification, or a mobile phone in bright light:

    • Write alt text that explains the role of an image, not just what it looks like.
    • Add captions and transcripts where you can, especially for core video and audio.
    • Keep headings short and clear.
    • Use link text that tells people where they are going next.

    Right before you publish, do a quick sweep for titles, descriptions, open graph tags, canonicals, and analytics events. It is basic hygiene, but it protects the hard work you have put into the content itself.

    This is also where roles matter. Someone needs to own copy approval, someone needs to own accessibility checks, and someone needs to own analytics and SEO. Clear lanes keep decisions moving and protect the tone and clarity of the experience you are building.

    Turning Design Files into Real-World Performance

    At some point, everything leaves Figma and lands on real devices with real network constraints. That moment is where a site either feels light and responsive or heavy and fragile.

    A few choices make a big difference:

    • Plan how assets will travel from design to production: icon systems, responsive images with srcset and sizes, and modern formats where they help.
    • Keep CSS lean by shipping critical styles first and deferring the rest, rather than loading everything at once.
    • Be intentional with JavaScript. Lean on native controls when you can, split code where it makes sense, and defer non-essential scripts until after people can read and interact with core content.

    Before launch, run tests that look like your users’ reality, not just the best-case lab profile: mid-range devices, slower networks, busy pages. Watch not just the scores but how quickly the page feels usable.

    These choices shape how your accessible website feels in everyday use—how quickly someone can read an article, submit a form, or complete a checkout without fighting the page.

    QA Loops That Protect Real People

    QA is where all the decisions made along the way show up side by side. When time is short, it can be tempting to “spot check a few pages” and call it done. That almost always hides something important.

    A lightweight but focused plan works better:

    • A keyboard-only pass through each template type to confirm you can reach everything, see focus at all times, and escape any interactive element without getting stuck.
    • Screen reader checks using common setups—NVDA or JAWS with a browser on Windows, VoiceOver on macOS or iOS—especially on interactive components such as menus, tabs, and dialogs.
    • Mobile testing with zoom at 200% to confirm content reflows and tap targets are large enough to hit without precision.

    Add a regression sweep on your highest-traffic legacy URLs to make sure redirects, analytics, and key flows still behave as expected.

    When issues show up, prioritize them by impact, how often they are likely to surface, and how hard they are to fix. High-impact accessibility and performance bugs move to the front of the line. The goal is not a perfect spreadsheet of checks; it is protecting the people who will rely on this build every day.

    Ship Fast, Stay Accessible, and Don’t Go It Alone

    A fast relaunch does not have to be reckless. With clear priorities, solid components, supportive tools, and a few disciplined feedback loops, you can move quickly and still ship an accessible website that feels thoughtful and dependable.

    If you are planning a rebuild—or living through one right now—and want another perspective on your accessibility and performance posture, 216digital can help. Schedule an ADA briefing with our team. We will look at where you are, highlight risk areas, and outline practical next steps that respect your timeline and stack, so you can launch quickly and know your work is welcoming the people you built it for.

    Greg McNeil

    November 20, 2025
    Testing & Remediation
    Accessibility, Accessibility Remediation, Accessibility testing, automated testing, Web Accessibility Remediation, Website Accessibility
  • Is ChatGPT a Substitute for Web Accessibility Remediation?

    Is ChatGPT a Substitute for Web Accessibility Remediation?

    If you’ve worked in digital long enough, you’ve probably heard it: “Couldn’t we just use ChatGPT to fix the accessibility stuff?”

    It’s an honest question. The tools are impressive. AI can summarize dense docs, spit out code snippets, even draft copy that sounds decent. When you’re staring at a backlog with limited budget, “free and fast” feels like a gift.

    Here’s the truth: speed without understanding rarely saves time. ChatGPT is great at producing. What it isn’t great at is deciding. And web accessibility—the real kind, not just error cleanup—is full of decisions.

    So, while it can support web accessibility remediation, it can’t replace it. Because remediation isn’t just about fixing what’s broken; it’s about understanding why it broke and what the right fix means in the context of your design, your users, and your codebase.

    What Remediation Really Looks Like

    Real remediation is closer to detective work than to one-off development. You trace how a problem shows up in the interface, how it travels through templates, and why it keeps coming back.

    It starts with discovery—learning how the site is put together and where risky flows live, like checkout or account pages. Then comes testing, both automated and human, to catch what scanners miss: poor focus order, ambiguous instructions, unlabeled controls, shaky widget behavior.

    From there, you triage and translate findings into work your team can actually ship. You plan fixes, weigh impact and effort, and roll changes through your stack. Finally, you validate with real assistive tech—keyboard, screen readers, voice control—to confirm the fix is a fix for real people.

    AI can sit beside you for parts of that journey. It can help reason through code or rephrase unclear labels. But it can’t feel when something “technically passes” yet still fails a user. That kind of judgment is learned, not generated—and it’s why web accessibility remediation stays a human-led process.

    Where ChatGPT Earns Its Keep

    Used by someone who understands accessibility, ChatGPT is genuinely helpful. It’s fast at rewriting small markup patterns. It can unpack a WCAG success criterion in plain language. It can draft alt text you’ll refine, or outline starter docs a team will own.

    It’s also great for teaching moments: when a new dev asks, “Why ARIA here?” AI can frame the idea before a specialist steps in with specifics.

    Think of it as an eager junior colleague—useful, quick, and worth having in the room. Just don’t hand it the keys.

    The Problem of “No Opinion”

    Here’s where AI hits the wall: it has no sense of context and no opinion of its own.

    Accessibility isn’t a math problem. Two developers can solve the same issue differently—both valid on paper, one far more usable in practice. That judgment call is the job.

    Because ChatGPT predicts what looks right, it can sound confident and still be wrong: adding a <label> but leaving a placeholder that confuses screen readers; copying a title into alt and causing duplicate announcements; “fixing” contrast by nudging color values without checking the full component state.

    Some barriers simply require a human to decide. Take alt text, for example: ChatGPT can’t actually see what an image is, how it’s being used, or what role it plays in the design. It doesn’t understand whether that image conveys meaning or is purely decorative—and that context determines whether alt text is needed at all. Without that judgment, even the best AI guess risks being wrong for the user.

    When you’re fixing accessibility, “almost right” is often still wrong. And when someone asks you to show due diligence, “we asked a chatbot” isn’t a defensible audit trail for web accessibility remediation.

    The Hidden Cost of “Free”

    Teams that lean too hard on AI learn fast that “free” isn’t free.

    You spend hours double-checking output, rewriting prompts, and chasing new issues that didn’t exist before. Sometimes you even end up debugging phantom problems the model invented.

    Meanwhile, the real barriers remain. Automated tools and AI together tend to catch only a slice of what actually affects users; the messy, contextual stuff slips through.

    So the report looks cleaner, the error count drops, and real people still struggle. That’s not progress. That’s paperwork dressed up as progress—and it leaves risk on the table, which is the opposite of web accessibility remediation.

    Even if AI manages to correct every automated scan error, it won’t protect you from real exposure. We’re now seeing a clear shift in ADA litigation: most new lawsuits aren’t built on automated findings anymore. They’re targeting manual issues—things uncovered by human testing and user experience barriers—because that’s where easy wins live for plaintiff firms. So even if AI covers one base, it leaves another wide open—and that’s the one most likely to cost you.

    Why Human-Led Web Accessibility Remediation Still Matters

    When you bring in a team that lives this work, you’re getting far more than bug fixes—you’re gaining traction. Instead of chasing one-off errors, you start to see the larger patterns behind what keeps breaking and why.

    A strong remediation partner brings clarity to your roadmap by tying priorities to real user impact and legal risk. Their fixes hold up through redesigns because they focus on underlying causes rather than surface-level symptoms.

    There’s also the advantage of human validation—review that’s defensible, thoughtful, and grounded in actual user experience. With the right process, accessibility becomes part of everyday development instead of something bolted on at the end.

    That’s the real promise of web accessibility remediation: not perfection, but predictability you can trust as your site evolves.

    How to Use AI the Right Way (With Guardrails)

    AI belongs in the workflow. It just doesn’t belong in charge.

    Use ChatGPT to speed up work you already understand, not to make calls you can’t verify. Let it draft checklists, summarize long audit exports, or propose markup for a pattern you’ve already chosen.

    Then layer on what AI can’t do: manual testing, AT validation, and the human decision-making that turns “technically correct” into “genuinely usable.”

    With that guardrail, AI becomes an accelerator for web accessibility remediation, not a shortcut that creates rework.

    What You Actually Get from Professional Remediation

    When you bring in a team that lives this work, you’re getting far more than bug fixes—you’re gaining traction. Instead of chasing one-off errors, you start to see the larger patterns behind what keeps breaking and why.

    A good remediation partner helps you understand where to focus first by tying priorities to real user impact and legal risk. They deliver fixes that continue to hold up through redesigns because the underlying causes—not just the surface-level symptoms—are addressed.

    You also gain something automated tools can’t offer: human validation that stands up to scrutiny. And with the right team, accessibility becomes part of how your site operates going forward, rather than something added after the fact.

    That’s the real value of web accessibility remediation. It’s not about perfection—it’s about creating a level of predictability you can trust as your site evolves.

    AI Doesn’t Make Judgment Calls—People Do

    ChatGPT is a powerful tool. It can teach, inspire, and save time—but it can’t care. Accessibility is about care: for users, for quality, for inclusion.

    AI can suggest the “how.” People understand the “why.” And perhaps most importantly, AI can’t shield you from the kinds of lawsuits that automation no longer catches.

    If your team is experimenting with AI and you want to make sure it helps instead of hurts, start with a conversation. Schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. We’ll show where AI fits safely, where human oversight is non-negotiable, and how to build a plan that keeps your site open to everyone.

    That’s web accessibility remediation done right—fast where it can be, thoughtful where it must be.

    Greg McNeil

    November 10, 2025
    Testing & Remediation
    Accessibility Remediation, Accessibility testing, AI-driven accessibility, automated testing, Web Accessibility Remediation
  • How to Budget with the ADA Tax Credit in Mind

    How to Budget with the ADA Tax Credit in Mind

    For many businesses, accessibility feels like a surprise expense—something that comes up only after a complaint, redesign, or audit. But it doesn’t have to be that way. With the right planning, accessibility can become part of your financial strategy rather than a reactive fix.

    When you view accessibility through a business lens, it’s not just a compliance requirement—it’s a smart, ongoing investment that strengthens your brand, expands your audience, and saves money over time. One of the most practical tools to make that possible is the ADA tax credit—officially known as the Disabled Access Credit.

    This guide will show how to make accessibility a consistent part of your annual budget: how to plan for it, phase improvements strategically, and use the ADA tax credit to turn compliance into a sustainable investment in inclusion.

    Why Accessibility Planning Belongs in Your Annual Budget

    Accessibility isn’t something you check off once and forget. Your website, apps, and digital content evolve constantly—so your accessibility strategy should evolve too.

    Including accessibility in your annual budget isn’t just about avoiding risk; it’s about planning smarter. When you allocate funds for accessibility ahead of time, you prevent the financial stress of emergency fixes later. In fact, businesses that plan accessibility from the start often save significantly compared to those responding reactively after an issue arises.

    The numbers underscore the point. In 2024 alone, U.S. courts saw more than 4,000 web accessibility lawsuits—a 10% increase over the previous year. For small and mid-sized companies, those legal and remediation costs can be steep. Proactive budgeting, on the other hand, creates stability and predictability—keeping accessibility sustainable and affordable long term.

    In short, accessibility planning isn’t just good ethics. It’s good business.

    Understanding the ADA (Disabled Access) Tax Credit

    The ADA tax credit helps make accessibility financially achievable. It’s a federal incentive available to small businesses through IRS Form 8826, designed to offset the costs of accessibility improvements each year.

    Here’s how it works:

    • Covers 50% of qualifying accessibility expenses between $250 and $10,250, with a maximum annual credit of $5,000.
    • Can be claimed every year, making it easier to align accessibility investments with your budget cycle.
    • Applies to both physical upgrades and digital accessibility improvements.

    To qualify, your business must have 30 or fewer full-time employees or less than $1 million in gross annual receipts.

    For web accessibility, eligible expenses may include:

    • Accessibility audits and WCAG remediation work
    • Accessible web design and coding
    • Employee training on accessibility best practices
    • Monitoring tools or software subscriptions

    When used strategically, the ADA tax credit becomes more than a refund—it becomes a built-in funding source that supports continuous accessibility progress.

    Building Accessibility Into Your Annual Budget

    Forecast Accessibility Costs Early

    Every good plan starts with a clear picture. Begin by conducting an accessibility audit to understand where you stand and what improvements are needed. From there, categorize your costs into two main groups:

    • One-time investments: redesigns, major platform updates, or initial remediation.
    • Ongoing costs: regular audits, training, or accessibility monitoring subscriptions.

    When your web and finance teams collaborate early, it’s easier to plan accessibility alongside other operational goals—keeping it consistent, predictable, and affordable.

    Use Phased Implementation

    Accessibility doesn’t need to happen all at once. A phased approach allows you to make measurable progress while spreading costs over multiple fiscal years.

    Start by addressing high-impact areas first—like navigation, contrast, and form labels—then move to broader improvements and long-term maintenance. For example, a $12,000 remediation project could be divided into two phases, allowing your organization to claim the ADA tax credit each year while maintaining steady momentum.

    This approach ensures accessibility stays manageable, not overwhelming.

    Align Accessibility with Other Initiatives

    Accessibility often fits naturally into projects you’re already planning. If you’re redesigning your website, refreshing your brand, or updating your CMS, integrate accessibility improvements at the same time.

    This strategy maximizes efficiency and saves money—since accessibility often enhances SEO, usability, and overall customer experience. You’re not adding extra work; you’re simply making every project more inclusive and more valuable.

    Maximizing the ADA Tax Credit

    Time Your Projects Strategically

    Timing plays a key role in maximizing your return. Plan accessibility work so invoices and payments align with your fiscal year—ensuring that eligible expenses fall within the same tax period. For multi-year initiatives, phase projects so each year’s work qualifies for the ADA tax credit, potentially giving you up to $5,000 back annually.

    Track and Document All Accessibility Expenses

    Clear documentation helps substantiate your claim and simplifies future budgeting. Keep a record of:

    • Consultant contracts and invoices
    • Software and platform receipts
    • Training documentation
    • Accessibility audit reports

    Not only does this support your IRS filing, but it also helps your internal team analyze spending trends and identify long-term cost efficiencies.

    Consult a Tax Professional

    Finally, consult a CPA familiar with ADA-related business incentives. Many accountants are aware of physical accessibility deductions but may overlook digital accessibility as a qualifying expense. Make sure your CPA understands that your web improvements align with ADA and WCAG compliance to fully leverage the credit.

    Pairing the ADA Tax Credit with Other Incentives

    The ADA tax credit is a powerful starting point, but it’s not the only financial tool available to businesses investing in accessibility. In many cases, you can combine federal and state incentives to maximize savings and stretch your accessibility budget even further.

    One example is the Section 190 Deduction, which allows businesses of any size to deduct up to $15,000 per year for accessibility-related improvements. This deduction can complement your digital accessibility initiatives, especially when accessibility enhancements are part of a broader modernization or inclusion effort.

    You may also find state-level programs that offer additional credits, deductions, or grants for digital inclusion projects. These can include funding for accessible technology, website upgrades, or employee training in accessibility best practices.

    Because eligibility and requirements vary, it’s best to consult your tax professional or CPA. They can help you identify which incentives apply to your organization and ensure your documentation meets all necessary criteria.

    When used together, these incentives create a layered approach to funding accessibility—one that lowers costs, supports continuous improvement, and reinforces your organization’s commitment to inclusive digital experiences.

    Long-Term Accessibility Budgeting: Turning Compliance Into ROI

    Once accessibility becomes a recurring part of your budget, it transforms from a legal requirement into a long-term asset.

    Building accessibility into your company culture saves money, builds loyalty, and reduces risk over time. Here’s how to make it last:

    • Review annually: Evaluate your site each year to identify new opportunities for improvement.
    • Budget continuously: Allocate a small percentage of every web project to accessibility testing and maintenance.
    • Train regularly: Educating your staff reduces future remediation costs and dependency on external consultants.
    • Monitor proactively: Tools like a11y.Radar detect accessibility issues early, saving time and expense.
    • Reinvest strategically: Use the ADA tax credit savings each year to fund future improvements, training, or technology upgrades.

    Over time, this cycle creates measurable ROI—fewer accessibility issues, reduced costs, and a stronger, more inclusive customer experience.

    Common Budgeting Mistakes (and How to Avoid Them)

    Even with the best intentions, budgeting missteps can cost you valuable time and savings. Here are a few to avoid:

    1. Treating Accessibility as a One-Time Fix: Build it into your annual financial strategy instead.
    2. Neglecting Documentation: Without records, you could lose eligibility for the ADA tax credit.
    3. Overlooking Small Wins: Incremental improvements qualify for credit and deliver real impact.
    4. Waiting Until Tax Season: Plan accessibility spending early to align with your fiscal calendar.
    5. Skipping Expert Input: Work with accessibility specialists to ensure your improvements meet both WCAG and IRS requirements efficiently.

    Accessibility That Pays Off

    Accessibility isn’t just a checkbox—it’s a commitment that pays dividends. It strengthens your reputation, prevents costly compliance issues, and builds loyalty among every visitor who interacts with your brand.

    When approached strategically, the ADA tax credit turns accessibility into a self-sustaining investment—one that grows in value every year.

    If you’re ready to make accessibility part of your long-term financial strategy, start planning now. Build it into your next budget cycle, track your progress, and treat accessibility not as an expense—but as an investment that keeps paying back.
    And if you’d like a clearer path forward, schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. We’ll help you build a practical, sustainable roadmap that fits your goals—and your budget.

    Greg McNeil

    October 17, 2025
    The Benefits of Web Accessibility, Uncategorized
    Accessibility Remediation, accessibility tax credit, cost, tax credit, Web Accessibility, Web Accessibility Remediation, Website Accessibility
  • Consultants or Automated Platforms: What’s Right for You?

    Consultants or Automated Platforms: What’s Right for You?

    Making a website accessible isn’t always a straight path. There are sleek platforms that can scan every page in minutes, and seasoned consultants who can spot problems no algorithm would catch. Each offers value—but in very different ways.

    The challenge isn’t choosing which one is “better.” It’s knowing when to rely on quick automated checks and when your site needs the nuance only human expertise can provide. Getting that balance right can turn accessibility from a one-time project into a lasting part of how your site works.

    What Automated Platforms Do Well

    Automated accessibility platforms are essentially software tools that scan your site for compliance issues. Think of them as always-on monitors quietly running in the background. They can:

    • Scan your site regularly to flag new problems as they appear
    • Track your accessibility performance over time
    • Send alerts when something changes

    They’re fast, efficient, and cost-effective. Within minutes, they can show you where your site stands and give you a benchmark to measure progress. For many organizations, this kind of real-time insight is reassuring—especially after an initial round of accessibility improvements. Automated tools can help ensure new issues don’t creep in unnoticed.

    But while they’re powerful, they’re not perfect. automated platforms can catch many surface-level problems, like missing alt text or low-contrast color pairings. What they can’t do is understand the human experience of using your site. They don’t know if your navigation makes sense to someone using a screen reader, or whether form instructions are clear enough to avoid confusion. For those nuanced judgment calls, human expertise is essential.

    The Role of Accessibility Consultants

    Accessibility consultants offer something no machine can: experience, context, and human perspective. They don’t just tell you what’s broken—they explain why it matters and how to fix it in a way that fits your real-world workflows.

    A good consultant will:

    • Conduct thorough audits that go far beyond automated scans
    • Identify root causes, not just symptoms
    • Guide your team through remediation with practical, achievable steps
    • Provide training so you can build accessibility into your process in the future

    Consultants also bring critical legal and standards knowledge to the table. They stay on top of evolving regulations and know how guidelines like WCAG apply to your specific industry or audience. That insight can help you minimize legal risk while also creating a more welcoming experience for users with disabilities.

    In other words, they look at the big picture—something an automated tool can’t do.

    Why Consultant-Led Remediation Should Come First

    One of the most common missteps organizations make is starting with an automated platform before any human-led remediation. On paper, it seems logical: run a scan, see what’s wrong, and start fixing. But in practice, this often backfires.

    Automated scans can return long lists of issues—some legitimate, some false positives, and many without clear instructions for resolution. Without expert guidance, it’s easy to spend hours chasing the wrong problems or applying “fixes” that don’t actually help real users.

    Consultant-led remediation flips this process around for better results. Instead of reacting to a flood of automated alerts, you get a clear, prioritized plan from someone who understands both the technical and human aspects of accessibility. They focus on foundational issues first, ensuring the fixes are meaningful and sustainable.

    Once that groundwork is in place, automated platforms become incredibly useful. They act like a safety net, helping you maintain the progress you’ve made.

    Think of it like building a house: you wouldn’t install a security system before the walls are up. The system is valuable—but only once the structure is solid.

    When Automated Platforms Make Sense

    After you’ve remediated your site with the help of a consultant, automated platforms can become a valuable part of your ongoing strategy. Websites are living, changing systems. Every content update, plugin installation, or design tweak carries the potential to introduce new accessibility barriers.

    An automated platform helps you stay ahead of those problems by catching them early. They’re instrumental when:

    • You publish new content frequently
    • You’re rolling out design changes or new features
    • You want to show good-faith efforts with regular monitoring reports
    • You need an affordable way to keep watch between consultant reviews

    Used this way, automated tools act as a maintenance system. They can’t replace human testing, but they can help keep your site healthier between more in-depth reviews.

    How to Decide What’s Right for You

    Choosing between consultants and automated platforms becomes much easier once you know where you are in the accessibility journey.

    Starting from scratch? Bring in a consultant first. Their guidance will help you build a solid foundation and avoid the guesswork that leads to costly mistakes.

    Working through remediation? Stay the course with consultant-led support. Automated scans can muddy the waters here, flagging noise instead of what really matters.

    Site already in good shape? That’s the moment to add an automated platform. Let it keep an eye on new changes while consultants check in periodically for deeper reviews.

    For many organizations, the most effective approach is a blend of both—just in the correct order. Human expertise lays the groundwork. automated platforms help you maintain it.

    The Long-Term Payoff

    Web accessibility isn’t a box you check off once—it’s a long-term commitment. But it’s one that pays off in measurable ways: stronger legal compliance, broader audience reach, improved usability, and greater trust from customers and clients.

    Consultants give you the strategy, expertise, and training to start on solid ground. automated platforms give you the ongoing monitoring to protect that investment.

    When used together, they create a sustainable system. You get the precision of expert audits and the efficiency of automated monitoring. This balance reduces risk, improves user experience, and keeps you aligned with evolving standards as they change over time.

    Human First, Automation Second

    Choosing between consultants and automated platforms isn’t really about picking one over the other—it’s about knowing how they fit together. Automated tools can keep watch over the details, but it takes human expertise to build the kind of foundation that lasts.

    Start by getting that solid groundwork in place with a consultant-led audit and remediation. Once your site is truly accessible, an automated platform can help you keep it that way—quietly catching issues before they become problems.

    If you’re ready to map out what that first step should look like, schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. It’s a chance to talk through where your site stands, what’s needed to meet compliance, and how to build a long-term plan that keeps accessibility on track.

    Greg McNeil

    September 17, 2025
    Testing & Remediation
    Accessibility, Accessibility Remediation, Accessibility testing, automated scans, automated testing, consultants, Web Accessibility, Web Accessibility Remediation, Website Accessibility

  • How to Fit Accessibility Testing Into Your Sprint

    Agile development thrives on fast, iterative progress—and that can make accessibility feel like a hurdle rather than a habit. But accessibility testing doesn’t have to slow you down. In fact, when baked into your sprint process from the outset, accessibility becomes a natural part of your workflow—reducing rework, enhancing code quality, and safeguarding your organization from legal risk.

    This guide walks through how to integrate accessibility testing into your Agile sprints without sacrificing speed or innovation. With the right approach, inclusive design becomes a team-wide mindset—and a competitive advantage.

    Why Accessibility Testing Belongs in the Sprint

    Accessibility testing helps ensure your website or app can be used by people of all abilities, including those who rely on screen readers, keyboard navigation, voice recognition, and other assistive technologies.

    Leaving accessibility checks until the end of a project—or worse, after launch—often leads to expensive remediation and a poor user experience. Worse, you could face lawsuits for failing to meet standards such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) or U.S. laws, including the ADA and Section 508.

    Agile teams are already built for continuous improvement. By incorporating accessibility testing into your sprints, you:

    • Catch issues earlier when they’re cheaper to fix
    • Avoid bottlenecks during QA
    • Improve design clarity and usability for everyone
    • Demonstrate a commitment to inclusivity and compliance

    Let’s break down exactly how to make this work in practice.

    Shift Accessibility Left: Early Planning Wins

    To integrate accessibility testing into a sprint, it needs to begin before the sprint starts.

    1. Include Accessibility in User Stories

    Start by writing user stories with accessibility in mind. Instead of:

    As a user, I want to submit a form so I can sign up for updates.

    Add accessibility context:

    As a screen reader user, I want to submit a clearly labeled, keyboard-navigable form so I can sign up for updates.

    This keeps accessibility visible to the entire team and sets the tone for inclusive features from day one.

    2. Define Acceptance Criteria

    Each user story should include accessibility-related acceptance criteria, such as:

    • All buttons must be focusable via keyboard.
    • Form fields must include visible and programmatically associated labels.
    • Error messages must be conveyed visually and via ARIA alerts.

    These criteria guide both developers and testers—and reduce ambiguity when it’s time to validate.

    Build Accessibility into Design

    Accessibility testing is often easier when designs are inclusive from the start.

    3. Collaborate with Designers

    Designers should use accessible color contrast, readable font sizes, logical tab order, and meaningful icon labels. Review early wireframes and prototypes against WCAG standards—ideally with tools like Stark or Figma plugins for accessibility.

    4. Run Design Reviews

    Hold accessibility-focused design reviews during planning or refinement. Spotting issues before development starts saves everyone time. Flag problems like insufficient contrast, unclear buttons, or missing focus indicators.

    Develop With Accessibility in Mind

    Your dev team is the frontline for accessibility. Setting clear expectations and tools helps them move fast without sacrificing inclusion.

    5. Use Accessible Components

    Encourage developers to use pre-tested accessible components or frameworks. For example, use accessible modal libraries that manage focus trapping and ARIA attributes out of the box.

    6. Lint for Accessibility

    Incorporate linters like eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y to catch common accessibility mistakes in code. This provides near-instant feedback—right inside the developer’s editor.

    7. Write Semantic HTML

    Encourage the use of native HTML elements like <button>, <label>, and <nav> over custom divs and spans. These elements carry built-in accessibility benefits and reduce the need for ARIA workarounds.

    Make Testing Part of the Flow

    Testing for accessibility isn’t a separate track—it’s part of sprint validation, just like functional testing.

    8. Automated Accessibility Tests

    Automate what you can using tools like WAVE or Lighthouse. These tools catch issues like missing alt text, ARIA misuse, or low contrast—before code merges.

    Run them as part of your CI pipeline, so broken accessibility fails the build just like broken code.

    Important Note: Automated tests only catch ~30% of WCAG issues. Manual testing is still essential.

    9. Manual Testing in Sprint

    Manual checks don’t need to wait for final QA. During development or code review:

    • Test keyboard-only navigation
    • Use a screen reader (like NVDA or VoiceOver) to verify flows
    • Check page headings and tab order for clarity

    Spread these tasks across the team so it’s not all on QA or accessibility specialists.

    Retrospectives: Keep Improving

    Agile is all about continuous learning. Use retrospectives to talk about what worked—and what didn’t—with accessibility during the sprint.

    Questions to consider:

    • Did we include accessibility in all relevant stories?
    • Were any accessibility bugs pushed to a future sprint?
    • Are our automated tools giving useful results?

    Use this feedback to tweak your workflow, tooling, or documentation.

    Tips for Getting Started (or Leveling Up)

    If you’re new to accessibility testing in sprints, keep it simple and scale up over time. Here’s a roadmap to get started:

    1. Pick one or two automated tools to run in dev and CI.
    2. Train your team on basic WCAG principles—especially designers and frontend devs.
    3. Set clear accessibility goals in your Definition of Done (e.g., no critical issues, passes keyboard navigation).
    4. Assign shared responsibility—accessibility isn’t just the QA team’s job.
    5. Start tracking accessibility debt just like tech debt. Tackle it bit by bit.

    For teams already doing accessibility work, the next step might be:

    • Formalizing a test plan
    • Adding assistive tech testing
    • Bringing in real users with disabilities for feedback

    Don’t Bolt It On—Build It In

    Too often, accessibility is treated as an afterthought—an item saved for the backlog or a separate “phase.” But that’s a recipe for stress, rework, and risk.

    When you incorporate accessibility testing into your sprint cycle, it becomes routine—not reactive. You don’t have to choose between speed and inclusion. You get both.

    And the benefits go beyond compliance. You build better products, open your brand to more users, and reduce friction for everyone.

    Need Help Fitting Accessibility Into Your Workflow?

    At 216digital, we specialize in helping Agile teams bake accessibility into every phase of the sprint cycle. From audits and remediation to training and ongoing support, our team ensures your products are not only compliant—but more usable and inclusive by design.

    Ready to build accessibility into your sprint?

    Let’s talk. Schedule a consultation today.

    Greg McNeil

    July 23, 2025
    Testing & Remediation
    Accessibility, Accessibility Audit, Accessibility Remediation, Accessibility testing, automated testing, Web Accessibility Remediation, Website Accessibility

  • Build Accessibility In, Don’t Bolt It On

    A brand-new website can feel polished and future-proof—right up until someone with a screen reader runs into a dead-end menu or a keyboard user can’t tab past the hero banner. Suddenly the “finished” project is back on the operating table, costing hours (and budget) you’d already spent elsewhere.

    When accessibility planning is woven into the first brainstorm—alongside color palettes, user flows, and content themes—those last-minute scrambles disappear. Decisions get crisper, code stays cleaner, and every visitor, regardless of ability, enjoys the same smooth path through your pages.

    Think of accessibility less as decorative trim and more as the blueprint that holds the whole structure together. Start with it, build on it, and you’ll launch faster, spend less, and welcome more people from day one.

    What Does “Bolting It On” Look Like?

    Many organizations treat accessibility like a retrofit. The site is already built, the design is approved, and the content is live. Only then does someone say, “Wait—what about screen reader support? What about color contrast? What if this form can’t be used with a keyboard?”

    Now you’re in damage control. Fixing accessibility issues post-launch can require rewriting code, redesigning components, and delaying updates. Even worse, you may be stuck with baked-in barriers that are difficult or costly to correct. For example:

    • Rebuilding menus that were designed without keyboard navigation in mind
    • Rewriting interactive components that don’t support screen readers
    • Replacing an entire color palette because contrast ratios fail WCAG

    Accessibility planning means thinking about inclusion as you sketch wireframes, select a CMS, or build your first component. It means your developers write semantic HTML, your designers test color contrast before finalizing a palette, and your content creators write with clarity and structure.

    When accessibility planning is part of the DNA of your project, you get better results—faster and with fewer surprises.

    Accessibility Planning = Smart, Strategic Design

    Now imagine the opposite scenario: your team is starting a new project or redesign. Right at the beginning, you ask:

    • Who are our users, and what diverse needs do they have?
    • Are we designing this interface to be usable without a mouse?
    • Can our color and font choices work for users with low vision or dyslexia?
    • Are we writing alt text for images, and using descriptive link text?
    • Is this form easy to complete using assistive technology?

    These questions don’t slow you down. They guide your decisions from the ground up.

    Accessibility planning means thinking about inclusion as you sketch wireframes, select a CMS, or build your first component. It means your developers write semantic HTML, your designers test color contrast before finalizing a palette, and your content creators write with clarity and structure.

    When accessibility is part of the DNA of your project, you get better results—faster and with fewer surprises.

    6 Stages Where Accessibility Belongs

    Here’s how to build accessibility into your process, stage by stage:

    1. Discovery and Strategy

    Before any code or design work begins, include accessibility planning as a strategic priority. Define your target users, including those with disabilities. Document accessibility goals and requirements as part of your project scope.

    Make accessibility a deliverable—not an afterthought.

    2. UX and Visual Design

    Design with inclusivity in mind. That means:

    • High contrast color palettes
    • Clear visual hierarchy
    • Large, legible typography
    • Components that look good and function well with assistive tech
    • Clear focus indicators and logical navigation

    Don’t assume visual design is just aesthetics—it impacts usability for everyone.

    3. Content Creation

    Content creators play a major role in accessibility planning. They should:

    • Use descriptive headings and meaningful subheadings
    • Write clear, concise link text (“Download the annual report” instead of “Click here”)
    • Provide transcripts or captions for audio and video
    • Write meaningful alt text for important images

    Training your content team on accessibility saves hours of rewriting down the road.

    4. Front-End Development

    This is where accessibility really comes alive. Developers should use:

    • Semantic HTML (correct use of <nav>, <button>, <label>, etc.)
    • ARIA labels only when needed—not as a shortcut for poor structure
    • Keyboard operability for all interactive elements
    • Logical tab order and skip navigation links

    Accessibility-friendly code isn’t just better for screen readers—it’s more resilient, scalable, and SEO-friendly too.

    5. Testing and QA

    Accessibility testing isn’t just automated. While tools like Lighthouse, or WAVE help flag obvious issues, real users and manual testing are critical.

    • Test with screen readers like NVDA or VoiceOver
    • Navigate your site using only a keyboard
    • Check forms for proper labels and error handling
    • Test responsiveness and zoom up to 200%

    Bring in users with disabilities if possible. Their feedback is irreplaceable.

    6. Launch and Maintenance

    Accessibility doesn’t stop at launch. It’s an ongoing effort. As you add new features or content, revisit your accessibility standards. Schedule regular audits. Monitor legal developments. Consider automated tools like a11y.Radar for early issue detection.

    The Human Side of Accessibility

    It’s easy to talk about accessibility in technical terms, but at its core, it’s about people.

    Think about someone using a screen reader to access your site. Or someone with motor limitations who can’t use a mouse. Or someone dealing with temporary impairments—a broken wrist, eye strain, or even just a noisy environment where audio isn’t practical.

    Building accessibility in from the start isn’t about compliance for its own sake. It’s about treating all users with dignity. It’s about believing that digital spaces should work for everyone, regardless of ability.

    Common Pitfalls to Avoid

    Even with good intentions, teams can fall into these traps:

    • Assuming accessibility is only the developer’s job: Accessibility is a shared responsibility across design, content, and engineering.
    • Waiting until the QA phase: Accessibility can’t be “tested in” at the end. It must be designed and developed.
    • Relying too much on overlays or plugins: Widgets don’t fix inaccessible code. In some cases, they create more problems than they solve.
    • Failing to document decisions: Keep a living accessibility checklist. It helps ensure continuity across teams and updates.

    Why It Pays Off

    Here’s what you gain when you build accessibility in from day one:

    • Faster development: Fewer reworks, cleaner code
    • Lower costs: Avoid costly redesigns and retrofits
    • Happier users: Better usability for everyone, not just people with disabilities
    • Improved SEO: Accessibility often overlaps with search best practices
    • Reduced legal risk: Stay ahead of ADA and state-level laws like Colorado HB 21-1110
    • Stronger brand reputation: Inclusion signals leadership and care

    Most importantly, you build a digital presence that welcomes, respects, and serves more people exactly like the web was meant to work.

    No Ifs, Ands, or Bugs—Just Accessibility Plans

    Accessibility doesn’t belong on a post-launch checklist or in a future phase that never quite gets prioritized. It belongs at the table from day one—when you’re mapping out user journeys, designing components, and writing your very first lines of code.

    By making accessibility planning a core part of your workflow, you avoid costly rework, improve overall quality, and create digital experiences that serve more people, more effectively. It’s not about adding more to your plate—it’s about building smarter from the start.

    If you’re ready to move from fixing to future-proofing, 216digital can help. Our phased accessibility services are designed to meet you where you are, guide your team, and strengthen your site’s foundation for the long haul. Let’s make accessibility part of how you build—every time.

    Greg McNeil

    June 20, 2025
    Testing & Remediation
    Accessibility, Accessibility Remediation, Accessibility testing, Web Accessibility, Web Accessibility Remediation, web development

  • Custom Accessibility Audits: Tailored for Your Website

    Most websites aren’t trying to be inaccessible—it just kind of happens. A few plugins here, a third-party widget there, and before you know it, people using screen readers or keyboard navigation are hitting roadblocks you didn’t even know were there.

    If you’ve ever felt unsure about where your site stands or thought, “We added a tool—so we’re probably fine,” you’re not alone. But the truth is, real accessibility takes more than a one-click solution. It takes intention, testing, and a plan. And with digital accessibility lawsuits on the rise, ignoring the gaps is more of a liability than ever.

    If staying ADA-compliant is your goal, you need more than a quick fix. You need custom accessibility audits, meaningful remediation, and a partner who can help you maintain compliance long-term.

    The Real Limitations of Automation Tools

    Automated accessibility tools are everywhere, and it’s easy to see the appeal. They promise a quick scan and some instant fixes—like adding alt text, adjusting colors, or offering a text-size toggle. It feels like progress. But these tools can only go so far.

    They often miss what really matters: how someone with a disability actually uses your site. Screen readers, keyboard navigation, and cognitive-friendly layouts aren’t things most automation can truly understand or evaluate.

    What They Miss (And Why It Matters)

    Here are a few areas where automation usually falls short:

    • Screen reader experiences: Automated tools won’t tell you if your navigation makes sense when read aloud.
    • Keyboard usability: They don’t catch when menus or popups trap users who don’t use a mouse.
    • Structural clarity: Bad heading structures or mislabeled buttons often go unnoticed.
    • Interactive elements: Modals, forms, and sliders might work visually but break down when tested for accessibility.

    Even more concerning? Courts are increasingly ruling that automation alone doesn’t meet ADA requirements. In some cases, relying on overlays without fixing underlying issues can actually increase your legal risk—especially for busy sites that handle transactions. This is why custom accessibility audits remain the gold standard for identifying real, user-impacting issues.

    Why Real Testing Still Matters

    You can’t fix what you don’t experience—and that’s the heart of manual testing. It’s not just about running a tool and checking boxes. It’s about walking through your site the way someone with a disability might.

    That means:

    • Navigating with a keyboard and nothing else.
    • Using a screen reader to browse your content.
    • Testing user flows like logging in, searching, or checking out—without assuming the user can see or use a mouse.

    The Kind of Issues Manual Testing Uncovers

    This type of testing uncovers issues that automation never will:

    • Dropdowns that don’t announce themselves
    • Buttons that lack clear, descriptive labels
    • Interactive sections that lose focus or confuse navigation
    • Forms that look fine visually but are hard to use with assistive tech

    At 216digital, we don’t just skim the surface. During custom accessibility audits, we follow real user journeys—from homepage to checkout—so we can see how the experience actually holds up. It’s not about passing a test. It’s about making sure everyone can use your site smoothly.

    What Custom Accessibility Audits Really Looks Like

    Once you know what’s broken, fixing it takes more than flipping a switch. True remediation means tailoring fixes to your site’s layout, content, and functionality—not applying a generic patch.

    That’s why we focus on changes that make a measurable difference for real users. Things like:

    • Making sure users can see where their keyboard focus is at all times
    • Adding ARIA roles and labels so screen readers can understand what’s on the page
    • Improving contrast without compromising your brand’s look

    Examples of Targeted Fixes

    We also fix the kinds of problems that create the most user friction:

    • Popups and modals that trap keyboard or screen reader users
    • Sliders or videos that move too quickly without user control

    There’s no one-size-fits-all approach. Each website is different. Each problem needs a thoughtful, code-aware fix. That’s where custom remediation stands apart—it solves the right problem in the right way.

    Keeping Accessibility on Track with a11y.Radar

    Accessibility isn’t something you do once and forget about. Websites change—new content, new plugins, new designs—and with those changes come new risks.

    That’s where our ongoing monitoring tool, a11y.Radar, makes the difference.

    It acts like a digital safety net by:

    • Running regular scans to check for new or recurring issues
    • Prioritizing problems based on what’s most important to fix first
    • Providing clear reports that your team can actually understand and act on
    • Using the same scanning methods many law firms rely on before filing lawsuits

    Stay Ahead, Don’t Fall Behind

    Think of it like maintenance for your website’s health. You wouldn’t skip oil changes for your car—and keeping your site accessible works the same way. a11y.Radar helps you stay proactive so small issues don’t turn into bigger problems later. And when paired with custom accessibility audits, you gain a complete strategy for long-term digital compliance.

    Why Visibility Increases Your Risk

    The more visible your business becomes, the more pressure there is to get accessibility right.

    In just May alone, 445 new digital accessibility lawsuits were filed in the U.S.—many aimed at online retailers, especially those using Shopify or WooCommerce. These platforms offer convenience, but often rely on templates or plugins that haven’t been fully tested for accessibility.

    The Real-World Consequences

    It’s not personal—these lawsuits are often triggered by bots scanning the web for compliance issues. If your site trips a red flag, it could end up on a law firm’s radar.

    The risks are real:

    • Expensive legal battles or settlement costs
    • Strained customer trust
    • Hits to your brand reputation
    • Increased insurance premiums

    The upside? When you invest in custom accessibility audits and monitoring, you dramatically lower your risk—and build a better experience for every user.

    Beyond Legal Advice: Why You Need Technical Support

    A good legal team can help you understand where you’re exposed. But they won’t fix your navigation, rewrite your forms, or troubleshoot your ARIA labels.

    That’s where a hands-on partner makes the difference.

    What a Technical Accessibility Partner Does

    At 216digital, we’ve supported hundreds of websites—small shops and enterprise platforms alike. Our approach is practical, technical, and built around real-life use cases. We don’t just tell you what’s wrong—we fix it, explain it, and set you up to manage accessibility long-term.

    Here’s what we bring to the table:

    • Clear developer guidance tailored to your platform
    • Integrated testing and remediation that fits into your current workflow
    • Ongoing support and monitoring after the fixes are live

    It’s not about being perfect—it’s about building lasting accessibility habits. And having a partner who helps you stay on track.

    Accessibility Isn’t Obligation—It’s Opportunity

    It’s your chance to build a brand that’s genuinely inclusive, appealing to a wider audience and avoiding costly legal pitfalls. Automation tools alone won’t get you there, but custom accessibility audits, hands-on remediation, and proactive monitoring will.

    If you’re done guessing and ready to confidently say your site is accessible, reach out to us at 216digital. We’ll clearly show you where your site stands, guide you through practical improvements, and keep accessibility effortless and ongoing. Because ultimately, making your website accessible isn’t just smart—it’s the kind of thoughtful action your customers will notice and appreciate.

    Greg McNeil

    June 17, 2025
    Testing & Remediation
    Accessibility, Accessibility Remediation, Accessibility testing, automated testing, custom accessibility audits, Manual Testing, Web Accessibility, Web Accessibility Remediation, Website Accessibility

  • How to Conduct Accessibility User Testing

    You can pass every automated test and still fail your users. That’s the uncomfortable truth behind many accessibility initiatives. True accessibility goes far beyond technical compliance—it’s about how people actually experience your product. Accessibility user testing isn’t a last-minute box to check; it’s a powerful way to build digital experiences that work for everyone.

    In this article, we’ll walk you through how to conduct accessibility user testing in a way that’s respectful, strategic, and truly impactful. Whether you’re a UX professional, web developer, or product manager, you’ll leave with clear, practical guidance to take your testing process from good intentions to real results.

    What Automated and Manual Testing Miss

    Accessibility tools like Google Lighthouse and WAVE are fantastic for catching code-level issues—missing alt text, low contrast, missing labels. But that’s just the surface. These tools don’t understand user intent. They can’t tell if your focus order makes sense, or if a screen reader user can actually make sense of your modal flow.

    Manual testing helps fill some of those gaps. Keyboard-only navigation, zoom testing, and screen reader simulations can uncover a lot—especially when done by experienced testers. But even this falls short of the lived experience.

    Take a modal dialog as an example. You might trap focus correctly, label everything with ARIA, and pass every automated check. But in practice? A screen reader user may still struggle because the modal doesn’t announce in the expected order or re-focus correctly on close. That’s the kind of thing only accessibility user testing with real people can reveal.

    Why User Testing with People with Disabilities Is the Game-Changer

    No simulation can match the perspective of someone who uses assistive tech every day. People who rely on screen readers, switch devices, or voice navigation uncover friction and failure points that even seasoned accessibility professionals can overlook.

    Here’s the shift: stop thinking of users with disabilities as edge cases. They’re not. They’re part of your audience—your customers, students, patients, or users. Designing for them improves your product for everyone.

    Accessibility user testing isn’t just about catching bugs. It’s a critical feedback loop that improves usability, product-market fit, and even innovation. When you integrate it early and often, you don’t just “fix accessibility”—you build better experiences from the ground up.

    Planning Your Accessibility User Testing Program

    Define Clear Objectives

    Start with real-world tasks. Instead of running a general audit, design your tests around meaningful user journeys:

    • Is it possible for a blind user to complete a purchase from start to finish?
    • Someone with low dexterity—can they successfully submit your job application form?
    • And what about users with cognitive differences—can they easily locate your support content?

    Clear, task-based goals help you focus your sessions and gather actionable insights.

    Build a Representative Participant Pool

    Many teams fall into the trap of testing only with blind screen reader users. That’s important—but not enough.

    To make your testing inclusive:

    • Include participants with motor impairments, cognitive disabilities, low vision, and voice input users.
    • Recruit from diverse sources and advocacy organizations.
    • Pay your testers. Always. Accessibility user testing is specialized work and should never rely on free labor. Follow ethical compensation practices and provide flexible scheduling and support.

    Pre-Test Logistics and Respectful Setup

    Before the session, send a tech-check checklist to participants. This might include browser compatibility, assistive tech setup, and ensuring a quiet space.

    Also, ask about accommodations in advance:

    • Do they prefer screen sharing or phone interviews?
    • Do they need additional time?
    • Would they like the questions in advance?

    Offering flexible formats—remote, hybrid, or in-person—ensures participants can engage comfortably. Respect starts with planning.

    Running Meaningful and Inclusive Testing Sessions

    Session Structure That Works

    Start with a warm-up task or small talk to ease anxiety and build trust. Remember, this isn’t a test of the participant—it’s a test with them.

    Structure your session around a few focused tasks. Example:

    • “Please use the site to find and register for a webinar.”
    • “Try to contact customer support using your preferred method.”

    Observe closely—but don’t interrupt unless necessary. Let participants narrate their thought process if they’re comfortable. This gives you insight into confusion points, workaround strategies, and breakdowns in usability.

    Accessibility user testing is about listening. Often, the most valuable insights come not from what users can or can’t do, but from the effort it takes them to do it.

    Ask Thoughtful, Open-Ended Questions

    Instead of “Did that work for you?” try:

    • “How did that process feel?”
    • “What was easy or hard about that task?”
    • “Was there anything that surprised or confused you?”

    Create space for honest feedback, and resist the urge to jump in with fixes. Your goal is to understand, not defend.

    From Feedback to Action

    Once your accessibility user testing sessions are complete, consolidate your notes into themes. What barriers kept coming up? Were there recurring moments of friction?

    Tag issues by severity and impact. Some will be quick fixes—labeling buttons, adjusting tab order. Others may require bigger design shifts. Either way, track them in your product backlog and prioritize them alongside other critical bugs.

    Also, share findings with your team. Make video clips or quotes part of your sprint reviews or design critiques. Seeing real users struggle—or succeed—can be a powerful motivator for accessibility buy-in across your organization.

    Make It Part of Your Process

    Accessibility user testing isn’t a one-off effort. Integrate it into every major phase of development:

    • Early design prototypes
    • Beta versions before release
    • Major feature updates

    The earlier you involve users, the more you catch—and the less expensive it is to fix. Consider building an accessibility testing panel you can tap into regularly. Make it part of your QA cycle, not just a compliance afterthought.

    User-Tested, People-Approved

    Automated tools and manual audits are important—but they only take you so far. To build truly inclusive experiences, you need to go deeper. Accessibility user testing gives you something no tool ever will: real human insight.

    By listening to and designing with people with disabilities, you move from compliance to compassion. From checking boxes to opening doors. From good enough to genuinely excellent. And that’s not just better accessibility—it’s better UX, period.

    If you’re ready to elevate your accessibility strategy with meaningful user feedback, 216digital can help. Schedule an ADA briefing with our accessibility team to discuss how user testing fits into a comprehensive, long-term solution. Together, we’ll help you build experiences that work for everyone—starting now.

    Greg McNeil

    June 13, 2025
    Testing & Remediation, Uncategorized
    Accessibility testing, Manual Testing, User Experience, user testing, Users experience, Web Accessibility Remediation
1 2 3
Next Page

Find Out if Your Website is WCAG & ADA Compliant







    216digital Logo

    Our team is full of expert professionals in Web Accessibility Remediation, eCommerce Design & Development, and Marketing – ready to help you reach your goals and thrive in a competitive marketplace. 

    216 Digital, Inc. BBB Business Review

    Get in Touch

    2208 E Enterprise Pkwy
    Twinsburg, OH 44087
    216.505.4400
    info@216digital.com

    Support

    Support Desk
    Acceptable Use Policy
    Accessibility Policy
    Privacy Policy

    Web Accessibility

    Settlement & Risk Mitigation
    WCAG 2.1/2.2 AA Compliance
    Monitoring Service by a11y.Radar

    Development & Marketing

    eCommerce Development
    PPC Marketing
    Professional SEO

    About

    About Us
    Contact

    Copyright 2024 216digital. All Rights Reserved.