Website Accessibility Archives /Tag

Escape the Accessibility Audit Shopping Loop
You probably know the pattern.

A demand letter arrives, or leadership decides it is time to “do something” about accessibility. Your team sends out a few RFPs, collects quotes, and picks a vendor to run an accessibility audit. A long report lands in your inbox. There is a burst of activity… and then daily work takes over again.

Months later, a redesign launches, a new feature goes live, or a new legal threat appears—and you are right back where you started. New quotes. New confusion. New pressure.

That’s the accessibility audit shopping loop: chasing one-off audits that feel busy and expensive, but don’t actually create lasting accessibility or meaningful legal protection. It is not a sign that you are doing anything wrong. It’s a sign that the way our industry sells accessibility nudges you toward short-term reports rather than long-term results. You can absolutely break this pattern—but it requires rethinking what an “audit” is for, how you evaluate proposals, and how accessibility fits into your long-term digital strategy.

Why a One-Off Accessibility Audit Falls Short

An audit can be useful. It can show you where some of your biggest barriers are and help you start a serious conversation inside your organization. But when an accessibility audit is treated as a one-time project, it rarely delivers what people think they are buying.

1. A Snapshot In a Moving World

Your site isn’t still. New campaigns launch. Content changes. Forms get updated. Third-party tools are added. A report finished in March may be out of date by June.

If your whole plan is “we will fix this report, and then we are done,” you are treating accessibility like a static task. In reality, it behaves more like security or performance. It needs regular attention.

2. Reports Without a Real Path Forward

Many teams receive thick PDFs packed with screenshots and WCAG citations. On paper, it looks impressive. In practice, it can be hard to use.

Without clear priorities and practical examples, teams are left asking what to fix first, how long it will take, and who owns which changes. When those questions go unanswered, work pauses. Other projects win. Leadership starts to think accessibility is “too big” or “too costly,” when the real issue is that the report never turned into a plan.

3. Gaps In Scope That Leave Risk Behind

Some audits only look at a small set of pages. Others skip key journeys like checkout, registration, password reset, or account management. Some focus on desktop and treat mobile as optional. Many rely heavily on automated tools.

On the surface, it may seem like you “covered the site.” But important user journeys and assistive technology use can remain untested. That means real people can still run into serious barriers, even while you hold a report that says you made progress.

4. Little Connections To Real Users

When the work is driven only by checklists, it is easy to miss how people with disabilities actually move through your site.

A tool might say “Form field is labeled,” yet a screen reader user may still hear a confusing sequence of instructions. Keyboard users might tab through a page in a way that makes no sense. An audit that does not consider real user journeys and assistive technologies can help you pass more checks, but still leave key tasks painful or impossible.

How to Read an Accessibility Audit Proposal

Breaking the loop starts before you sign anything. The way you read proposals shapes what happens next. When a vendor sends a proposal for an accessibility audit, you should be able to see what they will look at, how they will test, and how your team will use the results.

1. Look For a Clear, Meaningful Scope

A strong proposal spells out which sites or apps are in scope, which user journeys will be tested from start to finish, which assistive technologies and browsers are included, and which standards they map findings to, such as WCAG 2.1 AA.

If all you see is “X pages” or “Y templates,” ask how they chose them and whether those paths match your highest-risk flows, like sign-up, checkout, or account settings.

2. Ask For Transparent Testing Methods

You do not need to be an expert to ask good questions. How do you combine automated tools with manual testing? Do you test with real assistive technologies, such as screen readers and magnifiers? How do you check keyboard access, focus order, and error handling? Do you ever test with people who use assistive technology every day?

You’re looking for a process that feels like real use, not just a tool report with a logo on top.

3. Focus On What An Accessibility Audit Actually Delivers

Do not stop at “You will receive a PDF.” Ask to see a sample. Look for a prioritized list of issues with clear severity levels, along with code or design examples that illustrate the problem and a better pattern. A simple remediation roadmap that points out where to begin—and options for retesting or spot-checks after fixes are in place—will help your team actually move from findings to fixes.

If the deliverables section is vague, your team may struggle to turn findings into action later.

4. Confirm Real, Relevant Expertise

Ask who will do the work and what experience they have. Helpful signs include familiarity with your tech stack or platform, experience in your industry or with similar products, and a mix of skills: auditing, engineering, design, and lived experience with disability.

You are choosing the judgment of people, not just the name on the proposal.

Using Each Audit on Purpose

The goal is not to stop buying audits. It is to stop buying them on autopilot.

Pressure to “get an audit” usually shows up for a reason: legal wants evidence of progress, leadership wants to reduce risk, or product teams need clearer direction. Those are all valid needs—but they do not all require the same kind of work.

Treat every new accessibility audit as a tool with a specific job. For example, you might use an audit to:
- Validate a major redesign before or just after launch.
- Take a focused look at a critical journey, like checkout or application submission.
- Test how well your design system or component library holds up in real use.
- Measure progress after a concentrated round of fixes.
When you frame an audit around a clear question—“What do we need to know right now?”—it becomes one step in a longer accessibility journey instead of the entire plan. It also makes it easier to set expectations: an audit can confirm risks, reveal patterns, and guide priorities, but it cannot, by itself, keep a changing product accessible over time.

Beyond the Accessibility Audit: Building Accessibility Into Everyday Work

To truly escape the loop, audits have to sit inside a larger approach, not stand alone.

1. Give Accessibility a Clear Home

Start with ownership. Someone needs clear responsibility for coordinating accessibility efforts, even if the hands-on work is shared. That anchor role keeps priorities from getting lost when other projects get loud.

2. Thread Accessibility Through Your Workflow

Accessibility should show up at predictable points in your lifecycle, not just at the end:
- Design and discovery: Bring in accessible patterns, color contrast, and interaction models early so you are not “fixing” basics right before launch.
- Development and QA: Add simple accessibility checks to your definition of done and test plans, so issues are caught while code is still fresh.
- Content and marketing: Give writers and editors straightforward guidance on headings, links, media, and documents so everyday updates stay aligned.
Reusable, vetted components and patterns make this easier. When your design system embeds strong semantics, keyboard behavior, and clear focus states, every new feature starts on a stronger footing.

3. Watch for Regressions Before Users Do

Light monitoring—through tools like a11y.Radar, spot checks, or both—helps you catch problems between deeper reviews. Instead of waiting for complaints or legal notices to reveal a broken flow, you get early signals and can respond on your own terms.

Over time, this turns accessibility from an emergency project into part of how you build and ship. The payoff is steady progress, fewer surprises, and better experiences for everyone who depends on your site.

Stepping Off the Accessibility Audit Treadmill

An audit still has a place in a healthy accessibility program. But it should not be the only move you make every time pressure rises.

When you choose vendors based on clear methods and useful deliverables, question the idea that a single report will “make you compliant,” and build accessibility into daily work, you move from a cycle of panic and paper to a steady, durable program.

At 216digital, we’re ready to help you transition from one-off accessibility audits to an ongoing, effective accessibility program. If you want to move beyond endless audit cycles and build accessibility into your digital products for good, contact us today to start your journey with expert support.
Greg McNeil

December 8, 2025

Testing & Remediation

Accessibility Audit, Accessibility testing, automated testing, manual audit, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
The When, Where & Why of Your Web Accessibility Audit
When your team discusses accessibility, the same questions come up: When should we audit? Where should we focus? Why prioritize accessibility amid so many competing demands?

Inside most organizations, it is not a lack of concern that slows things down. Designers, developers, product, and marketing all care about getting this right—but between deadlines, releases, and stakeholder requests, accessibility work often feels like something you will “get to” once things calm down. A web accessibility audit can either feel like one more demand on already stretched teams or like the moment things finally get some structure and direction.

The difference is how you approach it.

Used well, an audit is less about producing a thick report and more about answering a few practical questions: What should we look at first? Which issues really matter for real users and real risk? How do we apply what we learn to make better decisions release after release, rather than only reacting when something goes wrong?

What a Web Accessibility Audit Really Looks Like in Practice

At its simplest, an accessibility audit is a close look at your site, app, or digital product to identify barriers that prevent people with disabilities from using it. Most audits measure your experience against the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines—currently WCAG 2.2—at Levels A and AA. That gives everyone a shared frame of reference, from designers and engineers to legal and procurement.

But the most useful audits don’t feel like abstract standards exercises. They feel grounded in real use.

There is usually an automated pass to quickly identify common surface problems—missing alt text, color contrast issues, broken heading structures. Those tools are helpful, but they only see what they’re built to detect.

Deeper value comes from manual testing—a person navigates your experience with a keyboard only, uses a screen reader, and checks whether form errors, focus order, dialog behavior, and dynamic content make sense.

Sampling Your Product, Not Every Page

Because modern sites are big and complex, most teams don’t audit every URL. Instead, they focus on a representative sample:
- Core templates like homepage, category, product, content, and forms
- Reusable components like navigation, modals, accordions, and filters
- High-value journeys like sign-up, checkout, donation, or account management
What comes out the other side is not just a list of failures. A strong web accessibility audit gives you a clear view of what’s getting in the way, who it affects, and how to fix it in terms your team can actually act on. Ideally, it also gives product owners something they can realistically schedule—not just react to.

Why Web Accessibility Audits Are Taking Center Stage

Legal Pressure Meets Day-to-Day Reality

Even teams that have cared about accessibility for years are feeling the pressure sharpen. Expectations are rising—sometimes through regulation, sometimes through procurement language, and sometimes simply through customer awareness.

Public-sector organizations now have firm WCAG-based timelines attached to their digital properties. In Europe, the European Accessibility Act is putting real dates on the calendar for accessible products and services. And even private companies not directly covered by those laws are seeing accessibility questions appear more frequently in RFPs, vendor questionnaires, and contract negotiations.

A web accessibility audit changes those conversations. Instead of answering with intent and aspiration, you can answer with evidence: what has been tested, what has been found, and what is actively being improved.

The Upside: UX, SEO, and Trust

There is also a quieter upside that often matters just as much. Most accessibility improvements make experiences smoother for everyone. Cleaner structure, clearer labels, stronger focus behavior—these things reduce friction across the board. And the same semantic foundations that help screen readers also help search engines understand your content.

For leadership teams, that combination—risk awareness, better experience, and brand credibility—is hard to ignore.

Deciding Where to Look First

One of the most overlooked parts of an audit is simply deciding where to begin. Not every surface deserves the same level of scrutiny on day one.

Most teams start with the places where users and business meet:
- Public marketing and product sites
- Support centers and documentation
- Logged-in dashboards and portals used by customers or employees
Don’t Forget Documents, Media, and Third Parties

From there, the scope often widens.

Documents—PDFs, slide decks, forms, contracts—frequently play a bigger role in user journeys than teams expect. Video and audio content bring their own requirements around captions, transcripts, and controls. Embedded third-party tools like chat widgets, schedulers, and payment forms can introduce barriers your users will still associate with you, regardless of who built the tool.

For organizations with design systems or shared component libraries, testing those patterns directly can be highly efficient. Fixing one modal or form pattern can improve accessibility across many screens.

A thoughtful web accessibility audit is less about testing “everything” and more about testing the right things with intention.

Getting the Timing Right

The most effective audits tend to feel planned, not reactive.

In an ideal world, audits happen before something big goes live: a new site, a redesign, a platform migration, a rebrand. When treated like performance or security testing, accessibility becomes part of the launch checklist rather than a post-launch surprise.

In reality, many audits happen shortly after launch. And that can still be a strong move. While the project context is fresh and momentum is high, teams can identify hot spots, prioritize fixes, and show clear forward motion.

For organizations with continuous release cycles, smaller-scoped audits tied to major features often work better than one giant annual review. For more traditional release schedules, annual or biannual audits create a steady rhythm—much like a regular security review.

Moments That Should Trigger a Fresh Look

There are also moments that naturally raise the stakes: an accessibility complaint, a new market with stricter rules, a framework upgrade, the rollout of a new third-party tool that touches checkout or login. Those moments often turn a “someday” audit into a “now” conversation.

The difference between scrambling and steering, in many cases, is whether your web accessibility audit was already part of the plan.

What Teams Experience During a Web Accessibility Audit

For teams that haven’t gone through one before, audits can feel intimidating. In reality, the strongest ones feel collaborative.

The audit process usually starts with discovery and scoping. Teams first discuss goals, constraints, timelines, typical traffic patterns, and the most important user experiences. Next, the team selects a representative sample based on this input. This sample guides automated and manual testing, ensuring the work is rooted in actual user scenarios.

Once the sample is chosen, automated testing surfaces patterns and repetition, highlighting common accessibility problems. Manual evaluation follows: evaluators review how keyboard navigation, screen readers, error handling, and dynamic updates perform on the selected samples. This approach grounds the audit in real user interaction.

From Findings to a Shared Roadmap

The real shift happens during triage and prioritization. Instead of a flat list of issues, findings are grouped by severity, frequency, and risk. Teams start to see not just what’s broken, but where the biggest leverage lives.

By the time reporting and handoff arrive, the best audits have already sparked shared understanding. The audit becomes not just a document, but a reference point for smarter decision-making.

Who Should Lead the Work

Many organizations choose an external partner for their first full audit. That outside perspective helps avoid blind spots, reduces the learning curve around WCAG and assistive technologies, and carries added weight in legal and procurement settings.

At the same time, internal teams remain central. Designers, developers, content authors, and QA are the ones who turn findings into reality—into backlog items, component updates, and content standards that actually stick.

Over time, the healthiest model is a blend: external audits for baseline and validation, internal ownership for day-to-day integration. Accessibility stops living in a report and starts living in the workflow.

From One Audit to an Ongoing Practice

A single web accessibility audit is not the destination; it is the baseline.

You can use that baseline to:
- Spot systemic issues (navigation patterns, color systems, form models)
- Prioritize foundational fixes that unlock better experiences across the board.
- Update your design system, component library, and content standards so improvements stick.
From there, you connect audits to training and process change. Short, focused training sessions built around your actual findings land better than generic guidelines. Lightweight monitoring—linters, CI checks, and targeted automated scans—helps catch regressions early.

The long-term shift is simple but powerful: instead of asking, “Are we accessible yet?” you begin asking, “How are we improving accessibility in this release?”

Progress, not perfection, becomes the measure.

Turning When, Where, and Why Into a Real Next Step

For many teams, accessibility feels important but amorphous. An audit turns it into something concrete:
- When it becomes tied to real releases and change moments
- Where becomes focused on the experiences that matter most
- Why becomes grounded in user trust, product quality, and organizational risk—not just compliance
And this is exactly where teams often ask for support. Not because they lack commitment—but because they want help shaping the work to fit real constraints.

At 216digital, we work with organizations every day to right-size their web accessibility audit strategy—scoping what matters most, timing it with roadmaps, and connecting findings to sustainable improvements rather than one-off fixes.

If you want a low-pressure way to start that conversation, scheduling an ADA briefing with 216digital is often the easiest first step. It gives you space to talk through upcoming launches, regulatory exposure, team capacity, and what kind of audit approach actually makes sense right now.

Accessibility is a long game. You do not have to untangle the “when, where, and why” on your own.
Greg McNeil

November 26, 2025

Testing & Remediation

Accessibility Audit, custom accessibility audits, manual audit, WCAG, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
Accessible WooCommerce Themes: Top Picks & What to Look For
When you pick a WooCommerce theme, you are not just choosing a layout. You are choosing how easy your store is to navigate, how clearly information is announced, and how much work it will take to keep things compliant over time. If you’re comparing accessible WooCommerce themes, the real question is not “Which one looks nicest?” but “Which one gives my customers the smoothest, most predictable path from homepage to checkout?”

Many teams choose under pressure: a redesign, a migration, or a branding push. It’s tempting to grab the first nice demo and plan to fix accessibility later. In practice, this creates more rework, more risk, and more frustration for users who rely on assistive technology.

You can quickly bring accessibility into your theme decision. Add structure, make targeted checks, and know your priorities to move forward with confidence.

Why Your Theme Choice Shapes More Than Just Design

A WooCommerce theme controls more than colors and fonts. It ships with its own templates, layout decisions, and code patterns. That means it shapes:
- How screen readers move through your pages
- What paths do keyboard users take to reach menus, filters, and checkout?
- How your store behaves on small screens and at high zoom
- How easy it is to keep things maintainable as you grow
Starting from one of the stronger accessible WooCommerce themes puts you ahead in several ways. You spend less time fixing basic issues, see fewer regressions when plugins update, and send a clear signal to customers that your store is built for them—not just for aesthetics. It can also reduce legal risk, because you are closer to what laws and guidelines expect when they reference the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Accessibility is not only an ethical choice; it is a business one. Sites that are easier to use convert better, generate fewer support tickets, and are less likely to be named in a lawsuit. For many teams, “accessible by default” is simply a smarter way to protect brand, revenue, and reputation simultaneously.

What “Accessible” Really Means in Practice

Guidelines like WCAG exist to turn a big idea—“everyone should be able to use the web”—into concrete checks. Over the years, WCAG has evolved (2.0, 2.1, 2.2), and most legal frameworks point to at least Level AA as the baseline. Level AAA is more stringent and often not practical for full ecommerce flows, so most teams aim for AA and build from there.

You do not have to memorize every success criterion, but it helps to know what a theme should support. Think of it through four simple lenses:
- Perceivable: Text has strong contrast, scales well, and is not buried in images. Important images have alt text. Links are descriptive rather than repeating “Learn more” 10 times, so people know where they are going.
- Operable: Menus, filters, dialogs, sliders, and forms work with a keyboard alone. Focus is always visible. Nothing traps people in a pop-up, mini-cart, or off-screen menu. Moving content can be paused or controlled instead of constantly sliding past.
- Understandable: Labels and instructions are clear. Errors explain what went wrong and how to fix it. Navigation and headings follow predictable patterns from page to page, so shoppers do not have to constantly re-learn how your site works.
- Robust: The HTML uses proper headings, landmarks, and controls. ARIA is applied thoughtfully, not sprinkled everywhere. The store works with screen readers, zoom, and narrow viewports, and does not fall apart when the browser or assistive tech changes.
If a theme gives you a solid start on all four, you are in a much better place than a design-first theme that just happens to “look clean.”

Common Problems You’ll See When You Test Themes

One thing that often surprises teams: many themes that market themselves as “accessible” still have rough edges. Even themes promoted as accessible WooCommerce themes can struggle with basics when you look beyond the promo page.

The most frequent trouble spots include:
- Weak or missing keyboard navigation
  No skip links, no focus outline, menus that cannot be opened with a keyboard, or dropdowns that open on hover only. Sometimes you can tab into a menu but never back out cleanly.
- Code issues behind the scenes
  Missing labels, misused landmarks, custom controls built from generic <div> elements, or error messages that never get announced. Cart updates might happen visually but remain invisible to screen readers.
- Design choices that work visually, but not accessibly
  Low-contrast buttons on hero images, very small text, or links that are only distinguished by color. On a large monitor, these might look elegant; on a smaller laptop or with aging eyesight, they become a barrier.
- E-commerce-specific gaps
  Product ratings hidden from assistive tech, price filters that only work with a mouse, or variation selectors that cannot be reached with the keyboard. Sometimes a “quick view” or slide-out cart steals focus and never gives it back.
Seeing one of these issues is not a reason to abandon a theme right away. Seeing many of them together usually indicates that your time is better spent on a different starting point.

WooCommerce Themes With Better Built-In Accessibility

No theme is perfect out of the box, but some give you a better baseline than others. Below are themes that often get teams closer than most other accessible WooCommerce themes right out of the box. You should still test any version you plan to use, along with your plugin stack, but these tend to show stronger intent.

Storefront

Built by the WooCommerce team, Storefront is deliberately simple and stable. It includes skip links, workable keyboard navigation, and a product-focused layout. You will likely want to layer on your own design system, but the structural choices are solid, which is exactly what you want from a base theme.

Neve

Neve balances flexibility with fairly clean markup. It usually includes proper landmarks, readable typography, and skip-to-content links. When you change colors or layouts, re-run contrast checks and re-test menus and headers—especially any mega menus or sticky headers you introduce.

Responsive

Responsive tends to perform well with responsive layouts, spacing, and contrast-friendly presets. Skip links and keyboard navigation are present, though imported template kits should always be checked individually. Some ready-made layouts might be less robust than the core theme, so treat them as starting points, not guaranteed safe patterns.

OceanWP

Popular for performance and options, OceanWP supports skip links and keyboard-friendly dropdowns. Focus on visibility and contrast, as they can vary depending on configuration. Harden them early in your build and keep a close eye on badges, secondary buttons, and sale labels.

Eimear and Monument Valley

Eimear and Monument Valley are known for prioritizing accessibility in their design. Multiple skip links, structured navigation, and responsive templates are common strengths. Dynamic pieces like filters, accordions, or cart notices still need real-world testing, but you are starting from a posture that takes accessibility more seriously than most.

The point of a shortlist is not to promise perfection; it is to avoid starting from a theme that fights you at every turn.

How to Vet a Theme’s Accessibility Quickly

Once you have a few candidates, you can move beyond marketing pages and see how each one behaves in practice. Use this checklist when you are evaluating accessible WooCommerce themes in the wild:

Do a Full Keyboard Tour

From the browser’s address bar, tab through the header, navigation, product grid, product detail page, cart, and checkout. Make sure you can see focus at every step and that ESC closes any open menu or modal. If you lose track of focus or end up “stuck” in an element, note it as a real risk.

Check Headings and Landmarks

Look for one main heading per page and a logical order beneath it. Confirm that regions like navigation, main content, and footer are clearly defined and not duplicated in confusing ways. This is what screen reader users rely on to jump around the page.

Test Forms and Messages

Add something to the cart. Trigger a form error. Apply a coupon. Ask: Is the feedback clear both visually and for screen readers? Does anything important happen silently? Error messages that only appear as red text, with no programmatic link to the field, are a common pattern to flag.

Zoom and Shrink

View the site at 200% zoom and at a narrow mobile width. Nothing important should overlap, spill off-screen, or become unreachable. Pay special attention to sticky headers, floating chat widgets, and fixed promos that can hide content when zoomed.

You can supplement this with quick automated checks (for example, running a browser extension or audit tool against the demo), but those should confirm your observations—not replace hands-on testing. If a theme passes this quick pass with only small issues, it is usually worth deeper evaluation.

Fixing Gaps When Your Theme Is “Almost There”

In most cases, you will end up choosing a theme that is “good, but not perfect.” That is normal. Once you have picked one of the more accessible WooCommerce themes, you will almost always still find gaps during real testing.

A practical way to tighten things up:
- Start with built-in controls.
  Use the theme’s and Site Editor’s options for color, typography, and spacing to fix contrast and legibility problems. This is usually the fastest way to bring large pieces of the site into alignment.
- Strengthen focus
  Add CSS to make focus rings thick, high-contrast, and consistent across all interactive elements. If you can see it clearly from a distance, a customer is far less likely to get lost.
- Swap custom elements for native ones.
  Replace “clickable divs” with actual buttons or links. Use real form fields for filters and variations. Native elements carry a lot of built-in accessibility that you do not have to re-create from scratch.
- Improve complex widgets
  For menus, tabs, accordions, and sliders, follow established patterns and then test with a keyboard and a screen reader. Focus moves, aria-expanded states, and visible labels all need to line up.
- Keep your plugin list lean.
  Every extra plugin is another chance to introduce inaccessible markup or conflicting scripts. Audit your plugin stack and remove anything you are not actively using.
When you identify gaps, prioritize fixes based on where money moves: product lists, product details, cart, and checkout first. Document the patterns you fix and treat them as reusable building blocks. That prevents the same problems from creeping back in later.

How to Maintain Accessibility After Launch

Even a well-built store can drift out of alignment over time. New campaigns, landing pages, and plugins all add risk. Treat accessible WooCommerce themes as a foundation, not a finish line.

Simple habits help:
- Run quick keyboard checks after theme or plugin updates.
- Keep short, clear guidelines for alt text, link text, and headings
- Schedule light accessibility spot checks before major campaigns
- Offer small refreshers for anyone who creates or edits content.
- Add a short accessibility checklist to your release process so changes get a quick sanity check before going live.
These steps do not require a full rebuild, but they do keep your store usable and reduce surprises.

Your Theme Is the Start—Accessibility Is Ongoing

Choosing a WooCommerce theme is one of the earliest—and most important—accessibility decisions you make. The right foundation can support better customer experiences, smoother growth, and lower risk. The wrong one can lock you into constant workarounds.

You do not have to solve every detail up front, but you can put your store on a stronger path by choosing a theme with accessibility in mind, testing it as a real customer would, and making small, steady improvements as you go.

If you would like a second set of expert eyes on your shortlist—or a clear picture of how your current theme holds up—schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. We will review real storefront flows, call out the highest-impact fixes, and map out a practical path toward WCAG-aligned accessibility and better conversions.
Greg McNeil

November 25, 2025

Legal Compliance, Web Accessibility Remediation

Web Accessibility, web developers, web development, Website Accessibility, WooCommerce, WooCommerce themes, WordPress
What Is Your ADA Website Risk?
You’ve likely read a headline about an ADA website lawsuit and instantly worried about your own site.

You know these lawsuits are out there. You’ve heard about demand letters landing out of nowhere. But how close is that risk to your website? Is your site a likely target… or are you losing sleep over something you don’t have a clear way to measure?

A lot of people who work on websites sit in that same uneasy space:
- Worried a letter will show up right before a busy season or launch
- Hearing mixed messages about what the ADA expects online
- Unsure whether they’re focusing on the right problems—or missing something big
Meanwhile, the numbers keep climbing. Digital accessibility lawsuits reached 4,187 cases in 2024. Current tracking puts 2025 on pace for roughly 4,975 cases—a jump of about 20%. These cases are not limited to major national brands. Retailers, hospitality, professional services, and local businesses of all sizes are in the mix.

From our perspective as a team at 216digital, the hardest part for most teams is not a lack of care. It’s the uncertainty. It is difficult to plan when you don’t know your website’s risk of being targeted. That’s the gap the ADA Website Risk Profile is designed to address: giving website teams something more solid than instinct to work from.

Making Sense of ADA Website Risk in a Shifting Landscape

Part of that uncertainty comes from the legal “grey area” around how courts treat websites.

A commonly cited example is Gil v. Winn-Dixie, in which a blind customer challenged a grocery chain because he could not use its website with a screen reader. Different courts treated the website differently and debated whether it counted as a “place of public accommodation” under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). That back-and-forth created confusion and left room for aggressive litigation strategies. The end result: more questions than clear direction.

However, while courts work through definitions, plaintiffs’ firms are not waiting. Specialized firms and recurring “tester” plaintiffs look for websites with obvious barriers. In some jurisdictions, tester standing is still recognized, and serial plaintiffs have filed hundreds or even thousands of cases over the last decade.

Many organizations don’t think seriously about legal exposure until a demand letter shows up—often on a Friday afternoon when the team is already stretched thin. By that point, choices narrow and the pressure rises.

How One Client’s Threat Changed Our Approach

Our risk work started with one very real scare.

In 2018, a long-time client contacted us after receiving an ADA noncompliance threat. This was an organization with a strong culture of inclusion and a site already built with accessibility in mind. They were trying to do the right thing. The letter still came.

For our CEO, Greg McNeil, it was personal. It was about protecting a client who genuinely cared about access and still felt blindsided. That moment was the beginning of an effort to understand ADA website risk not as an abstract idea, but as something that shows up in real inboxes and real budgets.

Over the years that followed, our team at 216digital:
- Reviewed and analyzed nearly 25,000 digital ADA lawsuits
- Tracked recurring red flags and the specific issues named in complaints
- Studied how a small cluster of law firms and repeat plaintiffs select targets
- Completed close to 1,000 remediation and response projects, from full-site WCAG work to urgent post–demand letter help
That combination of pattern analysis and hands-on remediation is the foundation of the assessment our team offers today.

What the ADA Website Risk Profile Actually Is

The ADA Website Risk Profile is a complimentary, structured assessment that estimates the relative likelihood that a website will attract an ADA noncompliance claim, based on known lawsuit patterns.

It is focused on ADA website risk—the chance of being targeted—rather than offering only a general snapshot of accessibility health.

In practice, the assessment:
- Evaluates technical and experiential issues that plaintiffs’ firms tend to flag
- Uses patterns drawn from thousands of digital ADA lawsuits
- Places a website into a relative risk level, such as lower, moderate, or higher
- Connects the findings to practical, prioritized recommendations
It does not replace a full Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) audit or comprehensive accessibility testing, and it is not legal advice or a guarantee that a lawsuit will never arrive. Instead, it gives teams a realistic, pattern-informed view of how their site may look through the lens of current enforcement behavior.

How the Assessment Works, Step By Step

The process is designed to be understandable to people who work in strategy, design, development, and content—not just legal teams or accessibility specialists.

Step 1: Baseline Review of Key Areas

We start with a focused look at core templates and flows: the home page, key product or service pages, important forms, and journeys like checkout, booking, or account creation. This is not a line-by-line code audit. It mirrors the paths that testers and law firms usually follow when seeking barriers.

Step 2: Mapping Findings to Known Red Flags

Next, we map what we find against patterns that show up in complaints, including:
- Common WCAG failures that are often cited in filings
- Structural and UX issues that tend to raise attention, such as broken flows for keyboard or screen reader users
- Contextual factors like industry, site complexity, heavy use of media, and certain third-party tools
Step 3: Assigning a Relative Risk Level

Using an internal database of past cases and ongoing tracking, we place the website into a relative risk level. The goal is not to label the site as “good” or “bad.” Instead, the aim is to show how it compares to others that have been targeted recently. This step is led by humans: our accessibility specialists and risk analysts review the findings together so the result reflects both technical reality and lawsuit behavior.

Step 4: Turning Findings Into a Plan

Finally, we translate the assessment into a clear set of next steps. These include immediate “must-fix” items that create a strong litigation hook. Medium-term improvements support both accessibility and user experience. Longer-term considerations can be folded into future redesigns or platform changes.

What You Walk Away With

The goal is not to hand over a dense document that no one reads. It is to support better decisions.

First, there is a clear picture of where the site stands. Your ADA website risk level is explained in clear, practical language with phrases like, “Right now, your site looks a lot like others that have been targeted in the last two years,” or, “You are in a comparatively lower-risk group, with a handful of high-impact fixes to address.” That kind of framing can help you talk about risk with both leaders and technical teams.

You also receive targeted recommendations ranked by impact:
- A short list of urgent issues most likely to catch a plaintiff’s eye
- A queue of improvements that support accessibility, usability, and risk reduction at the same time
- Notes about third-party components—overlays, widgets, or plugins—that may be raising your exposure
Equally important, there is time to talk through the results. Teams can review their assessment with our analysts, ask why certain items matter more than others, discuss constraints, and determine what is realistic for the next sprint or quarter. The aim is to move from general worry to a manageable set of priorities.

Why This Matters Beyond “Avoiding a Lawsuit”

It is easy to think about ADA website risk only in terms of avoiding a demand letter, but that view is too narrow.

Fixing barriers usually improves the experience for everyone—customers with disabilities, older users, and people on mobile devices or slower connections. It often reduces friction in key journeys, lowers support volume, and strengthens trust in your brand.

There is also a sharp difference between preparing and reacting. When a team reacts to a lawsuit, costs can include legal fees, settlements in the tens of thousands of dollars, and significant time pulled away from planned work. Preparing early with a clear view of risk tends to be calmer and more deliberate. It is also easier to fold into normal planning.

Accessibility sits alongside privacy, security, and performance as a core part of website governance. Once you understand your ADA website risk, it becomes easier to decide how it fits into the wider risk picture.

How the Risk Profile Fits Into Your Longer-Term Strategy

For many organizations, the assessment is the beginning, not the end.

A realistic path often looks like this: complete the complimentary assessment, fix the highest-risk issues, move into deeper testing of core user flows and templates, and add monitoring so new content and features do not reintroduce old problems.

We know most teams are balancing product roadmaps, design refreshes, and seasonal campaigns. Our aim is to help you prioritize, not to hand you an impossible to-do list. Your ADA Website Risk Profile becomes one of the tools you use to make calmer, smarter decisions with the resources you already have.

Whether you are planning a redesign or simply trying to get through your next busy season, a clear view of risk makes it easier to focus on what matters most.

What to Do Next

Here is the short version. ADA website lawsuits are not slowing down. The legal standards can be messy, but plaintiffs’ behavior follows patterns—and those patterns can be studied. Our team at 216digital has spent years analyzing those patterns and working with organizations on hundreds of remediation and response projects. The ADA Website Risk Profile turns that experience into a practical, complimentary assessment your team can actually use.

If you help guide a website and are concerned about ADA website risk, two simple steps can move you forward:
1. Request an ADA Website Risk Profile to get a clear snapshot of your site’s status.
2. Schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital to talk through what those results mean for your roadmap, budget, and long-term accessibility goals.
The briefing is a low-pressure chance to ask questions about risk, WCAG, lawsuit trends, and practical trade-offs—before a demand letter forces those decisions on you. Accessibility and legal risk do not have to be overwhelming. With a clear assessment, a focused plan, and an experienced partner walking alongside you, the work becomes manageable and genuinely achievable.
Greg McNeil

November 24, 2025

Testing & Remediation

ADA, ADA Compliance, ADA Lawsuit, risk mitigation, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
Accessible 404 Page: Turn Errors Into Wins

You click a link with a clear goal in mind and, instead of the content you expect, you hit a 404 page. For a second or two, you wonder whether you mistyped the URL, the site is broken, or if the content has disappeared. In that short pause, trust gets shaky. This is also where web accessibility and UX come together in a very real way: either the page leaves people stuck, or it gently helps them move forward.

That “not found” state is often seen as a throwaway screen, something the server shows when nothing else fits. With a bit of planning, this moment can be a calm, honest checkpoint. It explains what happened, offers clear next steps, and reassures people they’re still in the right place.

In the sections ahead, we will unpack what a 404 really is, how to frame it as a recovery rather than a failure, which inclusive design patterns matter most, and how architecture and analytics can support that work. By building this foundation, we can see how each layer—technical, experiential, and strategic—interacts to create an error response that turns an obstacle into a small signal of care that feels intentional, helpful, and human.

What a 404 Really Is — and Why It Happens

At the technical level, a 404 response is straightforward: the server looked at the requested URL and could not find a matching resource. That might be because content moved, a slug changed during a redesign, a redirect rule was missed, or the link was simply typed incorrectly.

The reality on most teams is a little more complicated. Content is added and removed over the years. Campaign landing pages go live for a season and then vanish. Migrations reshuffle URL patterns. Old PDFs and email templates keep sending people to paths that no longer exist. Over time, these small changes add up to a steady stream of “not found” visits.

Each of these visits is more than a missing document. It is a broken step in a user journey. Someone who trusted your link now has to decide whether to keep going, try again, or leave. Search engines see this pattern too: a cluster of broken internal links or confusing responses can send negative signals over time.

Treating that view as a recovery screen changes how you design. Instead of thinking, “The request failed,” you start asking, “How do we help this person take a meaningful next step?” This shift leads directly into the principles that guide effective 404 experiences.

Principles Before Pixels: A High-Performing 404 page Experience

Before you sketch a layout or write a clever line, it helps to agree on a few guiding ideas.

1. Accessibility is Not Optional

If parts of your experience are already hard to use, a broken link makes things worse. Folding the 404 template into your larger accessibility strategy ensures that the same care you give your main flows also applies in edge cases.

2. Clarity First, Personality Second

A bit of humor can soften the moment, but only after the page explains what went wrong and what the user can do now. Plain language always wins in high-friction states.

3.Stay On-brand

The 404 view should reuse the same typography, color system, and navigation patterns as the rest of the site. That continuity tells people they are still inside a trusted environment, even though something went wrong.

4. Focus On Recovery, Not Apology

A short, human message is important, but the screen’s real job is to provide useful paths forward and to gather enough data that you can keep improving the template over time.

Designing with these principles in mind sets you up to turn the 404 view into a small but meaningful part of the overall experience instead of a forgotten corner. Now, let’s look at the specific accessibility must-haves that support such inclusive error states.

Accessibility Must-Haves for an Accessible 404 page

When someone lands on an error view, they are already a little off-balance. The job of an accessible 404 page is simple: make it clear what happened, make it easy to recover, and make sure that experience works for more than one way of browsing. This is where UX and web accessibility meet in a very practical way.

A Clear Statement of What Happened

Start with a direct, plain-language heading that names the situation: “Page not found” or “We can’t find that page.” The short text that follows should explain, in one or two sentences, what that means and what the person can do next. No jargon. No blame. Just context and next steps.

A Layout That Still Feels Like “Your” Site

Even in an error state, users should feel grounded. Keep the same basic frame as the rest of your site—header, footer, typography, and overall rhythm. Familiar structure helps people using assistive tech or high zoom recognise that they have not been dropped somewhere unsafe or unrelated.

Recovery Paths That Are Easy to Spot and Use

The main routes off the page—a primary button, a search field, a small set of helpful links—should be visible without hunting and usable for people who navigate in different ways. That means clear labels, sensible tab order, and enough spacing that links and buttons are easy to pick out at a glance.

Text and Visuals That Hold Up Under Strain

Treat this template as a first-class reading experience. Body copy should be large enough, well spaced, and set against backgrounds with solid contrast. Any illustrations should support the message, not compete with it. If the visuals are just there for tone, they should be easy to ignore for anyone focused on getting back on track.

A Moment That Stays Stable, Not Jumpy

When someone reaches your 404 page, they need a beat to understand where they are and decide what to do. Avoid sudden auto-redirects or timed jumps away from the screen. A stable state is kinder to screen-reader users, keyboard users, and anyone who simply reads at a different pace—and it aligns with the spirit of web accessibility as a whole.

Page Anatomy: What to Include on Your 404 page

Once the foundation is set, you can start thinking about the screen’s anatomy.

Start with a headline and a brief empathy line. Something like, “We can’t find that page. Let’s get you back to something useful,” is honest and calm. It acknowledges the break without blaming the user or hiding behind technical jargon.

Next, add primary recovery paths. Place a clear button to your home page or a key hub to make resetting easy. A search field gives control to people who know what they seek. Short lists of curated links—popular sections, current campaigns, most-read articles—offer quick options if visitors want to explore.

Consider including a small, accessible feedback mechanism, such as a link that says, “Tell us if this link is broken.” When wired into your issue-tracking or analytics layer, this can reveal patterns that automation alone might miss.

Visually, keep the layout simple and open. Maintain your main header and footer so orientation is never in doubt. If the user came from a specific area, such as “/blog/” or “/support/,” you can surface related links to those sections to respect their original intent. In every case, ask whether the design makes it obvious what to do next.

Under the Hood: Technical Details That Support the Experience

The best copy and layout will fall short if the underlying implementation is weak. Your 404 page should be backed by correct HTTP status codes so search engines and monitoring tools know what is happening. For permanently removed content, a 410 status may make more sense than a 404, but the visual template can remain the same.

In client-side apps, routing logic needs extra care. When a user visits an unknown path, your router should render the error template and, when possible, coordinate with the server so that crawlers also receive the correct signal. Focus management, skip links, and semantic markup should be tested together so that the experience holds up for people using assistive technology. These technical details are small, but they add up to better web accessibility in the moments when users most need guidance.

Caching and performance matter here as well. Configure your CDN so error responses are cached sensibly, and ensure the template itself loads quickly with minimal heavy scripting. People are already dealing with a disruption; they should not have to wait for the recovery tools to appear.

Do not forget metadata. A clear title like “404 – Page not found” and well-structured meta tags make the state easier to recognise in analytics dashboards and open tabs. If your site serves multiple languages or regions, localise the copy and the key links so the experience feels considered, not generic.

Analytics, Monitoring, and Continuous Cleanup

A recovery view is not “done” once it ships. Logging and analytics should tell you how often people hit it, which paths send them there, and what they do next. Over time, this reveals where your architecture is working well and where it is quietly letting visitors down.

Simple dashboards can highlight the most common missing URLs, the internal pages that generate the most errors, and the CTAs that lead to successful recovery versus quick exits. You can even test variations of copy or link groupings to see which version helps more journeys continue.

Seen this way, the 404 page becomes a kind of listening post. It shows you where expectations and reality do not match—and gives you a place to respond with better structure, clearer navigation, and stronger web accessibility patterns.

Governance: Building Habits That Reduce Future 404s

Preventing needless errors is a shared responsibility. When content owners remove or rename pages, they should follow a simple checklist: update internal links, add redirects where appropriate, and document what has changed. Marketing teams should plan end-of-life steps for campaign URLs instead of letting them quietly break. Developers can integrate link checking into CI to catch internal broken links before launch.

For design and UX teams, the error view should live inside the design system as a standard template with clear accessibility criteria. During QA, it should receive the same level of attention as a key landing page: keyboard-only walkthroughs, high-zoom checks, screen-reader tests, and mobile scenarios. These habits turn one fragile corner of the site into a dependable part of your service.

Education is the final layer. When teams see the 404 state not as a failure but as a recoverable moment, they are more likely to invest in it. When they understand that good handling here is part of web accessibility, not just “nice to have” polish, they will keep it in scope during redesigns and migrations instead of leaving it behind.

Not All Wrong Turns Are Dead Ends

A missing resource will always create a small moment of friction, but what happens next is up to you. Treated with care, a well-designed 404 page becomes proof of how you handle the unexpected: calmly, clearly, and with respect for every visitor’s needs.

When people land on a thoughtful, well-structured error template, they stay oriented, feel supported, and are more likely to continue their journey with your brand. You protect trust, learn from the patterns that brought them there, and strengthen both your UX and your web accessibility at the same time.

If you would like a fresh perspective on how your own error and recovery states are working for users, the team at 216digital would be glad to help. An ADA briefing can surface quick wins, highlight deeper structural opportunities, and give your teams practical, actionable next steps.

The next time someone takes a wrong turn on your site, they will not just see a dead end. They will see a clear map forward—and a quiet signal that someone on the other side of the screen has their back.

Greg McNeil

November 21, 2025

How-to Guides

404 page, How-to, Web Accessibility, web developers, web development, 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
ADA Lawsuits: Can You Be Sued Again During Remediation?
When a business gets pulled into ADA lawsuits over its website, the first instinct is usually simple: “Fix it, fast.” Very quickly, though, another question creeps in:

If we’re already working on remediation, can we still be sued again?

The uncomfortable answer is yes. Separate people—or advocacy groups—can still bring their own claims while you’re actively fixing issues. The ADA is a public civil rights law, and it doesn’t include a universal “grace period” that pauses legal exposure once remediation begins.

That can feel discouraging, especially when your team is putting in real effort and genuinely wants to do the right thing. But this isn’t about punishing good intentions. At its core, the law is about access—whether people with disabilities can truly use your site to browse, book, buy, and get support without barriers.

The good news is that you’re not stuck. Once you understand how courts look at “remediation in progress,” you can make clearer decisions, reduce risk, and turn a stressful situation into a structured, manageable plan.

This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Always work with qualified legal counsel on your specific situation.

Now, let’s take a quick step back and look at how the ADA applies to websites in the first place—because that context matters when you’re facing ongoing legal pressure.

ADA, Websites, & Why Compliance Isn’t a One-Time Box To Check

Before diving further into repeat claims, it helps to ground the conversation in how the law actually views digital experiences.

Quick Refresher: ADA And Digital Spaces

Under ADA Title III (and sometimes Title II), many businesses qualify as “places of public accommodation.” Today, websites and apps serve as the digital front door to those spaces.

When a website’s design prevents a person with a disability from completing basic tasks—such as checking out, booking a service, logging in, or accessing essential information—the law treats that breakdown as a genuine access barrier. Courts and the U.S. Department of Justice have repeatedly compared inaccessible websites to physical locations with no ramp or blocked entrances.

The Practical Standard: WCAG As The Benchmark

The ADA itself does not spell out one specific technical standard for web accessibility. In practice, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) —most often WCAG 2.1 Level AA—has become the widely accepted benchmark.

When teams say a site is “compliant,” they’re typically referring to two things:
- The site substantially aligns with WCAG, and
- Users can complete core journeys—searching, browsing, signing in, purchasing, contacting support, and accessing their accounts—without major barriers.
Why Websites Are Vulnerable To Repeated Claims

Here’s where things get especially tricky: websites are never truly “finished.”

Marketing launches new campaigns. Developers add plugins and redesign layouts. Content teams upload images, PDFs, and promotional banners. Each update creates a fresh opportunity for accessibility gaps, even after earlier fixes.

A missing alt tag here, a mislabeled button there, a keyboard trap inside a modal—small changes can quietly reopen doors that had just been closed. This constant movement explains why multiple people can run into similar problems over time.

With that backdrop, we can return to the central concern: what actually happens when you’re already fixing your site and a new legal claim lands anyway?

Can You Face New ADA Lawsuits While You’re Fixing Things?

This is the question that keeps most teams up at night—and unfortunately, the answer isn’t as comforting as anyone would like.

There’s No Automatic “Grace Period”

Legally speaking, there’s no built-in pause button. Courts focus on what happened when a specific person tried to use your site.

If that individual encountered meaningful barriers at that moment, the fact that your team is actively making improvements doesn’t erase their experience. From the court’s perspective, access is evaluated in real time.

Multiple Plaintiffs, Overlapping Issues

Each person with a disability has their own potential claim. If one blind user files a lawsuit over an inaccessible checkout, that doesn’t automatically prevent another blind user—or a user with a different disability—from bringing a similar claim later.

Likewise, settling with one plaintiff does not “cover” everyone else. Unless the settlement takes the form of a formal court order with clearly defined terms, other parties can still assert their own rights if they encounter the same barriers.

Different Types Of Pressure At Once

In practice, this often shows up as a mix of:
- Informal demand letters,
- Formal lawsuits filed in court, and
- Occasional regulatory attention or guidance from agencies like the DOJ.
Dealing with all of this at once is one of the reasons a structured, documented remediation plan is far more effective than scattered one-off fixes.

Haynes v. Hooters

This case shows why “we’re working on it” doesn’t automatically stop new claims. Hooters had already settled a prior ADA website case and agreed to make its site accessible. When a different blind plaintiff later sued over similar barriers, Hooters argued that the new case was moot because of that earlier settlement and its remediation plans.

The Eleventh Circuit disagreed and allowed the new case to move forward. The court explained that promises made to someone else—and plans for future fixes—did not guarantee accessibility for this new plaintiff or long-term compliance.

In practical terms, remediation helps, but it isn’t a shield on its own if barriers still exist.

At this point, the natural follow-up question is: if remediation doesn’t automatically block claims, why does it still matter so much?

What Courts And Opposing Counsel Actually Look At

When the legal arguments fade into the background, most cases come down to a few very practical questions.

Two Moments That Matter Most

Courts tend to focus on two key points in time:
- When the plaintiff attempted to use your site, and
- The condition of the site at the time the court reviews the case.
If barriers existed at the time of the visit, liability may still exist for that experience—even if fixes came later. Once teams fully resolve those exact barriers, some claims may become “moot,” but that outcome does not undo the time, cost, and disruption earlier ADA lawsuits created.

When Remediation Can Strengthen Your Position

In Diaz v. The Kroger Co., the court dismissed the case after Kroger demonstrated that:
- All specific barriers named in the complaint had been fixed, and
- The website now conforms to WCAG 2.0 AA, the standard cited in that lawsuit.
The lesson here is simple: to argue mootness successfully, you need more than a promise. You need proof that the barriers are gone and that controls exist to keep them from coming back.

Patterns Vs. Isolated Mistakes

Courts and plaintiffs don’t just look for one broken button. They look for patterns. Are similar problems scattered across numerous pages? Is there any sign of training, audits, or an accessibility policy?

A site with a few lingering issues and a visible program in place looks very different from a site where accessibility has never been part of the process.

Documentation As Protection

Process matters. Documentation that often proves useful includes:
- Date-stamped audit reports and issue lists,
- Prioritized remediation roadmaps,
- Tickets, pull requests, and QA sign-offs tied to accessibility work,
- Notes from manual testing and assistive technology sessions.
None of this guarantees a win, but it gives your legal team something concrete to stand on.

From here, the focus shifts to what courts often refer to as “good-faith effort,” and what that looks like in the real world.

What “Good-Faith Effort” Looks Like In Practice

Good faith isn’t just a statement—it’s visible through consistent action.

Start With A Full, Expert-Led Audit

Rather than chasing bugs at random, it’s far more effective to begin with a thorough accessibility audit aligned to WCAG 2.1 AA or higher. That audit should evaluate:
- Core templates and layouts,
- Checkout, booking, and account flows,
- Forms, navigation, and interactive components,
- Third-party tools used in key user journeys.
Automated tools can help surface issues, but they don’t tell the whole story. Manual testing with keyboard navigation and screen readers is essential.

Prioritize The Issues That Truly Block Users

Once issues are identified, triage becomes critical. Blocking problems should come first, including:
- Navigation that can’t be operated with a keyboard,
- Buttons and icons with no accessible name,
- Forms without usable labels and error messages,
- Components that trap focus.
Fixing these first doesn’t just help legally—it immediately improves day-to-day usability.

Build A Realistic Remediation Roadmap

Strong remediation doesn’t happen in chaos. It usually happens in phases:
- 1: Critical path fixes,
- 2: Broader WCAG alignment,
- 3: Long-term safeguards in design systems and QA workflows.
A roadmap like this keeps teams aligned and gives leadership and counsel clarity on progress.

Communicate With Users—Carefully And Honestly

Many organizations choose to publish an accessibility statement during remediation. When handled well, it can:
- Acknowledge ongoing improvements,
- Invite users to report issues, and
- Provide support channels for assistance.
This should always be coordinated with legal counsel, but it clearly signals that accessibility is being taken seriously.

At this point, the technical work is underway. Now the focus shifts to how that work connects with legal strategy.

Navigating ADA Lawsuits While Improving Your Website

Accessibility remediation works best when legal and technical teams are aligned.

Keep Legal Counsel Closely Involved

Sharing your audit findings and remediation plans allows attorneys to:
- Respond more effectively if new ADA lawsuits or demand letters arrive.
- Decide when to highlight remediation progress.
- Assess whether tools like consent decrees are appropriate.
Handling Communications With Plaintiffs’ Attorneys

If another letter arrives mid-remediation, it’s important not to ignore it—or respond emotionally. Instead, work through counsel to acknowledge the concerns, share progress when helpful, and prioritize any legitimate issues that are identified.

Avoid Moves That Look Like Avoidance

Fast platform swaps, taking large parts of the site offline, or making bold public promises without proof can backfire. These moves often frustrate users and may not hold up in court if barriers reappear once the site returns.

Even with careful planning, a few common mistakes can keep organizations stuck in a cycle of repeat claims.

Common Missteps That Invite Repeat Claims

Many organizations facing ADA lawsuits don’t fail because they don’t care—they fail because they rely on shortcuts.

Relying Only On “Quick-Fix” Tools

Overlay tools and widgets often sound appealing under pressure, but they typically do not correct underlying code issues and can conflict with assistive technologies.

Treating Accessibility As An Afterthought

Holiday campaigns, product launches, and page redesigns are frequent sources of regressions when accessibility checks are skipped under tight timelines.

Ignoring Content And Third-Party Risk

Images without alt text, untagged PDFs, and third-party widgets all introduce new exposure if left unmanaged.

These issues point toward the need for a longer-term approach, not just a one-time cleanup.

Turning Remediation Into A Long-Term Accessibility Program

Once early fires are under control, the focus shifts to sustainability.

Accessible design systems, standardized testing processes, team training, and ongoing monitoring all help prevent regressions. Building accessibility directly into your site—rather than adding it only after complaints—significantly reduces your risk of future ADA lawsuits.

At that point, accessibility stops being a crisis response and becomes part of responsible digital operations.

Moving Forward Without the Constant “What If”

It can be frustrating to learn that more than one of these ADA lawsuits can land even while you’re actively fixing your site. But that doesn’t mean you’re doomed to keep reliving the same cycle. When accessibility becomes part of how you design, build, and maintain your digital experiences—not just something you scramble to address when a letter arrives—the entire situation starts to change.

The real shift is from reacting to planning. Instead of asking, “How do we get through this one case?” you begin asking, “How do we make accessibility a normal, manageable part of how we operate?” That mindset, backed by real remediation, documentation, and monitoring, is what gives you a steadier footing—for your users and in any future legal conversations.

If you’re unsure where you stand or what to prioritize next, this is exactly where 216digital can help. We’re a web development agency with deep expertise in web accessibility, and we offer personalized ADA briefings designed to help small businesses understand their obligations, assess their exposure, and chart a practical path forward.
Greg McNeil

November 19, 2025

Legal Compliance

ADA Compliance, ADA Lawsuit, ADA Lawsuits, ADA non-compliance, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
Email Accessibility Tips for Better Newsletters
Newsletters are still one of the most personal ways to reach people online. They share updates, spark interest, and keep relationships going—all right there in your reader’s inbox. Once the design looks polished and the list is ready, it’s easy to feel like the work is done.

But even the best-looking email can fall short for someone using a screen reader. A missing heading tag, a jumbled reading order, or an unlabeled image can make a message that feels seamless to one person confusing to another.

Email accessibility often gets left behind—not because people don’t care, but because it’s easy to think of it as something separate from web accessibility. In truth, it’s all connected. The same principles that make your website inclusive—clear structure, descriptive alt text, and meaningful markup—apply just as much to your emails.

An accessible email isn’t a bonus feature. It’s a sign of good communication: thoughtful, professional, and built for everyone.

The steps below show how to bring accessibility into your process naturally, without slowing your team down or changing the way you already design and send.

Start with a Strong Foundation

Every accessible email starts with clean, well-structured HTML. A simple one- or two-column layout works best. Multi-column or grid-heavy designs may look great on desktop but can become confusing when read aloud or viewed on mobile.

Keep your code organized so it flows naturally from top to bottom, left to right. When your layout collapses for smaller screens, content should still read in a logical order.

Use semantic markup to structure content:
- <h1>, <h2>, and <h3> tags for headings
- <p> tags for paragraphs
- Avoid using styled <div> elements to imitate headings or sections
If you rely on tables for layout, apply role="presentation" so assistive technologies don’t interpret them as data tables. And try to keep navigation minimal—five or six identical header links can feel repetitive for someone navigating by keyboard or screen reader.

Finally, test your message with images turned off. Many email clients block images by default, so make sure your message still makes sense when visuals are missing.

Make Links and Buttons Clear and Consistent

Screen reader users often jump between links to navigate quickly. That’s why each link should make sense on its own.

Instead of vague prompts like “Click here” or “Learn more,” use language that describes the action:
- “Download our June 2025 Report”
- “View featured products”
- “Register for our next webinar”
For buttons, stick to properly coded <a> tags styled with CSS. If you’re using nonstandard elements, include role="button" and test keyboard functionality. Avoid relying on image-based buttons without text alternatives or ARIA labels.

A few more details to keep in mind:
- When a link opens a page, make sure focus lands in a logical place—at the top or at a key heading, not mid-page.
- Treat unsubscribe and preference links as essential navigation elements. They should be easy to find, clearly labeled, and fully accessible.
Communicate Without Relying on Vision

Images, icons, and videos make emails engaging, but they shouldn’t be the only way you communicate.
- Add descriptive alt text to every meaningful image.
  - Example: <img src="banner.jpg" alt="50% off sale ends July 31">
- For decorative visuals, use empty alt text (alt="") so screen readers skip them.
- Never put important text—like “Register Now” or event details—inside an image unless that information also appears as live text.
If your email includes video or audio, make sure there are captions, transcripts, and accessible controls. Avoid autoplaying media; it can disrupt assistive technology users.

And once again—preview your message with images blocked. It’s one of the simplest ways to catch email accessibility issues before you hit send.

Keep Tables Simple and Purposeful

Tables are sometimes necessary, but they can quickly complicate email accessibility if used carelessly. Before adding one, ask: Could this be a list instead?

If you truly need a data table:
- Use <th> tags for headers
- Identify rows and columns properly
- Avoid merged or nested cells, which confuse screen readers
When a table is only for layout, mark it with role="presentation". In most cases, modern spacing and stacking techniques can replace layout tables without losing visual balance.

Prioritize Readability in Typography and Contrast

Readable text helps everyone—not just users with disabilities.
- Choose simple, widely supported fonts like Arial, Helvetica, or Calibri.
- Set body text at 14–16 pixels with line spacing around 1.4–1.5 for comfort.
- Left-align paragraphs rather than centering or justifying them.
- Maintain color contrast ratios of at least 4.5:1 for body text.
Avoid using color alone to convey meaning. Pair color cues with icons, labels, or underlines. Use emoji and symbols sparingly—they can sound awkward when read aloud by screen readers.

Leave breathing room between sections, and test your email in dark mode to confirm text and background colors remain readable. These small checks can make a big difference in overall legibility.

Reduce Friction with URLs and Attachments

Accessibility isn’t just about visuals—it’s about ease of use.
- Replace long, exposed URLs with descriptive links.
- If you must include a raw link, place it on its own line for clarity.
- Ensure attachments like PDFs are tagged and labeled
- Summarize key information within the email body when possible, so users don’t need to download a separate file.
Always include a plain-text version of your email for users relying on text-only clients or low-bandwidth connections.

Even your subject line and preview text play a role in accessibility. These are the first things a screen reader announces, so be specific:

Instead of “July Newsletter,” try “July Updates: Accessibility Toolkit and Webinar Dates.”

Test as a Natural Part of Your Process

Testing shouldn’t feel like a separate task—it should be part of your regular workflow for email accessibility.

Before sending, confirm that:
- Headings follow a logical hierarchy
- All images include alt text
- Links are descriptive
- Contrast meets WCAG standards
- The message reads naturally with images turned off
Check how your email performs in multiple clients—Outlook, Gmail, Apple Mail—and on different devices. Then, try it with a screen reader like NVDA, JAWS, or VoiceOver. Notice whether headings make sense, focus moves predictably, and buttons behave correctly.

Other valuable tests:
- Navigate using only your keyboard
- Zoom in to 200% and ensure the layout still holds together
- Ask teammates or testers who use assistive tech for feedback
Automated tools can flag issues like missing alt text or low contrast, but human review ensures quality. Once testing becomes routine, email accessibility starts to feel natural—not like an extra step, but part of how you craft great communication.

Email Accessibility: The Message Everyone Can Read

Accessibility works best when it’s built in, not added at the last step. When your structure is clear, headings are properly marked, alt text is descriptive, and links communicate purpose, your message feels effortless—no matter how someone reads it.

That’s what email accessibility really delivers: communication that’s consistent, inclusive, and easy for everyone to engage with. It’s not extra work; it’s smarter work that helps your team create better results with less rework and greater reach.

If you’re ready to strengthen that process, 216digital can help. Schedule an ADA briefing, and we’ll walk through your templates, review your workflow, and show you how to make email accessibility a seamless part of every campaign you send.
Greg McNeil

November 12, 2025

How-to Guides

Accessibility, email accessibility, How-to, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
Thinking About WCAG 3.0? Not So Fast
If you’ve been near a development or compliance conversation lately, you’ve probably heard rumblings about WCAG 3.0. Teams are curious. Vendors are hinting. Leadership wants to know if the roadmap should shift. The September 2025 Working Draft added to that momentum, especially with talk about modern UX considerations, cognitive accessibility, and even early ideas around AI.

It’s encouraging to see this evolution. Still, the best move right now is a steady one: keep an eye on WCAG 3.0, but continue building around WCAG 2.2.

WCAG 3.0 offers potential, but it’s still taking shape. WCAG 2.2 is what organizations can confidently rely on today—from both a practical and legal standpoint.

This overview explains why 3.0 remains a work in progress, why 2.2 is still the right foundation, and how you can stay prepared for the future without redirecting your entire strategy.

WCAG 3.0: Still a Moving Target

At this stage, WCAG 3.0 is a Working Draft, not a finalized rule set. The W3C has been clear that significant pieces will continue to evolve, and some will change before anything approaches a stable release.

Several foundational areas still have unanswered questions:
- Conformance: The draft explores a scoring-based approach and new ways of rating outcomes. It’s an interesting direction, but not locked in.
- Testing and sampling: The methods outlined today are early concepts. They aren’t yet clear enough to support reliable testing requirements or contract language.
- Emerging concepts: Topics like cognitive support, dark patterns, and AI bias are under discussion—not defined in a way that would hold up in a policy meeting or contract review.
There’s real value in following the work and experimenting where it makes sense. It just isn’t mature enough to serve as the basis for compliance decisions. Think of WCAG 3.0 as research and early modeling—not something to build KPIs or procurement language around.

What’s Enforceable Right Now

Most legal and procurement frameworks are still tied to the WCAG 2.x family. WCAG 3.0 isn’t written into laws, vendor requirements, or enforcement mechanisms.

A quick look at the landscape:
- United States – Section 508: The governing rule incorporates WCAG 2.0 Level AA by reference. That’s the enforceable baseline across federal agencies and their acquisitions.
- United States – ADA Title II (state & local): The Department of Justice’s 2024 final rule points to WCAG 2.1 AA for covered web content and mobile apps—again, not WCAG 3.0.
- European Union: The European Accessibility Act relies on EN 301 549, which maps to WCAG 2.1 (with some additions). That’s the practical reference across the EU—especially for procurement.
- Canada: Federal guidance is increasingly steering organizations toward EN 301 549 and WCAG 2.1 AA as standards are being updated.
- Australia: Government guidance and many public bodies state WCAG 2.1 AA as the target. The DDA is the legal backdrop, but day-to-day expectations align with 2.x.
Across these regions, WCAG 2.x remains the documented, enforceable reference. WCAG 3.0 is still too early to factor into risk conversations around litigation, enforcement, or compliance audits.

Separately, the W3C published WCAG 2.2 as a Recommendation in October 2023 and updated it in December 2024. Because policy updates lag behind standards, 2.2 is the most future-friendly version to align with—even if your existing contracts reference 2.0 or 2.1.

In other words: If you’re working toward 2.2, you’re exactly where you should be.

Why WCAG 2.2 Still Deserves Your Focus

WCAG 2.2 is a practical, incremental extension of the 2.x model that many teams already use. It gives organizations meaningful improvements without requiring a re-education effort from scratch.

Some highlights:
- It’s backward-compatible. If you meet WCAG 2.2, you also meet 2.1 and 2.0 (with one exception: 4.1.1 Parsing was retired). This protects existing work and simplifies updates.
- It introduces nine new success criteria targeted at gaps seen in real-world usage:
  - 2.4.11 / 2.4.12 Focus Not Obscured and 2.4.13 Focus Appearance support keyboard users more reliably.
  - 2.5.7 Dragging Movements gives users alternatives when drag-and-drop actions are difficult.
  - 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) helps reduce touch-target issues on mobile.
  - 3.2.6 Consistent Help, 3.3.7 Redundant Entry, and 3.3.8 / 3.3.9 Accessible Authentication reduce cognitive friction—especially in forms and multi-step processes.
These updates reflect how people actually use websites today: mobile navigation, mixed input methods, and form-heavy tasks. They also map directly to common user pain points—and, often, legal risk.

If you’re looking for a clear place to invest in accessibility that benefits real users and keeps you aligned with modern expectations, WCAG 2.2 is a safe and productive choice.

Practical Steps for Teams

If you want to make steady progress without guessing what WCAG 3.0 will look like, here are actions that fit well into the next one or two quarters.

1. Audit & Align to WCAG 2.2 AA

Update policy docs, design systems, acceptance criteria, and procurement language to 2.2 AA. Treat it as the organization’s default reference.

2. Test with both automation and humans

Use automated checks to catch the easy wins, then verify with manual reviews and assistive technologies (such as screen readers, keyboard-only access, and voice). That’s how you catch the issues 2.2 emphasizes (focus visibility, target size, redundant entry).

3. Prioritize High-impact Criteria
- Validate keyboard flow and focus visibility
- Confirm headings and ARIA landmarks
- Check that touch targets meet minimum sizes
- Provide alternatives to drag interactions
These are high-impact changes with direct user benefit.

4. Tighten Your Procurement Expectations
- Request VPATs/ACRs that reflect WCAG 2.2 AA
- Add language that requires delivery—not just promises—to help ensure fixes are part of the scope
U.S. federal purchasing still references earlier versions, but using 2.2 now helps you stay ahead.

5. Manage accessibility the same way you manage risk
- Track issues alongside privacy and security
- Prioritize by impact on real tasks (checkout, account creation, navigation paths)
This shifts your focus from theoretical compliance to meaningful outcomes.

6. Close the loop with users
- Invite people with disabilities into testing
- Conduct moderated sessions
- Keep an open channel for feedback
Tools can’t surface everything—lived experience often reveals what automated scans miss.

Keep an Eye on WCAG 3.0 — Without Rebuilding for It

Staying observant doesn’t mean rethinking your roadmap. As you explore new features—especially those involving AI, personalization, or experimental interactions—keep WCAG 3.0 in your periphery.

A balanced approach might include:
- Monitoring W3C updates and Working Draft notes
- Running small internal pilots to explore emerging topics like cognitive support, dark-pattern detection, or algorithmic fairness
- Keeping WCAG 3.0 exploration clearly distinct from compliance or contractual expectations
Think of it as learning ahead—not rebuilding ahead.

Clearing Up a Few Common Misunderstandings

As conversations circulate, a few assumptions come up again and again. It helps to address them directly:

“WCAG 3 will replace WCAG 2 next year”

Draft to adoption takes years. Regulations must be updated before anything becomes enforceable.

“If we wait, we’ll skip extra work”

Delays just increase accessibility debt. Fixing issues under 2.2 now removes work you’d otherwise carry forward.

“WCAG 3 will make compliance easier”

It may someday. Right now, the model is still forming and is more complex than the current structure.

“Once WCAG 3 is out, we can stop paying attention to 2.x”

WCAG 2.x will remain in place for some time. Policies and procurement don’t shift overnight.

“Focusing on 2.2 means we’re falling behind”

The W3C recommends using 2.2 to future-proof your efforts. It’s a forward-looking choice.

Build Habits That Will Carry Forward

The teams that succeed under WCAG 3.0 will already be practicing steady, continuous accessibility—not chasing a checklist of criteria.

Some ways to make that part of your culture:
- Integrate automated checks into your CI/CD workflow
- Gate merges on high-severity issues
- Keep an internal accessibility playbook within your design system
- Run periodic accessibility retrospectives
- Recognize incremental improvements—visible focus, reduced cognitive load, fewer drag-only interactions
Small improvements build momentum and help teams avoid the last-minute scramble when standards evolve.

Prepared for Tomorrow, Grounded in Today

WCAG 3.0 is an exciting step forward, but it’s still evolving. For now, the most reliable and enforceable standards remain WCAG 2.x, with WCAG 2.2 offering the clearest path to stay aligned with both current expectations and future direction.

Focus on the work that helps users today. Continue to test, iterate, and build accessibility into your everyday delivery. You’ll be well-positioned for whatever comes next—without unnecessary disruption.

If you’d like clarity on where your organization stands or where to invest next, our team at 216digital offers personalized ADA briefings and roadmaps rooted in WCAG 2.2, with an eye toward WCAG 3.0 as it matures. We’re here to help you stay confident, compliant, and ready for what’s ahead.
Greg McNeil

October 31, 2025

WCAG Compliance

Accessibility, WCAG, WCAG 2.2, WCAG 3.0, WCAG Compliance, WCAG conformance, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
How Good Is Your Accordion Accessibility, Really?
You’ve seen it before — those long, scroll-heavy pages packed with information. Even with great content, the layout can feel like a wall of text. It’s easy to lose your place. Harder still to stay focused.

That’s why accordions became so popular. They let you tuck sections away, helping people find what matters without forcing them to wade through everything else. They keep things clean, organized, and easier to digest.

But here’s the trade-off: an accordion that isn’t coded for accessibility can lock people out instead of inviting them in. Keyboard users can get stuck. Screen readers might skip entire sections or misreport whether content is open or closed. What looks tidy on the surface can be chaotic behind the scenes.

In this article, we’ll walk through how to build an accordion that’s not just functional but genuinely inclusive. By the end, you’ll understand what good accordion accessibility looks like — and how small development choices make a big difference for real users.

The Anatomy of an Accordion

At its core, an accordion is simple:
- A header or button people click or focus on.
- A content panel that expands or collapses to show details.
These pairs usually live inside a wrapper — maybe a <div> or a <ul> if you want to give screen readers a count of how many sections there are. Adding an aria-label to that wrapper can help clarify that this group of buttons belongs together.

Here’s a basic structure:
```
<ul aria-label="Accordion Control Group">
  <li>
    <button aria-controls="panel1" aria-expanded="false" id="accordion1">Section One</button>
    <div id="panel1" hidden>
      <p>Content for this section.</p>
    </div>
  </li>
</ul>
```
Think of this as the skeleton. Once you have a clear hierarchy, you can start layering in keyboard behavior and ARIA states. Structure isn’t decoration — it’s how assistive technologies understand your layout and read it back to users. That’s the foundation of solid accordion accessibility.

Keyboard Navigation: Where Real Accessibility Begins

The keyboard test is where most accordions fall apart. If you can’t open, close, and move through the component using only a keyboard, something’s missing.

A few simple rules make all the difference:
- Enter or Space should open and close sections.
- Tab should move forward through headings and visible content.
- Shift + Tab should move backward through that same flow.
When a section collapses, focus should jump back to the button that opened it — not vanish into the page. And every focusable element needs a visible indicator, whether that’s an outline or a subtle highlight.

For longer accordions, a “Skip accordion” link above the section is a small courtesy that goes a long way. It lets keyboard users move past the entire block when they don’t need it.

A good gut check? Set your mouse aside. If you can comfortably navigate the entire component using only your keyboard, your accordion accessibility is already miles ahead.

Semantic HTML: Let Meaning Do the Heavy Lifting

A lot of accessibility work is about using the right tools from the start. Semantic HTML gives browsers and assistive tech the information they need without extra code.

Here’s one solid pattern:
```
<h3>
  <button
    type="button"
    aria-expanded="false"
    aria-controls="panel1"
    id="accordion1-button">
    Billing Details
  </button>
</h3>
<div id="panel1" role="region" aria-labelledby="accordion1-button" hidden>
  <p>Your billing information goes here.</p>
</div>
```
This approach works because:
- <button> is already accessible and keyboard-friendly.
- aria-controls connects the button to its panel.
- role="region" helps screen readers describe the area once it’s expanded.
If you add icons or arrows, hide them from screen readers with aria-hidden="true". They’re visual cues, not meaningful content.

When your markup already carries meaning, ARIA becomes a way to enhance — not patch — your accordion accessibility.

Getting ARIA Right

ARIA attributes are what make dynamic elements “talk” to assistive technology. Used well, they keep users informed about what’s changing on screen.

The essentials:
- aria-expanded shows whether a section is open or closed.
- aria-controls links the button to the content it manages.
- aria-hidden keeps hidden content out of the accessibility tree.
- aria-labelledby ties the panel back to its header.
Your JavaScript should keep these in sync. When a section opens, switch aria-expanded to “true” and remove the hidden attribute. When it closes, set it back to “false” and hide the content again.

Add some visual feedback — an arrow that rotates or a smooth transition — so the interaction feels cohesive for everyone.

Good accordion accessibility doesn’t just meet a spec; it creates a consistent, predictable experience no matter how someone browses.

Native vs. Custom: Choosing the Right Path

If you’re building something simple, the native <details> and <summary> tags might do everything you need. They’re semantic, keyboard-ready, and require almost no JavaScript.
```
<details>
  <summary>Return Policy</summary>
  <p>Most items can be returned within 30 days.</p>
</details>
```
The downside? Styling can be limited, and behavior may vary slightly across screen readers — especially on iOS.

For more complex use cases, like multi-step forms or sections that animate open one at a time, a custom setup gives you full control. Just remember that every bit of custom logic means you’re also responsible for maintaining the accessibility that native elements give you for free.

Putting It All Together

Imagine a checkout form split into three collapsible sections: Personal Info, Billing, and Shipping.

Each section uses a button with aria-expanded and aria-controls. Each panel has role="region" and a unique ID. When users open a section, screen readers announce “Billing section expanded,” and focus moves smoothly to the first field.

If JavaScript fails, the content is still visible and usable. That’s resilience — and it’s a hallmark of good accordion accessibility.

When you build this way, you’re not adding “extra” accessibility. You’re writing cleaner, smarter code that works for everyone.

Testing What You’ve Built

No accessibility checklist is complete without testing.

Manual Testing

Use only your keyboard. Confirm that focus behaves as expected and hidden panels can’t be tabbed into.

Screen Reader Testing

Run through your accordion with NVDA, JAWS, or VoiceOver. Listen for clear announcements of “expanded” and “collapsed” states.

Automated Tools

Tools like Lighthouse or WAVE can flag broken ARIA references, missing labels, or overlapping IDs. Automated scans are helpful, but they’re not the finish line. Real users will always notice things an algorithm won’t. The goal isn’t perfection — it’s progress and empathy in practice.

Keep Expanding Accessibility

When built with care, accessible accordions do more than tidy up a layout — they make a site feel calmer, smarter, and easier to use. They’re a small reminder that good code and good experience go hand in hand.

Every time you improve an interactive element, you make the web a little more welcoming.

If you’re ready to take a closer look at your site’s accessibility — from accordions to forms, modals, and beyond — schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. We’ll help you identify where your code stands today and how to make accessibility part of your workflow going forward.
Greg McNeil

October 30, 2025

How-to Guides

Accessibility, accessible accordion, accordion, accordion accessibility, How-to, web developers, web development, Website Accessibility

Why a One-Off Accessibility Audit Falls Short

1. A Snapshot In a Moving World

2. Reports Without a Real Path Forward

3. Gaps In Scope That Leave Risk Behind

4. Little Connections To Real Users

How to Read an Accessibility Audit Proposal

1. Look For a Clear, Meaningful Scope

2. Ask For Transparent Testing Methods

3. Focus On What An Accessibility Audit Actually Delivers

4. Confirm Real, Relevant Expertise

Using Each Audit on Purpose

Beyond the Accessibility Audit: Building Accessibility Into Everyday Work

1. Give Accessibility a Clear Home

2. Thread Accessibility Through Your Workflow

3. Watch for Regressions Before Users Do

Stepping Off the Accessibility Audit Treadmill

What a Web Accessibility Audit Really Looks Like in Practice

Sampling Your Product, Not Every Page

Why Web Accessibility Audits Are Taking Center Stage

Legal Pressure Meets Day-to-Day Reality

The Upside: UX, SEO, and Trust

Deciding Where to Look First

Don’t Forget Documents, Media, and Third Parties

Getting the Timing Right

Moments That Should Trigger a Fresh Look

What Teams Experience During a Web Accessibility Audit

From Findings to a Shared Roadmap

Who Should Lead the Work

From One Audit to an Ongoing Practice

Turning When, Where, and Why Into a Real Next Step

Why Your Theme Choice Shapes More Than Just Design

What “Accessible” Really Means in Practice

Common Problems You’ll See When You Test Themes

WooCommerce Themes With Better Built-In Accessibility

Storefront

Neve

Responsive

OceanWP

Eimear and Monument Valley

How to Vet a Theme’s Accessibility Quickly

Do a Full Keyboard Tour

Check Headings and Landmarks

Test Forms and Messages

Zoom and Shrink

Fixing Gaps When Your Theme Is “Almost There”

How to Maintain Accessibility After Launch

Your Theme Is the Start—Accessibility Is Ongoing

Making Sense of ADA Website Risk in a Shifting Landscape

How One Client’s Threat Changed Our Approach

What the ADA Website Risk Profile Actually Is

How the Assessment Works, Step By Step

Step 1: Baseline Review of Key Areas

Step 2: Mapping Findings to Known Red Flags

Step 3: Assigning a Relative Risk Level

Step 4: Turning Findings Into a Plan

What You Walk Away With

Why This Matters Beyond “Avoiding a Lawsuit”

How the Risk Profile Fits Into Your Longer-Term Strategy

What to Do Next

What a 404 Really Is — and Why It Happens

Principles Before Pixels: A High-Performing 404 page Experience

1. Accessibility is Not Optional

2. Clarity First, Personality Second

3.Stay On-brand

4. Focus On Recovery, Not Apology

Accessibility Must-Haves for an Accessible 404 page

A Clear Statement of What Happened

A Layout That Still Feels Like “Your” Site

Recovery Paths That Are Easy to Spot and Use

Text and Visuals That Hold Up Under Strain

A Moment That Stays Stable, Not Jumpy

Page Anatomy: What to Include on Your 404 page

Under the Hood: Technical Details That Support the Experience

Analytics, Monitoring, and Continuous Cleanup

Governance: Building Habits That Reduce Future 404s

Not All Wrong Turns Are Dead Ends

Start with Clarity, Not Wireframes

Designing an Accessible Website from Components Up

Tooling That Gives Your Accessible Website Time Back

Redirects, Voice, and All the Invisible Decisions