An ADA website accessibility audit is a structured evaluation of a website against Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) conformance standards. The audit identifies issues that affect people with disabilities and creates a record of what needs remediation. For organizations concerned with ADA compliance, an audit is the foundational step in understanding where a website stands.
| Key Point | What It Means |
|---|---|
| What It Covers | A page-by-page evaluation of website content, structure, and functionality against WCAG 2.1 AA or 2.2 AA criteria |
| Who Conducts It | Accessibility professionals using assistive technologies, code inspection, and visual review |
| Typical Cost | Most audits start at 1,000 dollars and range to 3,000 dollars depending on site size and complexity |
| Why Scans Are Not Enough | Automated scans only flag approximately 25% of accessibility issues. The remaining 75% requires human evaluation. |
| Primary Outcome | A detailed report listing identified issues, their locations, severity, and remediation guidance |
What an ADA Website Accessibility Audit Includes
An audit evaluates a representative sample of pages across a website. Each page is reviewed for conformance against the WCAG standard specified in the audit scope, typically WCAG 2.1 AA.
The evaluation process covers several areas. Screen reader testing confirms that content is announced correctly and that interactive elements function as expected with assistive technology. Keyboard testing verifies that every function on the page is operable without a mouse.
Code inspection examines the underlying HTML, CSS, and ARIA attributes for correct implementation. Visual inspection checks the presentation of content, including text sizing, layout behavior at 200% and 400% browser zoom, and focus indicators.
An automated scan is typically included as one component of the evaluation. The scan flags the subset of issues detectable by automated rules, while the auditor reviews the remaining criteria through direct evaluation. Assistive technologies used during audits commonly include NVDA, JAWS, and VoiceOver, tested in Chrome and Safari.
How Audits Differ from Scans
Scans and audits serve different purposes. A scan is an automated check that loads a web page and runs programmatic rules against the code. Scans detect approximately 25% of accessibility issues. They are fast, repeatable, and useful for catching regressions between audit cycles.
An audit is a thorough human evaluation. It covers the full range of WCAG criteria, including those that require judgment, context, and interaction with assistive technology. Scans cannot assess whether a screen reader announces content in a logical order, whether custom widgets behave correctly with keyboard input, or whether the meaning of content is preserved when styles are overridden.
The two work best together. Scans provide ongoing monitoring. Audits provide the depth of evaluation that scans cannot replicate.
ADA Title II and Title III Considerations
Under ADA Title II, state and local government websites are required to conform to WCAG 2.1 AA. This rule went into effect with specific conformance dates based on entity size.
Under ADA Title III, which covers private businesses open to the public, there is no technical standard specified in the statute. Courts have increasingly referenced WCAG 2.1 AA as the benchmark, and the Department of Justice has cited it in settlement agreements. Organizations operating under Title III use audits to establish a documented record of their accessibility posture and reduce legal risk.
An audit does not guarantee immunity from legal action. It does create evidence that an organization is aware of its obligations and actively working toward conformance.
What the Audit Report Delivers
The output of an audit is a detailed report. Each identified issue includes the specific WCAG criterion it relates to, the location on the page where the issue occurs, a description of the problem, and guidance on how to remediate it.
Reports typically prioritize issues using a combination of user impact and risk factor scoring. Issues that prevent someone from completing a core task, such as submitting a form or accessing navigation, rank higher than issues with limited functional impact.
The report becomes the remediation roadmap. Development teams use it to fix issues in priority order, and organizations use it to demonstrate progress over time.
How Often to Conduct an Audit
A baseline audit establishes the starting point. After remediation, a follow-up audit confirms that fixes were implemented correctly and identifies any new issues introduced during the remediation process.
Ongoing, most organizations conduct audits annually or after significant website redesigns. Between audits, automated scans run on a recurring schedule to flag regressions and new issues on recently published content.
Choosing an Audit Provider
The quality of an audit depends on the expertise of the team conducting it. Key indicators of a thorough evaluation include full manual review of all applicable WCAG criteria, use of multiple assistive technologies, evaluation across browsers, prioritization by user impact, and clear remediation guidance tied to specific code locations.
Audits that rely primarily on automated scan output and repackage it as a full evaluation do not provide the depth required to identify the 75% of issues scans miss. The distinction between a scan report and a genuine audit report is significant when building an accessibility program or responding to a legal inquiry.
Most audits cost between 1,000 dollars and 3,000 dollars, with per-page pricing typically falling between 100 dollars and 250 dollars per page or screen evaluated.