Accessibility · Assessment
Website Accessibility Check
Identify the accessibility barriers most likely to exclude real users — then decide what to fix first, with an honest view of what automation can and cannot tell you.
Accessibility problems are rarely deliberate. They accumulate through decorative markup, unlabelled controls, low-contrast brand colours and keyboard journeys nobody ever tested. The result is a site that works for some visitors and quietly fails others.
This check gives you a factual starting point: what an automated review can detect, where manual testing is required, and how to sequence remediation without rebuilding everything.
Enter a public page. Key templates — home, listing, detail, form — give the most useful picture.
Automated analysis is being connected. Until then a specialist runs the check manually and sends you the findings — no automated score is generated on this page.
Included in the check
- Image alternative text presence and quality signals
- Heading structure and document outline
- Form labels, grouping and error messaging
- Keyboard operability and visible focus indicators
- Colour contrast indicators
- Landmarks, semantic structure and common ARIA misuse
What this check assesses
Grouped the way remediation actually happens — by component and template, not by page count.
Alternative text
Images missing alt attributes, decorative images announced unnecessarily, and text carried only inside graphics.
Heading structure
A single meaningful H1, logical nesting, and headings used for structure rather than visual size.
Labels and forms
Programmatically associated labels, grouped related fields, and errors announced rather than shown by colour alone.
Keyboard and focus
Whether every interactive element can be reached and operated by keyboard, with a clearly visible focus state.
Contrast indicators
Text and interface colour combinations that fall short of common WCAG AA contrast thresholds.
Landmarks and semantics
Header, navigation, main and footer regions, plus native elements used in place of styled generic containers.
Common ARIA issues
Roles applied incorrectly, states that never update, and ARIA used where a native element would work better.
Media and motion
Captions and transcript availability, autoplaying media, and whether reduced-motion preferences are respected.
What you'll learn
- Which barriers are detectable automatically, and roughly how widespread they are.
- Which templates and shared components are responsible for the most issues.
- Which criteria require manual testing with assistive technology.
- A practical remediation order, starting with global components.
- How accessibility work overlaps with performance and technical SEO improvements.
- What a fuller manual WCAG-oriented audit would involve if you need one.
Important: automated accessibility checks cannot establish complete WCAG or ADA compliance, and this page does not provide legal advice or any compliance guarantee. Meaningful assurance requires manual testing with assistive technology alongside organisational process. See our ADA & WCAG accessibility audit approach for how that work is structured.
How it works
- 1
Choose the pages
Pick the templates that matter most — usually the homepage, a listing page, a detail page and any form or checkout.
- 2
We review them
Automated detection is combined with a specialist reading of the markup, focus order and contrast decisions.
- 3
You get a prioritised list
Findings grouped by component, separated into automated detections and items needing manual verification.
Frequently asked questions
- What does an accessibility check look at?
- It reviews the parts of a page that assistive technology depends on: image alternative text, heading structure, form labels, keyboard focus behaviour, colour contrast, landmark markup and common ARIA mistakes.
- Can an automated check confirm WCAG or ADA compliance?
- No. Automated testing can only detect a subset of accessibility issues. It cannot establish complete WCAG conformance or ADA compliance, and we do not issue compliance guarantees or certificates.
- Is this legal advice?
- No. Nothing here is legal advice. Accessibility obligations vary by jurisdiction and organisation, and legal questions should go to your own counsel.
- Why is manual testing still necessary?
- Many criteria are judgement-based — whether alt text is meaningful, whether a keyboard journey is usable, whether an error message makes sense to a screen-reader user. Those require a person testing with real assistive technology.
- Which WCAG level should we aim for?
- WCAG 2.1 or 2.2 Level AA is the level most organisations reference. The right target depends on your audience, sector and any contractual or regional requirements.
- What if the findings are extensive?
- That is common on older sites. Issues are grouped so remediation can be sequenced — templates and global components first, since fixing them usually resolves problems across many pages at once.
Take accessibility beyond a scan.
A deeper manual review, remediation of shared components and design-system level fixes are handled by our accessibility and engineering teams.
Related tools
Website Health Check
Review performance, technical SEO, security basics and page structure signals across your site.
OpenEmail & Domain Health
Check MX, SPF, DMARC and DNS configuration gaps that quietly damage business email delivery.
OpenProject Cost Estimator
Structure your scope — category, platforms, integrations and timeline — before requesting a proposal.
Open