Digital Accessibility Audit Checklist: A Step-by-Step Guide

A comprehensive digital accessibility audit requires more than running an automated scan or checking a website against a basic WCAG checklist. A thorough audit combines automated checks, expert manual evaluation, assistive technology testing, clear documentation, remediation planning, and re-testing to identify and address barriers across a digital experience.

This accessibility audit checklist provides a structured framework for evaluating websites and applications and can also be adapted for auditing other digital properties like native mobile apps and documents. Use it to plan an audit, organize testing, document findings, prioritize improvements, and establish a repeatable process for maintaining accessibility over time.

How to use this digital accessibility audit checklist

Every digital accessibility audit should be tailored to your organization, digital assets, users, and any applicable standards or regulatory requirements. Before testing begins, define the audit scope, identify the accessibility standards and requirements relevant to the engagement apply, and establish who will conduct, manage, and act on the findings.

The checklist below covers seven phases of a comprehensive digital accessibility audit:

1. Pre-audit preparation
2. Automated testing
3. Manual testing
4. Assistive technology testing
5. Documentation of findings
6. Remediation planning
7. Re-testing and validation

Use each phase as a planning and tracking tool. Depending on the size and complexity of the digital experience, individual steps may require additional testing or documentation.

Phase 1: Pre-audit preparation

Effective accessibility testing begins by clearly defining what the audit will evaluate. Establishing scope and requirements before testing helps ensure that important parts of the digital experience are not overlooked.

Define the audit scope

• ☐Identify the website, application, or digital product to be evaluated.
• ☐Identify representative page types, templates, components, and priority user workflows.
• ☐Include key user journeys, such as account creation, login, search, checkout, or form submission.
• ☐Identify relevant content types, including images, video, audio, documents, and downloadable files.
• ☐Determine which responsive or mobile-optimized views (for websites), which mobile operating systems (for mobile apps), or alternative versions of the product interface are in scope.
• ☐Document any areas that are intentionally excluded from the audit and why.

Identify applicable requirements

• ☐Identify the appropriate standards to test against. For websites, applications, and documents; this means the WCAG version and conformance level, such as WCAG 2.2 Level AA.
• ☐Based on the product type and its market, determine whether standards such as Section 508 or EN 301 549 apply.
• ☐Consider applicable legal or contractual accessibility requirements.
• ☐Document the standards and requirements that will be used to evaluate findings.

Establish the audit team and process

• ☐Determine whether you have sufficient expertise to conduct the audit in-house or whether you should instead work with a vendor. If you don’t have internal accessibility expertise, or if the goal of the audit is ultimately to produce a VPAT Accessibility Conformance Report, a reputable vendor may be a better solution.
• ☐For internal audits, identify who will conduct the audit and who will manage progress.
• ☐Identify additional stakeholders who should participate and who will need to act on the audit findings, including product management, development, design, and content.
• ☐If an external provider is being used, establish responsibilities, deliverables, and communication processes.
• ☐Establish how findings will be documented, assigned, prioritized, and tracked.

Establish a baseline

• ☐Document what is already known about the current accessibility level of the digital experience.
• ☐Review known issues from previous accessibility audits and customer feedback, and past remediation efforts.
• ☐Identify existing accessibility documentation or conformance reports for known issues.

Phase 2: Automated testing

Automated testing can efficiently identify many common accessibility issues across a large number of pages and components. However, automated tools cannot identify every accessibility barrier. Use automated testing as one part of a broader evaluation rather than as a replacement for manual and assistive technology testing.

Run automated tests

• ☐Run an automated accessibility scan across the in-scope digital experience.
• ☐Test representative pages, templates, components, and user flows.
• ☐Use appropriate automated accessibility tools to identify machine-detectable issues across representative pages and components. Review each flagged issue, its location, and relevant WCAG success criteria.
• ☐Manually verify automated findings and investigate results that may be false positives or require human judgment.
• ☐Export or otherwise preserve the automated testing results.

Review automated findings

• ☐Confirm whether each automated finding represents an actual accessibility issue.
• ☐Identify issues that require manual evaluation.
• ☐Look for recurring issues that may be present in a template or components used across many pages.
• ☐Consider the frequency and scope of each issue when evaluating its significance.
• ☐Use automated results to inform, rather than determine, remediation priorities.

Phase 3: Manual testing

Manual evaluation helps identify accessibility barriers that automated tools cannot reliably detect or can only partially identify. Review the interface for conformance with relevant standards requirements using keyboard navigation, visual inspection, and other manual techniques.

Keyboard navigation

• ☐Confirm that all interactive functionality can be accessed and operated using a keyboard.
• ☐Verify that keyboard focus moves through the interface in a logical order.
• ☐Confirm that focus is visible.
• ☐Check for keyboard traps.
• ☐Verify that users can open and dismiss tooltips and related content without requiring a mouse or other pointing device.

Structure and navigation

• ☐Review heading structure for appropriate hierarchy.
• ☐Check that landmark regions are used appropriately.
• ☐Confirm that page titles and navigation mechanisms are meaningful.
• ☐Verify that links and buttons have clear, descriptive names.
• ☐Verify that repeated navigation and content structures are consistent, and that users can bypass repeated content where applicable.

Images and other content

• ☐Evaluate whether meaningful images have appropriate alternative text.
• ☐Confirm that decorative images are appropriately treated as decorative.
• ☐Check that instructional or informational content is available in an accessible format.
• ☐Review multimedia content for applicable accessibility requirements.

Forms and error handling

• ☐Confirm that form controls have appropriate labels.
• ☐Verify that instructions and required-field information are available to users.
• ☐Check that errors are clearly identified and described.
• ☐Confirm that users can determine how to correct form errors.
• ☐Evaluate whether dynamic error messages are accessible.

Visual presentation and interaction

• ☐Evaluate color contrast, including cases that may require manual review beyond automated detection.
• ☐Check reading order and the relationship between visual and programmatic content.
• ☐Review content at increased browser zoom levels.
• ☐Check timeout warnings and controls where applicable.
• ☐Evaluate motion, animation, and other dynamic effects for applicable accessibility requirements.
• ☐Review notifications, alerts, and other dynamically updated content to determine whether content changes are communicated in an accessible way.

Phase 4: Assistive technology testing

Testing with assistive technology takes manual testing a step further by providing insight into how people with disabilities may experience a digital product in real-world use. Different assistive technologies may expose different accessibility barriers, so testing should include the technologies most relevant to the users and environments being evaluated.

Screen reader testing

• ☐Select screen readers and platform combinations based on the product’s users, supported environments, and audit scope. Relevant combinations may include JAWS or NVDA on Windows and VoiceOver on Apple platforms.
• ☐Navigate pages using headings, landmarks, links, forms, and other screen reader navigation methods.
• ☐Confirm that interactive elements have meaningful and accurate names and states.
• ☐Verify that dynamic content and status changes are communicated appropriately.
• ☐Document screen reader-specific issues separately from general manual findings where useful.

Magnification and zoom testing

• ☐Test the interface at increased browser zoom levels.
• ☐Test with appropriate screen magnification software, such as ZoomText, when applicable.
• ☐Verify that content remains usable and understandable when magnified.
• ☐Check for content clipping, overlapping elements, or loss of functionality.

Keyboard and assistive technology combinations

• ☐Confirm keyboard navigation while using relevant assistive technology.
• ☐Test important user flows from beginning to end.
• ☐Document barriers that appear only when using a particular assistive technology.
• ☐Record the assistive technology, operating system, browser, and relevant version information for reproducibility.

Phase 5: Document findings

A useful accessibility audit report should give organizations enough information to understand each issue, determine its impact, and take appropriate action.

Compile and organize findings

• ☐Combine findings from automated, manual, and assistive technology testing.
• ☐Remove duplicate findings while preserving information about affected pages or components.
• ☐Reference the applicable WCAG success criterion and/or other standards requirement for each finding.
• ☐Identify the location or component where the issue occurs.
• ☐Describe the accessibility barrier clearly, including expected and actual behavior.
• ☐Explain how the barrier may affect people with relevant disabilities or assistive technology use cases.
• ☐Capture screenshots, recordings, or other supporting evidence where appropriate.
• ☐Provide remediation advice on how the issue can best be fixed.

Prioritize findings

• ☐Assign an appropriate severity or priority level to each finding.
• ☐Consider user impact and effort to fix when determining remediation priority.
• ☐For user impact, consider the location and frequency along with effect on ability to complete tasks and achieve goals.
• ☐For effort to fix, consider the level of code or visual design changes, and associated expertise that would be needed to remediate the issue.
• ☐Distinguish between individual occurrences and systemic issues affecting multiple pages or components.

Severity classifications can vary by organization and audit methodology. It’s important to establish a consistent approach and apply it across the audit.

Phase 6: Remediation planning

An audit creates value when its findings can be translated into concrete improvements. Remediation planning connects accessibility findings to the teams, timelines, and acceptance criteria needed to address them.

Assign remediation responsibilities

• ☐Create an issue tracker logging each issue reported in the audit and progress toward remediation.
• ☐Determine whether remediation belongs with development, design, content, product, or another team.
• ☐Assign each issue to the appropriate team or owner.
• ☐Identify systemic issues that may require changes to shared components, templates, or processes.
• ☐Establish a process for tracking remediation status and updating the issue tracker.

Establish priorities and timelines

• ☐Define remediation priority tiers.
• ☐Establish target issue remediation timelines based on user impact, severity, business-critical workflows, dependencies, and organizational priorities.
• ☐Address systemic issues that could resolve multiple findings where appropriate.
• ☐Identify dependencies that could affect remediation timelines.

Schedule and track remediation progress

• ☐Schedule re-testing for completed remediation work.
• ☐Update the issue tracker as issues are addressed.

Phase 7: Re-testing and validation

Digital accessibility testing should not end when developers or content teams report that an issue has been fixed. Re-testing verifies that the original barrier has been fully addressed and helps identify any unintended effects of remediation.

Validate remediation

• ☐Re-test each remediated finding against the original issue, using the appropriate combination of automated, manual, and assistive technology testing.
• ☐Confirm that the original barrier has been addressed, and that the affected workflow can now be completed as intended.
• ☐Confirm that the remediation has not introduced new accessibility issues.
• ☐Document the outcome of each re-test, including details of unresolved issues or new issues.
• ☐Update the status of each finding in the issue tracker.

Update accessibility documentation

• ☐Document any findings that remain unresolved.
• ☐Produce a product VPAT Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) to reflect the product’s accessibility; if an ACR already exists, update it to reflect improvements made.
• ☐Update any additional product applicable accessibility documentation.
• ☐Preserve testing results and documentation for future reference.

Establish the next audit cycle

• ☐Address any still-unresolved issues or document alternative ways to access content or functionality for affected users.
• ☐Determine when the digital experience should be evaluated again; typically, on an annual basis or before a major upgrade/release, whichever is sooner.
• ☐Establish ongoing accessibility testing practices for new and updated content, features, and components.
• ☐Incorporate accessibility testing into development and QA workflows where appropriate.
• ☐Define how accessibility issues identified between formal audits will be reported and addressed.

When should you conduct a digital accessibility audit?

Organizations can conduct accessibility audits at different points in the lifecycle of a digital product. Organizations commonly conduct formal accessibility audits when:

• Launching a new website or application
• Redesigning or significantly updating an existing digital property
• Introducing major functionality or user flows
• Preparing for an accessibility conformance or compliance initiative
• Evaluating progress after a remediation effort
• Establishing a baseline for an accessibility program
• Conducting periodic reviews as part of an ongoing accessibility strategy

Accessibility testing can also be integrated into development and QA processes so that issues are identified and addressed throughout the product lifecycle rather than only during periodic audits.

Do you have the resources to conduct a digital accessibility audit?

A comprehensive audit requires more than access to an automated scanning tool. Organizations conducting audits internally should consider whether their teams have the expertise and resources to perform automated, manual, and assistive technology testing and interpret the results accurately.

Consider whether your team has:

• Knowledge of accessibility standards, customer requirements, and regulatory context relevant to the engagement
• Experience applying WCAG and other accessibility standards to real-world digital experiences
• Expertise with manual and automated accessibility evaluation processes and reporting
• Experience testing with relevant assistive technologies
• The time and resources to evaluate representative pages and user flows
• A process for documenting, prioritizing, and tracking findings
• The ability to re-test fixes and validate remediation

Organizations without all these capabilities internally may benefit from external accessibility expertise that complements internal teams, provides specialized testing capacity, and helps establish a repeatable evaluation and remediation process.

Build a repeatable accessibility testing process

A digital accessibility audit is most useful when it becomes part of an ongoing accessibility program rather than a one-time exercise. Use this checklist to establish a consistent approach to evaluating digital experiences, documenting barriers, prioritizing improvements, and validating remediation.

As digital properties evolve, repeat the appropriate testing activities and incorporate accessibility into development, design, content, and QA workflows. A structured process helps teams identify barriers earlier, prevent recurring issues, measure progress, and create more consistent digital experiences for people with disabilities.

Talk with a Vispero accessibility expert about the right audit approach for your digital environment.