Evaluating WCAG Conformance — Audits, Reports & Scorecards

Introduction

Evaluating accessibility conformance is the process of verifying whether a digital product meets the success criteria defined by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). Regular audits and structured reporting ensure that websites, apps, and documents remain inclusive, compliant, and continually improving as they evolve.

While accessibility testing might seem complex, WCAG 2.2 provides a measurable framework. By combining automated scans, manual inspection, and user testing, teams can produce meaningful reports that identify barriers, gauge compliance, and inform long‑term accessibility strategies.

Why Accessibility Evaluation Matters

Accessibility audits are not a one‑time requirement; they are part of an ongoing quality assurance cycle. An effective evaluation process brings multiple benefits:

• 
  
• Compliance Assurance: Demonstrate adherence to legal regulations such as ADA, Section 508, and EN 301 549.
• User Experience Improvement: Remove usability obstacles affecting all visitors, not only people with disabilities.
• Risk Mitigation: Identify potential legal and reputational risks before they escalate.
• Performance Metrics: Track accessibility progress over time using quantitative scorecards.

Auditing accessibility helps organizations mature their design and development processes with evidence‑based corrections instead of assumptions.

Types of WCAG Evaluation

• 
  
• Automated Audits: Use scanning tools to detect easily testable issues at scale — missing alt text, color contrast failures, skip link omissions, and ARIA misuse.
• Manual Audits: Involve expert reviewers testing features manually using keyboards, screen readers, and visual inspections for headings and landmarks.
• User Testing: People with disabilities perform real tasks, giving qualitative feedback impossible to achieve through automation alone.
• Hybrid Reviews: Combine automated detection and human validation for a comprehensive picture.
• 
  

WCAG Conformance Levels

Evaluation reports categorize findings according to conformance levels defined by WCAG.

• 
  
• Level A — Basic Accessibility: Essential for ensuring that key functionality is perceivable and operable.
• Level AA — Industry Standard: Addresses common barriers like color contrast and keyboard navigation. Most organizations aim for this level.
• Level AAA — Enhanced Accessibility: Represents the highest standard, valuable for public services and education sectors.

Each issue in an audit should map directly to a WCAG success criterion — for instance, tagging a missing caption as a 1.2.2 Captions (Prerecorded) failure.

Conducting an Accessibility Audit Step by Step

1. Define Scope: Specify pages, templates, and components to test — especially high‑traffic or high‑risk flows like login, checkout, and forms.
2. Select Standards: Choose the conformance target (e.g., WCAG 2.2 Level AA).
3. Run Automated Tests: Use tools like axe DevTools, WAVE, or Lighthouse to collect data on violations.
4. Perform Manual Verification: Navigate the interface via keyboard and screen reader to confirm real‑world usability.
5. Document Findings: For each issue, record its WCAG reference, description, and severity.
6. Recommend Fixes: Provide clear developer instructions and estimated effort to resolve issues.
7. Retest & Validate: After remediation, rerun tests to ensure issues are fully resolved.

Key Audit Areas Based on WCAG Principles

1. Perceivable

• 
  
• Text alternatives for images and media (1.1.1).
• Audio/video captions and transcripts (1.2.x series).
• Color contrast compliance (1.4.3 and 1.4.11).

2. Operable

• 
  
• Keyboard navigation and focus ordering (2.1 – 2.4 range).
• Skip link availability and touch target sizing (2.5.5).

3. Understandable

• 
  
• Consistent navigation and labeling (3.2.3 – 3.2.4).
• Error suggestions and form validation (3.3 series).

4. Robust

• Valid HTML and ARIA landmarks (4.1.2).
• Assistive technology compatibility checked with screen readers.
• 
  

Reporting Accessibility Findings

A strong accessibility report transforms raw issues into actionable insights. Standard components of a report include:

• 
  
• Executive Summary: Overview of pages tested, methodology, and overall conformance level achieved.
• Detailed Findings Table: Lists each violation with its WCAG reference, description, severity, and recommended fix.
• Annotated Screenshots: Highlight visual examples of issues and solutions.
• Remediation Roadmap: Prioritized actions for designers and developers.
• Testing Environment Data: Include browser, OS, assistive tools, and versions used.
• 
  

Clear documentation helps teams reproduce issues, track corrections, and demonstrate transparency to stakeholders or regulators.

Creating Accessibility Scorecards

Scorecards express accessibility progress as measurable indicators. They quantify conformance and highlight improvement trends across time.

• 
  
• Issue Count by Severity: Number of violations at critical, major, minor levels.
• Compliance Percentage: Ratio of passed checks per total criteria tested.
• Historical Comparison: Showing improvement from previous audits.
• Team Performance Metrics: Average resolution time for identified issues.

Use visual dashboards to communicate results — charts and heat maps help non‑technical stakeholders understand progress quickly.

Tools for WCAG Evaluation

• 
  
• WAVE — Browser‑based analyzer for visual and semantic audits.
• axe DevTools — Comprehensive ruleset for automated WCAG testing.
• Accessibility Insights — Step‑by‑step evaluation for manual and automated tests.
• Pa11y — Command‑line testing framework for CI/CD integration.
• Lighthouse Accessibility — Built‑in Chrome tool for high‑level auditing and trend tracking.
• 
  

Common Evaluation Mistakes

• 
  
• Relying solely on automation: Automated tools catch around 40% of issues. Manual testing is irreplaceable for contextual errors.
• Lack of user inclusion: Excluding disabled testers leads to gaps between theoretical conformance and practical usability.
• Ignoring regression testing: Accessibility must be re‑evaluated with each update like any QA process.
• Missing documentation: Untracked results make future maintenance impossible; always version‑control reports and scorecards.
• 
  

Maintaining Accessibility Over Time

Accessibility is continuous, not static. Schedule periodic evaluations — monthly, quarterly, or during major releases. Embed checkpoints into your design and development pipelines.

• Integrate automated tests into CI/CD to catch regressions early.
• Maintain a shared repository for accessibility bugs and resolutions.
• Train teams to review WCAG updates and apply new criteria as they are released.
• 
  

Conclusion

Evaluating WCAG conformance empowers organizations to measure and improve their accessibility efforts objectively. Systematic audits, transparent reports, and data‑driven scorecards turn guidelines into actionable goals. Accuracy and consistency in evaluation ensure that your product remains inclusive from one release to the next.

Next steps: Establish a recurring audit schedule and centralize your findings in an accessibility scorecard. Track key metrics, verify each WCAG criterion, and keep improving through data‑backed iteration.