# Accessibility Evaluation Report: [Website or application name]

> Accessibility conformance evaluation report. The method follows the five
> steps of the W3C Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology
> (WCAG-EM 1.0), and results are reported against WCAG 2.2 level AA success
> criteria. Replace every `[bracketed]` value and every row marked
> *Example*. This report records an evaluation; it is not legal advice on
> accessibility law.

<!--
Guidance: How to use this template
- Follow the steps in order: define scope (section 2), explore (section 3),
  select a sample (section 4), audit (sections 5-6), report (sections 7-9).
  Skipping exploration leads to samples that miss the hard pages.
- Combine automated tools with manual and assistive technology testing.
  Automated tools detect only a minority of WCAG failures.
- Result values per success criterion: Pass, Fail, Not present (no content
  of that kind), Cannot tell. Record which sampled pages fail.
- Refer to WCAG success criteria by number and short name, and link to the W3C
  documents for their exact wording rather than copying it.
-->

## Document control

<!-- Guidance: Identify the evaluation, the evaluator and the date range. A conformance claim is only valid for the version and date evaluated. -->

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Document ID | [A11Y-SITE-2026-001] |
| Website / application | [Name and base URL] |
| Version or release evaluated | [Release 5.1 / content as of YYYY-MM-DD] |
| Evaluation commissioner | [Organisation or team] |
| Evaluator(s) | [@name, organisation] |
| Evaluation dates | YYYY-MM-DD to YYYY-MM-DD |
| Report version | [0.1] |
| Status | [Draft / Final / Re-test update] |
| Classification | [Internal / Public] |
| Last updated | YYYY-MM-DD |

### Approvals

| Role | Name | Decision | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead evaluator | [@name] | [Issued] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Peer reviewer | [@name] | [Reviewed] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Product owner | [@name] | [Accepted / Accepted with comments] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Accessibility lead | [@name] | [Decision] | YYYY-MM-DD |

## Revision history

<!-- Guidance: Add a version for each re-test so status changes are traceable. -->

| Version | Date | Author | Change summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@name] | Draft for peer review |
| 1.0 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@name] | *Example:* Final report issued |
| 1.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@name] | *Example:* Re-test of A11Y-003 and A11Y-007; both resolved |

## Contents

<!-- Guidance: Keep in sync with headings. -->

1. [Executive summary](#1-executive-summary)
2. [Step 1: Evaluation scope](#2-step-1-evaluation-scope)
3. [Step 2: Exploration of the website](#3-step-2-exploration-of-the-website)
4. [Step 3: Representative sample](#4-step-3-representative-sample)
5. [Step 4: Audit method and assistive technologies](#5-step-4-audit-method-and-assistive-technologies)
6. [Results by success criterion](#6-results-by-success-criterion)
7. [Issues and remediation](#7-issues-and-remediation)
8. [Step 5: Conformance statement](#8-step-5-conformance-statement)
9. [Re-test plan](#9-re-test-plan)
10. [References](#10-references)

## 1. Executive summary

<!-- Guidance: State the target, the overall result, the most serious barriers in terms of who is affected, and the top fixes. Avoid SC numbers here. -->

*Example:* The online banking portal was evaluated against WCAG 2.2 level
AA between YYYY-MM-DD and YYYY-MM-DD using a sample of 18 pages and 3
complete processes. The portal **does not yet conform**: 11 of the 55
level A and AA success criteria fail on at least one sampled page.

The most serious barriers are:

1. Keyboard users cannot complete a payment, because the account picker cannot be reached or operated without a mouse.
2. Screen reader users are not told about form errors on the transfer form.
3. Several buttons have text and icon contrast below the minimum, affecting users with low vision.

| Result | Count of success criteria (A + AA) |
|---|---|
| Pass | [36] |
| Fail | [11] |
| Not present | [8] |
| Cannot tell | [0] |

Fixing the 4 issues rated Critical or High in section 7 would remove the
barriers to the core payment process.

## 2. Step 1: Evaluation scope

<!-- Guidance: Define exactly what is evaluated and against what. Scope decisions made later are a common source of disputes about the result. -->

### 2.1 Scope of the website

| Item | Definition |
|---|---|
| Website in scope | [`https://bank.example.com` and all pages under it, including logged-in areas] |
| Excluded | [Third-party chat widget; PDF statements archive older than 2024 (justify)] |
| Third-party content | [Payment confirmation iframe from provider: evaluated, issues reported as third-party] |

### 2.2 Conformance target

| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| WCAG version | WCAG 2.2 |
| Conformance level | AA (includes all level A criteria) |
| Accessibility support baseline | [Combinations listed in 5.2] |
| Additional requirements | [EN 301 549 mapping / internal design system checks / none] |

### 2.3 Evaluation type

[Basic / detailed / in-depth evaluation]. This evaluation is
[detailed]: it reports results per success criterion and per page, with
examples and remediation advice.

## 3. Step 2: Exploration of the website

<!-- Guidance: Before sampling, map the site: common pages, essential functions, page types, technologies and states. Record what you found so the sample can be justified. -->

### 3.1 Common web pages

[Home page, login, main navigation targets, contact, help, legal and
accessibility statement pages.]

### 3.2 Essential functionality

| ID | Functionality | Why essential |
|---|---|---|
| EF-01 | *Example:* Log in with two-factor authentication | Gate to all services |
| EF-02 | *Example:* Make a payment to a new payee | Core purpose of the service |
| EF-03 | *Example:* Download a statement | Legal record for customers |
| [EF-nn] | [Functionality] | [Reason] |

### 3.3 Variety of page types and states

[Forms, data tables, dashboards with charts, modal dialogs, error states,
empty states, mobile layout at 320 CSS pixels wide, dark mode.]

### 3.4 Web technologies relied upon

[HTML, CSS, JavaScript (React), WAI-ARIA, SVG, PDF for statements.]

## 4. Step 3: Representative sample

<!-- Guidance: Include common pages, each essential functionality as a complete process, each page type, plus a random selection (about 10% of the structured sample) to check that the sample is representative. -->

### 4.1 Structured sample

| ID | Page or screen | URL or path | Reason selected |
|---|---|---|---|
| P-01 | Home page | `/` | Common page |
| P-02 | Login | `/login` | Common page; EF-01 |
| P-03 | Two-factor code entry | `/login/verify` | EF-01; time limit |
| P-04 | Account overview | `/accounts` | Dashboard, data tables, charts |
| P-05 | Transaction history | `/accounts/123/transactions` | Large data table, filters |
| P-06 | New payment: payee details | `/payments/new` | EF-02 form |
| P-07 | New payment: review | `/payments/new/review` | EF-02; error prevention |
| P-08 | New payment: confirmation | `/payments/new/done` | EF-02; status message |
| P-09 | Statements | `/statements` | EF-03; PDF download |
| P-10 | Help centre article | `/help/cards` | Content page |
| [P-nn] | [Page] | [Path] | [Reason] |

### 4.2 Complete processes

| ID | Process | Pages |
|---|---|---|
| CP-01 | Log in | P-02, P-03, P-04 |
| CP-02 | Pay a new payee | P-06, P-07, P-08 |
| CP-03 | Download a statement | P-09 plus downloaded PDF |

### 4.3 Random sample

| ID | Page | Path | Selection method |
|---|---|---|---|
| R-01 | [Page] | [Path] | [Random selection from crawl of n URLs] |
| R-02 | [Page] | [Path] | [Method] |

## 5. Step 4: Audit method and assistive technologies

<!-- Guidance: Describe how each criterion was checked and with which tools and assistive technologies. This defines the accessibility support baseline. -->

### 5.1 Method

Each sampled page and process was checked against every level A and AA
success criterion using: automated scanning with [tool and version];
manual inspection of code and behaviour; keyboard-only operation;
zoom to 200% and 400%; reflow at 320 CSS pixels; text spacing override;
and testing with the assistive technologies below.

### 5.2 Assistive technologies and browsers tested

| Assistive technology | Version | Browser | Operating system |
|---|---|---|---|
| *Example:* NVDA | [2025.x] | Firefox [version] | Windows 11 |
| *Example:* JAWS | [2025] | Chrome [version] | Windows 11 |
| *Example:* VoiceOver | [Built in] | Safari [version] | macOS [version] |
| *Example:* VoiceOver | [Built in] | Safari | iOS [version] |
| *Example:* TalkBack | [version] | Chrome | Android [version] |
| *Example:* Windows Magnifier, browser zoom | Built in | Edge | Windows 11 |
| *Example:* Voice Control / Dragon | [version] | Safari / Chrome | [OS] |

### 5.3 Tools

| Tool | Purpose |
|---|---|
| [Automated checker, version] | Detects a subset of failures across all sampled pages |
| [Contrast analyser] | Text and non-text contrast |
| [Browser developer tools] | Accessibility tree, computed names and roles |
| [Bookmarklets or extensions] | Headings, landmarks, text spacing |

## 6. Results by success criterion

<!-- Guidance: One row per WCAG 2.2 level A and AA criterion. Use the short name only; follow the W3C link for its wording. "Failing pages" lists sample IDs; "Issues" links to section 7. -->

Result values: **Pass**, **Fail**, **Not present** (no content to which the criterion applies), **Cannot tell**.

### 6.1 Principle 1: Perceivable

| SC | Short name | Level | Result | Failing pages | Issues |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1.1 | Non-text Content | A | *Example:* Fail | P-04 | A11Y-004 |
| 1.2.1 | Audio-only and Video-only (Prerecorded) | A | Not present | | |
| 1.2.2 | Captions (Prerecorded) | A | *Example:* Pass | | |
| 1.2.3 | Audio Description or Media Alternative (Prerecorded) | A | *Example:* Pass | | |
| 1.2.4 | Captions (Live) | AA | Not present | | |
| 1.2.5 | Audio Description (Prerecorded) | AA | *Example:* Pass | | |
| 1.3.1 | Info and Relationships | A | *Example:* Fail | P-05, P-06 | A11Y-005 |
| 1.3.2 | Meaningful Sequence | A | [Result] | | |
| 1.3.3 | Sensory Characteristics | A | [Result] | | |
| 1.3.4 | Orientation | AA | [Result] | | |
| 1.3.5 | Identify Input Purpose | AA | *Example:* Fail | P-06 | A11Y-008 |
| 1.4.1 | Use of Color | A | *Example:* Fail | P-06 | A11Y-002 |
| 1.4.2 | Audio Control | A | Not present | | |
| 1.4.3 | Contrast (Minimum) | AA | *Example:* Fail | P-01, P-04, P-06 | A11Y-003 |
| 1.4.4 | Resize Text | AA | [Result] | | |
| 1.4.5 | Images of Text | AA | [Result] | | |
| 1.4.10 | Reflow | AA | [Result] | | |
| 1.4.11 | Non-text Contrast | AA | *Example:* Fail | P-06 | A11Y-003 |
| 1.4.12 | Text Spacing | AA | [Result] | | |
| 1.4.13 | Content on Hover or Focus | AA | [Result] | | |

### 6.2 Principle 2: Operable

| SC | Short name | Level | Result | Failing pages | Issues |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.1.1 | Keyboard | A | *Example:* Fail | P-06 | A11Y-001 |
| 2.1.2 | No Keyboard Trap | A | [Result] | | |
| 2.1.4 | Character Key Shortcuts | A | Not present | | |
| 2.2.1 | Timing Adjustable | A | *Example:* Fail | P-03 | A11Y-006 |
| 2.2.2 | Pause, Stop, Hide | A | [Result] | | |
| 2.3.1 | Three Flashes or Below Threshold | A | [Result] | | |
| 2.4.1 | Bypass Blocks | A | [Result] | | |
| 2.4.2 | Page Titled | A | [Result] | | |
| 2.4.3 | Focus Order | A | [Result] | | |
| 2.4.4 | Link Purpose (In Context) | A | [Result] | | |
| 2.4.5 | Multiple Ways | AA | [Result] | | |
| 2.4.6 | Headings and Labels | AA | [Result] | | |
| 2.4.7 | Focus Visible | AA | *Example:* Fail | P-04, P-05 | A11Y-007 |
| 2.4.11 | Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) | AA | [Result] | | |
| 2.5.1 | Pointer Gestures | A | [Result] | | |
| 2.5.2 | Pointer Cancellation | A | [Result] | | |
| 2.5.3 | Label in Name | A | [Result] | | |
| 2.5.4 | Motion Actuation | A | Not present | | |
| 2.5.7 | Dragging Movements | AA | [Result] | | |
| 2.5.8 | Target Size (Minimum) | AA | [Result] | | |

### 6.3 Principle 3: Understandable

| SC | Short name | Level | Result | Failing pages | Issues |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1.1 | Language of Page | A | [Result] | | |
| 3.1.2 | Language of Parts | AA | [Result] | | |
| 3.2.1 | On Focus | A | [Result] | | |
| 3.2.2 | On Input | A | [Result] | | |
| 3.2.3 | Consistent Navigation | AA | [Result] | | |
| 3.2.4 | Consistent Identification | AA | [Result] | | |
| 3.2.6 | Consistent Help | A | [Result] | | |
| 3.3.1 | Error Identification | A | *Example:* Fail | P-06 | A11Y-002 |
| 3.3.2 | Labels or Instructions | A | [Result] | | |
| 3.3.3 | Error Suggestion | AA | [Result] | | |
| 3.3.4 | Error Prevention (Legal, Financial, Data) | AA | *Example:* Pass | | |
| 3.3.7 | Redundant Entry | A | [Result] | | |
| 3.3.8 | Accessible Authentication (Minimum) | AA | [Result] | | |

### 6.4 Principle 4: Robust

| SC | Short name | Level | Result | Failing pages | Issues |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.1.2 | Name, Role, Value | A | *Example:* Fail | P-06 | A11Y-001 |
| 4.1.3 | Status Messages | AA | [Result] | | |

## 7. Issues and remediation

<!-- Guidance: One row per distinct issue (an issue may fail several criteria or appear on many pages). Severity reflects impact on users completing tasks, not the number of criteria. -->

### 7.1 Severity scale

| Severity | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Critical | Blocks a user group from completing an essential function |
| High | Makes an essential function very difficult; workaround needs help from another person |
| Medium | Causes difficulty or confusion; user can still complete the task |
| Low | Minor inconvenience; best-practice improvement |

### 7.2 Issue register

| ID | Issue | SC | Pages | Users affected | Severity | Remediation | Owner | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A11Y-001 | *Example:* Payee account picker is a custom `div` list that cannot be focused or operated with the keyboard and has no role or name | 2.1.1, 4.1.2 | P-06 | Keyboard, screen reader, voice control users | Critical | Use a native `select` or the design system combobox with listbox pattern; expose name and selected value | [@web-lead] | [Open] |
| A11Y-002 | *Example:* Form errors shown only as red border; no text message, not announced | 3.3.1, 1.4.1 | P-06 | Screen reader, colour-blind users | High | Add text error next to field, link with `aria-describedby`, move focus to error summary on submit | [@web-lead] | [Open] |
| A11Y-003 | *Example:* Primary button text 3.1:1 and input borders 1.9:1 | 1.4.3, 1.4.11 | P-01, P-04, P-06 | Low vision users | High | Update design tokens: button text to at least 4.5:1; borders to at least 3:1 | [@design-system] | [Open] |
| A11Y-006 | *Example:* Two-factor code expires after 60 s with no warning or way to extend | 2.2.1 | P-03 | Users with cognitive or motor impairments | High | Extend to 10 minutes or warn and allow extension | [@identity-team] | [Open] |
| A11Y-007 | *Example:* Focus outline removed on table rows and filter chips | 2.4.7 | P-04, P-05 | Keyboard users | Medium | Restore visible focus indicator from design system | [@web-lead] | [Open] |
| A11Y-004 | *Example:* Balance chart has no text alternative | 1.1.1 | P-04 | Screen reader users | Medium | Provide summary text and a data table toggle | [@web-lead] | [Open] |
| A11Y-005 | *Example:* Table headers marked up as bold cells, not `th` | 1.3.1 | P-05 | Screen reader users | Medium | Use `th` with `scope` | [@web-lead] | [Open] |
| A11Y-008 | *Example:* Name and email fields lack `autocomplete` | 1.3.5 | P-06 | Users with cognitive or motor impairments | Low | Add `autocomplete` tokens | [@web-lead] | [Open] |
| [A11Y-nnn] | [Issue] | [SC] | [Pages] | [Users] | [Severity] | [Remediation] | [@owner] | [Status] |

### 7.3 Best-practice observations

[Observations that do not fail WCAG 2.2 AA but would improve the
experience, for example level AAA criteria or plain-language improvements.]

## 8. Step 5: Conformance statement

<!-- Guidance: Only claim conformance if every sampled page and process passes every criterion at the target level. Otherwise publish a partial statement with the known failures. -->

*Example (does not conform):* Based on this evaluation, [Website name] as
of YYYY-MM-DD **does not conform** to WCAG 2.2 level AA. Failures were
found for 11 success criteria, listed in section 6. [Organisation] plans
to resolve the critical and high issues by YYYY-MM-DD.

*Template for a claim when all criteria pass:*

| Element | Value |
|---|---|
| Date of claim | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Guidelines and version | Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2, W3C Recommendation |
| Conformance level met | [AA] |
| Scope (web pages covered) | [Definition from section 2.1] |
| Technologies relied upon | [HTML, CSS, JavaScript, WAI-ARIA] |
| Evaluation method | WCAG-EM 1.0, sample in section 4 |
| Assistive technologies used | [Section 5.2] |

## 9. Re-test plan

<!-- Guidance: Plan how fixes will be verified and when the next full evaluation is due. Re-test the same sample plus the pages where fixes landed. -->

| Activity | Scope | Date | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Re-test critical and high issues | A11Y-001, -002, -003, -006 on all affected pages | YYYY-MM-DD | [@evaluator] |
| Re-test remaining issues | Medium and low issues | YYYY-MM-DD | [@evaluator] |
| Regression checks in CI | Automated checks on all routes; fail build on new critical violations | Continuous | [@web-lead] |
| Next full evaluation | New sample per WCAG-EM | YYYY-MM-DD (or after major redesign) | [@accessibility-lead] |

| Issue | Re-test date | Build | Result | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A11Y-001 | YYYY-MM-DD | [build] | [Resolved / Partly resolved / Not resolved] | [Notes] |

## 10. References

<!-- Guidance: Link to the exact W3C documents used. Readers need them for the normative wording of each criterion. -->

- W3C, *Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2*, W3C Recommendation, https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/
- W3C, *Understanding WCAG 2.2*, https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/
- W3C, *Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology (WCAG-EM) 1.0*, W3C Working Group Note, https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/
- [Organisation accessibility policy or statement]

## Standard and licence note

Based on the W3C Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology
(WCAG-EM) 1.0 for its five evaluation steps and on WCAG 2.2 for success
criterion numbers and short names. W3C documents are copyright the World
Wide Web Consortium and are cited under the W3C Document License
(https://www.w3.org/copyright/document-license/); no normative text is
reproduced here, so consult the W3C documents for the requirements. All
other text is original and written for this collection. Template licence:
MIT. This report format is not legal advice on accessibility law.