Key Takeaways:
- An accessibility audit report is a starting point for remediation, not the end of the accessibility process.
- Teams should review findings carefully and prioritize issues based on user impact, severity, frequency, and task importance.
- Fixing shared templates, components, and workflows can address multiple accessibility issues at once.
- Every remediation should be validated before the related finding is considered closed.
- Government, education, finance, and publishing organizations may prioritize different digital experiences, but the overall remediation process remains similar.
- Accessibility should become part of regular design, development, content, procurement, and publishing workflows.
Receiving a WCAG audit report can feel like the hard part is over. In reality, the report gives your team a clear starting point. Knowing what to do after an accessibility audit helps your organization move from identifying barriers to fixing them, validating those fixes, and preventing the same problems from returning.
6 Steps to Take After an Accessibility Audit
-
Review the Audit Report with Your Team
The first step in understanding what happens after an accessibility audit is to review the findings in detail rather than immediately sending every issue to development. Look at each finding and identify:- Which accessibility requirement or WCAG success criterion is involved?
- Where the problem occurs?
- Which users or tasks may be affected?
- How frequently the problem appears?
- Whether the issue is isolated or part of a larger pattern?
- What remediation approach the auditor recommends?
- Government and municipal organizations should review issues across citizen-facing websites, service portals, online forms, and public documents.
- Educational institutions should examine findings across learning management systems, student portals, course materials, PDFs, and other learning content.
- Financial institutions should review online banking experiences, customer portals, applications, forms, statements, and other financial documents.
- Publishers should examine EPUBs, PDFs, websites, digital publications, and the platforms used to produce and distribute them.
-
Prioritize Issues Based on User Impact
An audit report can contain many findings, and trying to fix everything at once can be overwhelming and difficult to manage. Instead, create a priority order based on factors such as user impact, severity, frequency, and the importance of the affected task.- For example, an inaccessible checkout, application form, login process, or service request may deserve attention before a lower-impact issue that affects a less important page.
- Government and municipal organizations should prioritize barriers that could prevent people from accessing essential public services or information.
- Educational institutions should prioritize barriers that interfere with course access, coursework, student services, or other essential learning activities.
- Financial institutions should prioritize barriers that prevent customers from accessing accounts, submitting applications, completing transactions, or using important services.
- Publishers should prioritize barriers that affect readers and issues repeated across a large number of publications.
-
Find Fixes That Solve More Than One Problem
Not every audit finding needs to be handled as a separate development task. Look for patterns. If the same problem appears across a shared component, template, design system, document structure, or production process, fixing the underlying source may resolve many instances at once. This approach is especially useful for post-accessibility-audit remediation as it reduces repetitive work and addresses systemic accessibility barriers. For example, changing one shared form component may improve accessibility across many forms. Updating a document template may prevent the same structural problem from appearing in future documents. What changes by industry?- Government and municipal organizations may find recurring issues in shared website components or document templates.
- Educational institutions may find the same problem in an LMS component, course template, or document template used across multiple courses.
- Financial institutions may identify a shared customer portal component or form pattern affecting several customer journeys.
- Publishers may discover that an EPUB structure, publication template, or production workflow is responsible for recurring issues across hundreds of titles.
-
Convert Findings Into an Action Plan
For every significant issue, define who owns the remediation, what needs to change, how the work will be tracked, and when it should be completed. A centralized issue-tracking process can make it easier to monitor findings from open through remediation and validation. Your action plan may include:- The audit finding and affected WCAG criterion.
- The affected product, page, document, component, or workflow.
- The assigned owner.
- The remediation priority.
- The planned fix.
- The target completion date.
- The validation method.
- The current status.
- Government and municipal organizations may need coordination among IT, web and content teams, accessibility staff, procurement teams, and compliance or legal teams.
- Educational institutions may involve IT, accessibility teams, instructional designers, faculty, and content teams.
- Financial institutions may need product, engineering, accessibility, compliance, and document or content teams to work together.
- Publishers may involve editorial, production, digital teams, accessibility specialists, and external vendors.
-
Validate Every Fix Before Closing the Finding
The next step after an accessibility audit is to validate each remediation. A developer marking an issue as “fixed” does not necessarily mean the accessibility barrier has been resolved. Validation should confirm that the original problem has been addressed and that the remediation has not introduced another accessibility issue. Depending on the product and finding, validation may involve automated checks, manual testing, keyboard testing, screen reader testing, or other assistive technology testing. Remember that automated scans are useful, but they should not be treated as a complete replacement for human evaluation. -
What changes by industry?
- Government and municipal organizations should retest websites, forms, documents, and other public digital services using appropriate evaluation methods.
- Educational institutions should test LMS experiences and learning content, including relevant keyboard, screen reader, and assistive technology scenarios.
- Financial institutions should test the actual customer journey, such as whether a user can independently complete a form or access a service.
Publishers should validate EPUBs, PDFs, and other digital publications in their final published form. [Related Read: How to Fix Accessibility Issues in PDF ]
7. Integrate Accessibility Into Everyday Workflows
The final step to take after an accessibility audit is to prevent accessibility from becoming an issue that your organization addresses only when the next audit arrives.
Integrate accessibility throughout planning, design, development, and other stages of the production process rather than leaving it until evaluation. That can mean adding accessibility checks to design reviews, development and QA processes, content creation, procurement, document creation, and release workflows.
Related Read:
Strengthen your digital accessibility strategy with scalable remediation solutions designed for government agencies.
What changes by industry?
- Government and municipal organizations can incorporate accessibility into website updates, content workflows, procurement, and digital service development.
- Educational institutions can include accessibility in course creation, faculty workflows, LMS updates, and digital-content procurement.
- Financial institutions can integrate accessibility into the software development lifecycle, product updates, design reviews, and testing.
- Publishers can incorporate accessibility into editorial, production, document creation, and publication workflows.
The objective is to move from reacting to audit findings toward preventing recurring issues in the first place.
Industry-Specific Steps to Take After an Accessibility Audit
What to do after an accessibility audit does not vary completely from one organization to another. The process stays broadly the same, while the digital experiences, users, risks, and remediation priorities change.
| Steps to Take | General Approach | Government/Municipality | Education | Finance | Publishing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Examine the Audit Findings | Start by understanding the accessibility barriers, the relevant WCAG requirements, the locations where they occur, and the potential effect on users. | Review findings across public websites, resident service portals, digital forms, and documents that citizens rely on. | Examine accessibility issues affecting the LMS, student-facing portals, online course materials, PDFs, and other educational resources. | Review findings across digital banking services, customer accounts, applications, forms, financial statements, and other financial content. | Examine accessibility barriers across EPUB files, PDFs, publishing websites, digital titles, and the systems used to create them. |
| Decide What Needs to Be Fixed First | Rank findings according to their effect on users, level of risk, frequency, and importance to the task being completed. | Address barriers that could make it difficult for residents to obtain essential information or complete important government services. | Focus first on issues that could stop students from accessing learning materials, completing coursework, or using necessary student services. | Give higher priority to barriers that could interfere with account access, applications, transactions, or other important customer activities. | Focus on barriers that affect readers directly, particularly when the same problem appears across a high volume of publications. |
| Identify Solutions | Look for underlying patterns where one change could remove the same barrier from multiple pages, files, components, or experiences. | Check whether a shared website component or commonly used document template is responsible for repeated accessibility problems. | Determine whether an LMS component, course structure, or shared document template is creating the same barrier across multiple classes or resources. | Investigate whether a reusable portal element or form pattern is causing accessibility problems across several customer experiences. | Look for recurring problems within publication templates, EPUB structures, or production systems that could affect many titles at once. |
| Build a Remediation Plan | Convert audit findings into defined tasks with clear owners, priorities, deadlines, and methods for tracking progress. | Assign work across the teams responsible for technology, web content, accessibility, procurement, and compliance as needed. | Coordinate responsibilities among technology teams, accessibility professionals, faculty, instructional designers, and content teams. | Bring together product, engineering, accessibility, compliance, and document or content teams to address the findings. | Coordinate remediation between editorial, production, digital, accessibility, and external vendor teams where necessary. |
| Validate Fixes | Reevaluate each remediation to make sure it addresses the original barrier before marking the finding as complete. | Recheck public websites, online forms, documents, and digital services using testing methods appropriate to each experience. | Evaluate the LMS and learning materials with relevant keyboard, screen reader, and assistive technology scenarios. | Walk through the affected customer experience to confirm that users can complete important tasks without encountering the original barrier. | Check the final EPUB, PDF, or digital publication output to make sure accessibility improvements remain intact after production. |
| Incorporate Accessibility Into the Workflow | Build accessibility checks into everyday processes so that the same barriers are less likely to reappear. | Include accessibility considerations in website updates, content production, document creation, procurement, and digital service development. | Integrate accessibility into course development, faculty processes, LMS changes, and the selection or creation of digital learning content. | Include accessibility throughout product development, software releases, design reviews, testing, and other parts of the software development lifecycle (SDLC). | Incorporate accessibility into editorial planning, content production, document creation, and the final publication process. |
How Continual Engine Can Support Accessibility Remediation
An audit gives your organization valuable information, but turning that information into sustained accessibility improvements requires coordination across teams, digital assets, and workflows.
Continual Engine helps organizations approach accessibility as an ongoing process by supporting accessibility work across websites, documents, and other digital experiences. The goal should not be to fix findings only until the next audit. It should be to use audit results to improve the systems and processes that create digital experiences in the first place.
Turn Your Audit Findings Into Meaningful Action
Need help turning accessibility findings into a practical remediation and validation plan?
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs):
-
How long does the work after an accessibility audit usually take?
There is no standard timeline. The duration depends on the number and complexity of findings, the size of the digital product, available resources, and how many teams are involved. Prioritize high-impact issues, so your team can begin addressing the most important barriers even when full remediation will take longer.
-
Do you need the same auditor to validate fixes?
Not necessarily. The original auditor can be helpful because they already understand the findings, testing scope, and context. However, another qualified accessibility professional can also perform validation if they have enough information about the original evaluation and the changes made.
-
What if some issues cannot be fixed right away after an accessibility audit?
That is common, particularly when remediation requires major code changes, vendor involvement, platform changes, or a product redesign. Track unresolved findings, document the reason for the delay, assign an owner, and establish a realistic remediation plan. Do not claim conformance to a WCAG level if applicable success criteria within the evaluation scope remain unmet.
-
Can scans replace a follow-up audit?
No. Automated scans can help identify certain issues and catch regressions, but they cannot evaluate every aspect of accessibility. Combine automated testing with human evaluation when assessing WCAG conformance.
