Important scope note: an accessibility evaluation identifies evidence within an agreed sample and standard. It is not a certification, legal opinion or guarantee that an entire service complies with a particular law. Confirm legal obligations with the relevant regulator or a qualified adviser.

What the evaluation is for

The work creates a documented view of accessibility barriers within a clearly defined scope. Before testing starts, the scope should state the pages, components, user journeys, technologies, WCAG version and conformance level being evaluated. This boundary matters: W3C conformance applies to complete pages and complete processes, while a sample-based review only supports conclusions about the sample and method used.

W3C advises using WCAG 2.2 for future applicability. A client may need another agreed version because of a contract, procurement requirement or applicable policy. The evaluation records that choice instead of silently treating one standard as the legal answer for every organisation.

Methodology

Define the scope. Record the evaluation goal, included URLs and states, target standard, supported technologies and any exclusions.
Explore the service. Identify page types, shared components, key functionality, authentication states, documents and complete processes that may need representation.
Select a sample. Where every page cannot be evaluated, select representative and relevant pages deliberately and document what the sample does not cover.
Use tools as assistance. Automated checks can locate potential issues efficiently, but W3C says evaluation tools cannot determine accessibility on their own. Manual judgement remains necessary.
Review interaction. Depending on scope, this can include keyboard operation, focus, zoom and reflow, labels, instructions, errors, names and roles, status messages and selected assistive-technology checks.
Consider user involvement. Evaluation with disabled users can reveal usability barriers that conformance review alone may miss. It complements standards evaluation; it does not replace it or support generalisation from a small group.

Deliverables

Scope record stating what was evaluated, against which WCAG version and level, using which environments and methods.
Findings register with reproducible evidence, affected locations, relevant success criteria and a practical priority rationale.
Remediation notes that distinguish content, design, code, document and process work. Recommendations still need implementation and retesting.
Limitations and open questions so readers do not mistake sampled evidence for a site-wide certification.
Findings review in a format agreed during scoping, with ownership and next actions recorded.

Who this is for

Teams that need an evidence-based accessibility backlog before redesign or remediation.
Product owners who need to understand barriers in important journeys or shared components.
Procurement and delivery teams that have an agreed technical standard and need the evaluation scope documented.
Teams preparing a new release that want accessibility findings available before launch decisions.

What this service does not decide

Usability.ie does not determine whether an organisation is in scope for legislation, issue a legal compliance certificate or promise that remediation will make every page conform. Regulatory scope can depend on the organisation, service, product, contract and current law. Those questions should be resolved separately; the agreed answer can then inform the technical evaluation scope.

Engagement shape

Timing depends on the number of distinct templates and states, the complexity of complete processes, access to authenticated areas, documents, technologies and whether user evaluation is included. The written scope should list the sample and outputs before work begins rather than promising a universal audit size or finding count.

Where this links into design and build

Some accessibility findings are content fixes the client team can do, while others require design or development changes. If separate implementation support is needed, its scope, responsibilities and retesting boundary should be agreed explicitly. Our sister studio digitaldesign.ie can be considered for design and build work; the evaluation itself does not promise remediation capacity or a conforming outcome.

Standards and evaluation sources

Ready to scope it?

Use the brief call to identify the service, pages, processes and evaluation standard that need to be in scope. A written proposal can then state the method, limitations, timing and fee.

Request an audit →

Website Accessibility Evaluation