A Step-by-Step Guide to Conducting a Web Accessibility Audit

A web accessibility audit examines whether people with disability can perceive, understand, navigate and use a website or digital service. It combines automated scans, manual checks and testing with assistive technologies to reveal barriers that may be missed during ordinary quality assurance.

For Australian organisations, accessibility is also a governance and risk issue. The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 applies to digital services, while WCAG provides the practical criteria used to assess conformance. A careful audit helps teams improve usability, support compliance and reach a broader local market.

The most reliable process begins with clear scope and representative users. It then moves through planning, inspection, testing, prioritisation and reporting. A collaborative workspace such as UCDmanager can keep findings, user needs, requirements and remediation evidence connected throughout the project.

Define the audit scope and success criteria

Start by deciding what will be assessed. Include important templates and journeys rather than checking only the home page: account creation, search, checkout, contact forms, bookings, media, error states and authenticated areas. For an Australian retail site, this might include delivery information for Sydney, Melbourne and regional locations, as well as payment and returns processes.

Select the accessibility standard and level you will use. WCAG 2.2 Level AA is a practical benchmark for many organisations, although contractual or government requirements may specify another target. Record the browsers, operating systems, screen sizes and assistive technologies included in the audit, along with the date and version of the website.

Understand users and their tasks

Accessibility requirements become clearer when linked to real user goals. Identify people who may use screen readers, keyboard navigation, magnification, captions, voice control or alternative input devices. Consider age, digital confidence, language, connectivity and temporary impairments as well as permanent disability.

Personas and task-based scenarios help the team judge whether an issue affects a meaningful journey. UCDmanager’s personas workspace can help organise user characteristics, needs and accessibility considerations alongside other UX research. Include Australian usage patterns where relevant, such as mobile access on public transport in Melbourne or variable connectivity in regional Queensland.

Run automated accessibility checks

Use an established auditing tool to identify common technical problems, including missing alternative text, insufficient colour contrast, duplicate IDs, invalid form labels and heading structure errors. Run scans across representative pages and states, because a single automated result rarely reflects the whole service.

Automated testing is efficient, but it cannot determine whether alternative text is meaningful, whether focus moves logically or whether instructions are understandable. Treat scan output as evidence for investigation rather than a final compliance score. Remove duplicate findings, verify false positives and record the affected page, component and user impact.

Complete a manual interface review

Navigate the website using only a keyboard. Check that every interactive element receives visible focus, that the tab order follows the intended sequence and that menus, dialogs, carousels and forms can be operated without a mouse. Test skip links, focus trapping and the ability to escape expanded controls.

Review content and visual presentation manually as well. Check heading hierarchy, link purpose, language declarations, zoom up to 200 percent, text spacing and reflow on narrow screens. Confirm that colour is not the only way to communicate status, and that error messages explain what happened and how to fix it. Australian English, familiar date formats and plain language can also reduce friction for local users.

Test with assistive technologies

Use a screen reader such as NVDA, VoiceOver or TalkBack to complete priority tasks from start to finish. Listen for the page title, landmark structure, headings, form labels, validation messages, table headers and dynamic updates. A technically valid page may still be confusing if announcements are out of sequence or controls have vague names.

Include people with disability in user testing whenever possible. Ask participants to complete realistic tasks rather than simply inspect isolated components. For services used by Australians with varied internet access, test on mobile devices and slower connections as well as current desktop browsers. Capture observed barriers without asking participants to diagnose the underlying code.

Record, prioritise and report findings

Each issue should include a concise title, affected URL or component, WCAG reference, reproduction steps, observed behaviour, expected behaviour and likely user impact. Add screenshots or short recordings where they clarify the problem, while protecting personal information. Group repeated defects by shared component so developers can fix the source rather than every instance.

Prioritise issues by severity, reach, task importance and implementation effort. A missing label on a primary application form may deserve urgent attention, while a low-impact decorative issue can enter the regular backlog. Share findings with designers, developers, content authors and product owners, and assign an owner and target date for each remediation item.

Validate fixes and maintain accessibility

After changes are released, retest the original scenario and run regression checks on related components. Confirm that a fix has not introduced new problems, such as a modal that now has a label but traps keyboard focus. Keep evidence of retesting, including the environment, test method and result.

Accessibility should become part of the delivery lifecycle rather than a once-only audit. Add accessibility acceptance criteria to requirements, include keyboard and automated checks in continuous testing, and review new content before publication. For organisations serving the Australian public, maintaining an accessible feedback channel and documenting responses demonstrates that accessibility remains an ongoing service responsibility. Teams that need help organising an evaluation can use the UCDmanager contact page to explore a collaborative approach.