Accessibility Testing Services:
2026 Guide to Finding the Right Partner

WCAG Version & Conformance Level

They should test against WCAG 2.1 Level AA at minimum. If they're still on WCAG 2.0, they're behind. Some advanced services also test against WCAG 2.2 criteria.

🚩 Red flag: Tests only WCAG 2.0 or 'Section 508' without WCAG mapping.

Actionable Remediation Guidance

A list of violations is useless without fix instructions. The best services provide code examples, priority rankings, and estimated effort for each issue.

🚩 Red flag: Just lists violations without explaining how to fix them.

Testing by Disabled Users

For manual audits, testers who actually use assistive technology daily catch issues that non-disabled testers miss. Ask if their team includes people with disabilities.

🚩 Red flag: All testers are sighted developers using screen readers for the first time.

No Overlay Recommendations

Any provider recommending overlay widgets (accessiBe, UserWay, etc.) as a compliance solution is not acting in your best interest. Overlays don't fix code and may increase lawsuit risk.

🚩 Red flag: Suggests installing an overlay widget as a fix.

Ongoing Monitoring Capabilities

One-time audits go stale immediately. Look for providers that offer continuous monitoring to catch regressions from content updates, code deployments, and third-party changes.

🚩 Red flag: Only offers point-in-time audits with no monitoring option.

Clear Reporting & Documentation

Reports should be understandable by non-technical stakeholders (executives, legal) while also containing enough technical detail for developers to act on.

🚩 Red flag: Reports are just raw data dumps or generic PDFs.

❌ Relying only on automated testing

Automated tools catch 30-40% of issues. You'll miss the majority of accessibility barriers, including all of the interaction and usability issues that trigger lawsuits.

✅ Fix: Use automated tools for monitoring, but supplement with periodic manual testing.

❌ Testing only the homepage

Lawsuits target specific user flows — checkout, login, contact forms, product pages. Your homepage might score an A while your checkout is an F.

✅ Fix: Test your top 10 pages by traffic and all critical user flows.

❌ One-time audits without monitoring

Your site changes constantly — content updates, code deployments, third-party widgets. A clean audit becomes stale within weeks.

✅ Fix: Set up continuous automated monitoring + annual manual audits.

❌ Installing an overlay instead of fixing issues

Overlays don't fix your code. They've been called out by the FTC ($1M fine to accessiBe), cited in lawsuits as insufficient, and condemned by 800+ accessibility professionals.

✅ Fix: Fix your actual code. Use real testing tools and remediation.

❌ Ignoring mobile accessibility

Over 60% of web traffic is mobile. Mobile-specific issues — touch targets too small, pinch-to-zoom disabled, content hidden at small viewports — are increasingly cited in lawsuits.

✅ Fix: Test on actual mobile devices with VoiceOver (iOS) and TalkBack (Android).

❌ Not documenting your efforts

Courts look for 'good faith effort.' If you've been actively testing and fixing issues, documentation of your process provides legal protection.

✅ Fix: Keep scan results, audit reports, and remediation logs. Maintain an accessibility statement.

How much do accessibility testing services cost?

Costs vary widely by approach. Automated scanning tools range from $0 to $99/month. Manual accessibility audits typically cost $3,000 to $15,000 per website. Hybrid services (automated + manual) usually run $1,000 to $5,000. For small businesses, starting with a free automated scan and then investing in manual testing for critical pages is the most cost-effective approach.

What is the difference between automated and manual accessibility testing?

Automated testing uses software to scan your code for known WCAG violations (missing alt text, contrast issues, missing labels). It catches 30-40% of accessibility issues instantly. Manual testing involves human testers navigating your site with assistive technologies (screen readers, keyboard only, voice control) to catch the remaining 60-70% — things like logical tab order, meaningful content structure, and real-world usability for disabled users. The best approach combines both.

How often should I test my website for accessibility?

Automated scans should run at least weekly (daily is ideal) to catch regressions from content updates, code changes, or third-party widget updates. Manual audits should be conducted annually at minimum, or whenever you make significant design/functionality changes. Continuous monitoring with automated tools is the most practical approach for ongoing compliance.

Can automated tools replace manual accessibility testing?

No. Automated tools are essential for catching common, code-level violations quickly, but they only detect 30-40% of WCAG issues. Many accessibility requirements — like whether content is logically structured, whether custom interactions are intuitive, or whether video captions are accurate — require human judgment. The strongest compliance posture combines automated monitoring with periodic manual audits.

What should I look for in an accessibility testing service?

Key factors include: WCAG version tested against (should be 2.1 AA minimum), whether they provide remediation guidance (not just a list of issues), testing methodology (automated only, manual, or hybrid), whether testers include people with actual disabilities, reporting format and actionability, ongoing monitoring capabilities, and cost structure.

Do I need accessibility testing if I use an overlay widget?

Yes — overlay widgets do not make your website compliant. The FTC fined accessiBe $1 million for deceptive compliance claims, and 25% of ADA lawsuits now specifically cite overlay widgets as insufficient. Overlays add a toolbar on top of your site but don't fix underlying code issues. You still need real testing and remediation.