What We Keep Finding
ARIA, the markup layer that tells assistive technology what your widgets are, comes with a famous first rule. Do not use it if you do not have to. Most sites we audit carry more ARIA than they need and less than they think is working. A role that does not match the behavior. An aria-label gone stale. A state that never updates. Each one looks fine in code review and lies out loud.
Here is the mechanical reason your tooling will not catch any of that, and it comes from W3C rather than from us. The criterion covering names, roles and values has fifteen automated test rules filed under it, more than any other, and ten of those name it as the thing they test. Seven of the ten test whether something is present and not empty. Not whether it is right. A button whose accessible name is the word "button" passes all seven. So a page can clear every automated rule in the set while announcing nonsense to the person the rules were written for.
Which is why we do not review ARIA by reading it. We review it by listening. Every role, name and state gets checked against what the screen reader in your audit actually says, because the announcement is the product. A toggle that never says it is pressed did not fail a validator. It failed a person.
What We Check
- Check every role against the behavior it promises, so tabs that act like tabs
- Verify each control's accessible name is present, accurate, and plain
- Test state changes by ear, so expanded, selected, checked, and disabled
- Flag the ARIA that should just be native HTML, with the simpler swap named
- Name the patterns screen readers are known to disagree on, and the safest markup
What You Get
Every service on this site runs the same three-pass engine: an automated scan, an expert review of all 55 WCAG 2.2 A and AA rules, and a hands-on session with a professional blind screen-reader user. You get one report with every finding screenshotted, ranked by user impact, and linked to its fix. Your team fixes, we verify: the re-audit is half price within 3 months.
The format is not a mystery either. Read the sample report before you spend anything.
The Honest Limit
One honest limit, and W3C shares it. Screen readers disagree with each other more than anyone admits, and no auditor can make three tools speak identically. W3C's own authoring practices say as much, warning that its reference patterns deliberately do not work around gaps in browser and assistive-technology support, and advising teams to test with each combination that matters to their audience. We run one pairing per audit and the report names it. Where a pattern is known to split, we say who announces what and recommend the markup with the fewest surprises rather than pretending there is one right answer.
What It Costs
Rapid Audit: $499, up to 10 pages you pick, report in 5 business days. Standard Audit: $1,499, up to 25 pages in 10 business days. Flat rates, no discovery calls, and a real blind screen-reader user on every engagement. Pick your pages. We bring the humans.
Worth Reading Next
Related on this site
Guides, checklists, tools, and terms that go with this service.