An audit against a named standard
WCAG at a stated level and version, tested page by page, with each finding tied to a specific criterion. An audit that returns a score and no criterion references is not something you can act on or show anyone.
New York
Website accessibility in New York this is the market where it is tested.
More web accessibility claims are filed in New York federal courts than almost anywhere else in the country. Most defendants had no idea their site was a problem.
Overview
What accessibility work actually involves
Website accessibility work in New York costs $2,000 to $25,000 depending on the size of the site and how much was built without it. New York sees a disproportionate share of US web accessibility claims, which makes conformance a commercial risk question here rather than only a design-quality one. We build and remediate to WCAG. We are not your legal advisor.
Testing by hand, not just by tool
Automated scanners catch perhaps a third of real problems. The rest needs a person moving through the page with a keyboard and a screen reader: focus order, focus visibility, error messages, modal traps, custom controls.
Forms are where most sites fail
Labels that are not programmatically associated, errors announced only in colour, required fields marked with an asterisk and nothing else, and timeouts nobody can extend. Forms are also where the money is, so this is where remediation pays first.
Overlays and widgets are not a fix
The one-line accessibility widget is heavily marketed and does not make a non-conformant site conformant. Plenty of sites carrying one have still received claims. Fix the page rather than covering it.
Documentation is part of the deliverable
What was tested, against what standard, what was fixed, what remains and why. If a question ever arrives, the difference between a documented programme and a good intention is the entire difference.
Cheaper in a rebuild than after one
Built into a new site, accessibility is a rounding error. Retrofitted into a five-year-old template it is a project. If you are rebuilding anyway, this is the cheapest it will ever be.
Pricing
What accessibility work costs
| Project | Range (USD) | Timeline | What you get |
|---|---|---|---|
| Audit only, small site | $2,000 to $5,000 | 1 to 3 weeks | Page-by-page findings against WCAG criteria, prioritised, with reproduction steps |
| Audit and remediation, small site | $5,000 to $12,000 | 3 to 6 weeks | Above plus the fixes, keyboard and screen reader retest, written statement |
| Larger site or ecommerce | $12,000 to $25,000 | 6 to 14 weeks | Templates, components, checkout flow, third party review, documentation |
| Accessible new build | Add 5 to 10 percent | Within the build | Contrast, focus, labels, headings and components correct from the first wireframe |
| Ongoing conformance | $400 to $2,500 per month | Ongoing | Checks on new pages and releases, regression testing, updated documentation |
We build and test to WCAG. Whether your organisation has a legal obligation, and at what level, is a question for your own counsel rather than for us.
What to avoid
Where New York sites fail
| Problem | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Images with no meaningful alt text | The most common finding and the easiest to fix |
| Form errors shown only in red | A colour-blind or screen reader user gets no error at all |
| Focus outline removed for aesthetics | A keyboard user cannot tell where they are on the page |
| Custom dropdowns built from plain divs | Unreachable and unreadable without a mouse |
| Modals that trap or lose focus | The user cannot get out and cannot get back |
| Video with no captions | Excludes deaf users and fails a criterion outright |
| An overlay widget instead of remediation | Marketed as a fix, has not prevented claims |
| Problem | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Images with no meaningful alt text | The most common finding and the easiest to fix |
| Form errors shown only in red | A colour-blind or screen reader user gets no error at all |
| Focus outline removed for aesthetics | A keyboard user cannot tell where they are on the page |
| Custom dropdowns built from plain divs | Unreachable and unreadable without a mouse |
| Modals that trap or lose focus | The user cannot get out and cannot get back |
| Video with no captions | Excludes deaf users and fails a criterion outright |
| An overlay widget instead of remediation | Marketed as a fix, has not prevented claims |
Choosing
What to ask an accessibility supplier
| The question | A good answer | Walk away if |
|---|---|---|
| Which standard and level do you test to? | WCAG, named version and level | Full ADA compliance |
| How much of the testing is manual? | Most of it, and they say who does it | Our scanner is comprehensive |
| Will each finding cite a criterion? | Yes, with reproduction steps | A score out of a hundred |
| Do you retest after remediation? | Yes, and it is in the price | Retesting is quoted separately |
There is no such thing as certified ADA compliant. Any supplier promising that phrase is telling you they do not understand the exposure.
Detail
Common questions
Why is accessibility a bigger issue in New York?
New York federal courts handle a large share of US web accessibility claims, which makes it a commercial risk question here rather than only a question of doing good work. Most businesses that receive a claim had no idea the site was non-conformant.
What does website accessibility cost?
An audit on a small site runs $2,000 to $5,000. Audit and remediation runs $5,000 to $12,000. Larger sites and ecommerce run $12,000 to $25,000. Built into a new site from the start it adds roughly 5 to 10 percent.
Will an accessibility overlay solve it?
No. The one-line widget is heavily marketed and does not make a non-conformant site conformant. Sites carrying one have still received claims. The fix is the page itself.
Can you guarantee we will not receive a claim?
No, and nobody honestly can. What we can do is test to a named WCAG standard, remediate what fails, retest and document the whole thing. Whether you have an obligation and at what level is a question for your counsel.
How much of the testing is automated?
A minority of it. Automated tools reliably catch perhaps a third of real problems. The rest requires moving through the page with a keyboard and a screen reader, which is where the findings that matter come from.
What usually fails first?
Forms. Labels not programmatically associated, errors signalled only by colour, focus outlines removed for appearance, and custom controls built from plain divs. Forms are also where your revenue is, so remediation pays there first.
Is it cheaper to fix or to rebuild?
If you are rebuilding anyway, build it in and it is a rounding error. Retrofitting a five-year-old template is a project of its own, and on a large site it can cost more than the original build did.
What do we get at the end?
A written record of what was tested, against which standard, what was fixed, what remains and why. That documentation is the difference between a programme you can point to and a good intention you cannot.
Detail
Site that has never been keyboard tested?
Send us the URL and we will tell you what a keyboard user cannot reach on your three most important pages.