Recently, we lost two proposals that we were more than qualified to win. We diligently sought the buyers’ feedback and will use it to guide our future proposals. As we talked with them, however, it was clear that they had not really considered the challenges of making their decades of digital infrastructure accessible. This blog post reviews some of the challenges causing state and local governments to fail at digital accessibility and what they should consider when looking for digital accessibility services.
Don’t Underestimate the Difficulty of Making Your Website Accessible
The new ADA Title II web accessibility regulation requires state and local governments to make their web content accessible by April 24, 2026 (although smaller entities and special district governments get until April 24, 2027). To meet this challenge, many governments assume they can ask a consultant to review their website and correct the problems they identify. At a superficial level, this makes sense because that’s similar to the process they use for architectural barriers when conducting a self-evaluation and transition plan. Here’s why what works with buildings and traditional services doesn’t work with websites.
- Scope. Over the last several decades, state and local governments have created thousands—sometimes millions—of web pages and electronic documents on their websites. Manually evaluating each page of this content could easily bankrupt many counties and municipalities. Relying on automated testing tools to address such a large scope does not provide much benefit because these scanning tools do not identify many blocking and critical issues that can only be identified with manual testing. Often, these barriers can only be fixed by the IT product’s vendors who have access to the code source.
- Diversity. Accessibility consultants typically focus on reviewing a test sample of the website that represents the templates and components that are common throughout the customer’s content management system. For most customers, this works great as it allows for identifying issues within a manageable and affordable scope. Unfortunately, for state and local governments, this method is inadequate because they have dozens, if not hundreds, of separate third-party web applications that they use for the diverse services they offer. These applications can range from pet licensing to payment of fines, and each uses its own set of templates and components that extend beyond just their website presence.
- Depth. The Department of Justice regulation generally requires full compliance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.1 A/AA (WCAG). I’ve mentioned before that full WCAG compliance is a pipedream, but understanding how to justify partial compliance requires planning. In a typical private-sector web audit, accessibility consultants identify all the ways a web page violates WCAG. This requires time, which comes at a cost. Because State and local governments provide numerous services that go beyond just their basic website, they need to prioritize and focus on whether there are barriers for people with disabilities in accessing these many third-party services, which also help ensure resources are being used wisely.
When you combine these three factors together, the approach that state and local governments should adopt is:
- Manual Full Audit of Main Content Management System (CMS). Your content management system is the basic framework for your government’s website. Because you directly control this content, this should get a thorough WCAG review. It’s highly unlikely that this will require more than 30 pages. In an RFP for a city, I would outline:
- “The Consultant will work with the City to identify up to thirty (30) web pages that represent the templates, components, and type of content used in its main CMS.”
- “The Consultant will perform a manual accessibility review of the mutually agreed upon pages, identify any inconsistencies with WCAG 2.1 A/AA, provide a report to the City, and help City staff understand how to avoid creating these barriers in the future.”
- “The Consultant will also work with the City to identify barriers that are due to the CMS vendor. It shall prepare a report (to be delivered only to the City’s General Counsel). If the City wishes to approach the CMS vendor with this report, the Consultant shall make itself available for consultation.”
- Use Case Review of Web Applications. What about those dozens (hundreds) of third-party web applications used for government services? Performing a complete WCAG review on these applications is cost-prohibitive and should not be your responsibility. Plus, the ADA isn’t clear about scope—which may mean that the single-user license to Canva that you bought your intern in the digital marketing team is also technically covered. Regardless, you must ensure that the important government services applications are accessible. Here is what I would put in an RFP for a city:
- “The Consultant will work with the City to identify a set of web applications that will be reviewed under this contract, based on compliance obligations and overall risk to the City.”
- “The Consultant shall perform up to three hours of accessibility use case testing per web application and will prepare a basic report describing WCAG violations that affect the user’s ability to obtain the service supported by the web application. This report shall be delivered only to the City’s General Counsel. If the City wishes to approach the web application vendor with this report, the Consultant shall make itself available for consultation.”
Unfortunately, this kind of effort is hard to do effectively as a fixed-cost contract unless you know exactly how many web applications you want to review. Instead, organizations should consider setting an overall dollar limit but allowing for contract extensions.
Automated testing solutions don’t offer a good solution here and may only complicate or confuse your efforts. Automated testing solutions are great AFTER a manual review because they are very good at catching problems created by your content creators. Automated solutions are far less effective at testing more complex problems, like keyboard traps, which are invariably due to the vendor. We know of at least two multi-billion-dollar companies that relied too heavily on automated testing solutions—and then got sued by disability advocates because of fundamental accessibility problems that automated solutions fail to identify.
Underestimating What Compliance Means
There aren’t many lawyers who understand the ADA—and fewer still have any appreciation of digital technology. For instance, it’s after the April web compliance deadline, and you are a medium-sized city that has a web application that costs $150,000 that you use for an essential government service. The application has some fundamental WCAG barriers that make it difficult (but not impossible) to use with a screen reader. A blind individual sues you and demands that you make the application accessible today. Can you argue that this would be an undue burden?
In a previous blog post, I mentioned that, based on how undue burden is interpreted and how the new DOJ regulation is written, the city would likely be required to stop what it’s doing and replace the application. If you had a digital accessibility plan that outlined when you were upgrading applications for accessibility, you likely wouldn’t have to drop everything you were doing and replace the application. Understanding why this is the case—and being able to articulate why—requires a lot of experience in digital accessibility law. Plus, that understanding constantly evolves with new developments specific to accessibility.
State and local governments also buy a TON of web applications. Previously, I mentioned the example of a single-user license for Canva being purchased for an intern in the marketing department. Technically, this falls under the new Title II web accessibility regulation. But do you want all your IT purchase requests to get bottle-necked with your legal department?
Lawyers are really good at crafting solutions if they are well-versed in a particular area of law. However, from experience, I know that lawyers are not so good at creating organizational processes that define clear rules—especially about IT procurements. This requires the IT and procurement departments.
When you combine these ideas together, the approach that I believe state and local governments should adopt is:
- Expect Your Digital Accessibility Consultant to Know Law and Policy. Your digital accessibility consultant shouldn’t just be a technical whiz—they need to know the laws and policies that drive technical requirements. They should live and breathe digital accessibility. Here is what I would put in an RFP for a city:
- “The Consultant shall provide subject matter guidance on all aspects of digital accessibility law and policy. The Consultant is expected to be up to date on the latest regulations and technical assistance from federal and state agencies and be ready to advise the City on how to incorporate these principles into its accessibility planning.”
- “The Consultant shall provide consulting services to the City’s IT and Procurement policies. It shall review and update these policies to ensure that current and future web and digital technologies are as accessible as possible and minimize risk to the City.”
- Create Great Processes. It’s one thing to do something well; it’s something else entirely to do something well consistently. The only way we’ve found to achieve that kind of consistency is by creating written, repeatable processes. For instance, this can start with risk matrices that separate essential apps (like pet licensing) from minor apps (like that Canva example). After being validated, risk matrices can evolve into checklists to make the compliance steps as simple as possible. Bridging the gap between legal, IT, and procurement is where consultants can provide a massive benefit because they aren’t invested in one department or another. Plus, they bring outside expertise specific to the challenge. Here’s what I would put in an RFP for a city:
- “The Consultant shall work with the City’s Legal, IT, and Procurement teams to create clear processes reinforcing its accessibility policies. These processes shall ensure that existing and future web and digital technologies meet WCAG and other accessibility requirements to the maximum extent feasible.”
- “The Consultant shall further work with the City to document these processes to enable new Legal, IT, and Procurement staff to understand and implement these requirements in their job duties immediately.”
Failing to Start with a Plan
Digital accessibility consultants have seen it all. We’ve seen programs that work and programs that fail. Reputable consultants also stay abreast of best practices and new developments in our field. So why not ask for our help when creating YOUR digital accessibility plan?
I would be cautious about consultants offering a “one-stop-shop” for all your accessibility needs. As the digital accessibility field has evolved, many solution vendors have consolidated and now offer testing and remediation services across both web and electronic documents. As a small policy-focused shop, we work with several vendors in each of these spaces, and we have found that no one company offers the perfect package for everything. Instead, it’s important to understand the different categories of the web and digital technologies that need to be addressed—and then have a solid plan for each. Some examples of the major categories are:
- Existing Web Applications. This includes the government’s CMS and its host of web applications that it uses for specialized services.
- Existing Electronic Documents. This means PDF documents. The number of available tools and services for PDF accessibility has increased dramatically. The prices for these solutions also vary much more than those for web accessibility services, so it pays to get a list of vendors and shop around.
- New Technologies. Of course, new technologies need to be accessible, and procurement is the most important gatekeeper here. However, widespread web technologies can sneak in through different channels. For instance, some major applications (e.g., pet licensing) often fall below procurement dollar thresholds.
- New Electronic Documents. There are a set of different technologies here that can make it easier for new electronic documents to be accessible. For instance, documents that follow a standard template can be made accessible once (the template), and all documents made from that template will also be accessible. It’s important to have a good understanding of these options—and a list of the different vendors who provide them—and then shop around because prices vary tremendously here as well.
Of course, you will want to ensure that training is also part of your plan. Here, too, it’s important to plan carefully. The natural knee-jerk reaction is to train content creators on WCAG 2.1 when only a small handful of success criteria apply to their job roles. Instead, good training should focus on the types of content they are likely to encounter, simple tools they can use to create accessible content confidently, and on-demand resources available when on the job and performing specific tasks requiring access to that training.
- Digital Accessibility Plan. While you may have already created a digital accessibility plan, you should be open to adjusting it based on your digital accessibility consultant’s experience. Here is how I would incorporate these ideas into an RFP for a city:
- “The City has prepared a draft Digital Accessibility Plan to meet the new DOJ Title II web accessibility regulation. The Consultant shall work with City staff to validate this Plan. This may include advising City Counsel, IT, Procurement, and other staff on accessibility legal and policy requirements, formulating communications plans, and other services to ensure successful implementation of the Plan.”
- “The Consultant shall update the Plan based on new developments. The Consultant shall also advise the City on other documents and tools that may help manage the implementation of the Plan. These documents include heat maps, scorecards, dashboards, and other tools the City can use to manage implementation.”
- “At a minimum, the Plan should include a high-level methodical plan for existing web applications, existing electronic documents, new web applications, and new electronic documents. It should also identify how training will support this plan. However, it should not include a detailed application-by-application or document-by-document review as these should be addressed separately in the various tools (e.g., scorecards).”
- “The Consultant shall identify or create (at the City’s discretion) training that will successfully implement the elements of the Plan.”
- “Either quarterly or semi-annually, the Consultant shall prepare a summary of the City’s success in implementing the Plan. It shall also identify remaining elements that need to be addressed, and steps taken (including tools and services used) to ensure ongoing compliance with the Plan.”
Wrapping Up
State and local government digital accessibility isn’t complex. Yet it should not be taken for granted. It is very different from other types of accessibility that most accessibility professionals encounter. Don’t make the mistake of jumping in too early or without doing your homework. Better yet, work with someone who has faced the challenge from more than just a technical perspective.
I may be letting the cat out of the bag, but here goes. We are working on a workshop to give state and local governments everything they need to meet the new digital accessibility challenge. Our goal is to launch the basic workshop by the end of 2025 Q1 and the full workshop by the end of 2025 Q2. That will be just in time for ramping up for the April 2026 deadline! Stay tuned for more details! Or, if you would like a notification when this workshop is ready, please send us an email (info@convergeaccessibityl.com) and let us know!
Disclaimer
Nothing in this post should be interpreted as legal advice or as forming an attorney-client relationship. It is offered for educational purposes only. You should always contact a qualified attorney in your area to discuss your legal rights and responsibilities.
Want to See More Content Like This?
Want the latest blog posts, videos, white papers, and announcements? Sign up for our mailing list and stay in the loop!
We're Here to Help When You're Ready
Take a deep breath. Then feel free to reach out to our team when you're ready to discuss your accessibility needs.
0 comments on “Why State and Local Governments are Failing at Digital Accessibility”