What an accessibility audit report really includes
Every accessibility audit claims to check your site for WCAG 2.2 AA / EN 301 549 conformance. The difference is in what the report actually delivers. Here is the exact structure of the documented automated report we produce - the same sections you get for €19 after running the free scan.
No signup to scan · Score in under a minute · €19 for the full documented report + statement
What a complete automated audit report contains
A documented report is more than a score. Each of these sections is part of the deliverable:
- Conformance score and grade - a single 0-100 score mapped to a grade (0-49 Critical / 50-69 Poor / 70-89 Fair / 90+ Good), so you and your stakeholders have one honest number.
- Per-rule violations - each finding tied to the specific WCAG 2.2 AA / EN 301 549 success criterion it violates (e.g. 1.4.3 Contrast, 1.1.1 Non-text Content, 3.3.2 Labels), not a vague "has accessibility issues".
- Severity and impact - how many instances, how many users each issue affects, and whether it blocks core journeys (buying, forms, navigation).
- Prioritised fix plan - remediation guidance per issue, ordered by impact-to-effort, so a developer can work through it.
- Annex V accessibility statement draft - a statement you can publish that accurately reflects the automated findings, including the "automated check only" scope line.
An automated audit is a strong, repeatable starting point - it is not a human accessibility certification. See below for what automated scanning cannot catch.
What a real report looks like
Below is a representative slice of an automated audit of a typical small business website. The figures are an example, not your site - run the free scan to see your own results.
Score card
Score: 64 / 100 · Grade: Poor - 7 distinct WCAG 2.2 AA violations, 148 total instances.
Top findings
- 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) · Critical - body text on the product pages fails the 4.5:1 ratio (32 instances). Impacts readability for low-vision users on the main shopping path.
- 1.1.1 Non-text Content · Serious - 47 images missing descriptive alt text, including product and "add to cart" icons.
- 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions · Serious - 9 form fields (checkout, search) lack programmatically associated labels.
- 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) · Moderate - 26 links with non-descriptive text ("click here", "more").
- 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value · Moderate - 11 interactive elements without accessible names or correct roles.
- 3.2.2 On Input · Minor - 6 fields trigger unexpected page changes on focus/blur.
- 1.1.1 (cookies/consent) · Minor - the consent banner is not keyboard-focusable in order (14 instances).
Fix plan
Each finding carries remediation guidance ordered by impact-to-effort. In this example the first three (contrast, alt text, labels) fix the majority of user-facing impact with developer-friendly changes, and the report groups them as the "must fix before publish" batch for an honest statement.
What automated scanning cannot catch
No automated tool can verify every accessibility requirement. A machine checks structural and technical criteria well (contrast, alt text, labels, landmarks, ARIA, keyboard operability of widgets), but it cannot judge real user experience: a screen-reader walkthrough, meaningful non-text alternatives, cognitive load, or whether a keyboard flow feels usable.
That is why the report and the Annex V statement always carry a clear "automated check only, not a human-assisted certification" scope line - so you never overstate your conformance in writing. The automated audit is the evidence-based first layer; manual review is the next one if you need full assurance.
Get this report for your own site - free
Run an automated WCAG 2.2 / EN 301 549 scan of your site. You get the 0-100 score, the number of distinct violations and a severity breakdown for free - and the €19 report adds the full documented PDF with the fix plan and the Annex V statement draft.
The free scan is an automated pre-check, not a certification. See pricing.