Sample executive summary
A short leadership-facing summary explains what was reviewed, which customer tasks were most affected, and where the first fixes should begin.
Sample Snapshot Review
See what a practical accessibility review can produce.
This sample shows the shape of useful accessibility work: clear scope, practical findings, fix guidance, and a public verification page tied to dates and boundaries.
Evidence, not theater
The sample is educational and sanitized. It is meant to show the kind of evidence a client receives, not to publicly shame a real organization.
What this sample includes
A good first review should be easy to understand and useful to fix.
A focused Snapshot Review is small enough to start, but concrete enough to show real value.
Sample findings report
Each finding includes severity, affected flow, user impact, reproduction steps, expected behavior, recommended fix, and retest status.
Sample verification page
A public verification page shows reviewed areas, dates, status, included platforms, and boundaries so the claim stays accurate and date-bound.
What a client receives
Clients receive practical findings, a fix sequence, retest guidance, and a clear explanation of what is covered by the review.
Sample executive summary
Priority flow reviewed: booking and confirmation.
The review focused on whether a screen reader user could find a service, choose a time, complete required form fields, understand errors, and receive confirmation. The most serious barriers were unlabeled controls, unclear error recovery, and a confirmation step that was not announced reliably after submission.
The recommended first fix cycle is to repair field labels, connect validation messages to the affected fields, and verify that the confirmation state is announced without moving focus unexpectedly.
Sample findings report
Date picker control is announced without a useful name.
- Severity
- High: major friction in a booking-critical task.
- Assistive technology used
- Keyboard-only review and screen reader testing.
- Recommended fix
- Give the trigger a programmatic name, expose the selected date, preserve keyboard operation, and announce validation feedback.
- Retest status
- Not retested in this sample.
Methodology note
The process starts with scope and representative tasks.
Guidepost starts by naming the scope, choosing representative tasks, testing those tasks, and reporting findings clearly.
WCAG-EM reference
W3C’s WCAG-EM describes a structured approach for website evaluation, including defining scope, exploring the target, sampling, auditing, and reporting.
Open WCAG-EMPublic-sector note
The DOJ’s Title II rule is especially relevant to state and local government web content and mobile apps. Guidepost can support technical review while policy and legal decisions stay with the client’s advisors.
Open DOJ rule summary