Client & Context
A growth and digital marketing agency engaged HalfAccessible in mid-2026 to bring one of its client websites into line with WCAG 2.1 — structured as two back-to-back phases on a single engagement: a full manual audit, followed immediately by remediation of everything the audit found. The engagement closed in about eight weeks, and both phases were rated 5.0 out of 5.0.
The Challenge
Marketing agency sites are usually optimized for speed and visual polish first — page builders, third-party embeds, custom forms, and animated components — and that combination is where WCAG 2.1 barriers accumulate fastest: incomplete keyboard support, unlabeled or ambiguously labeled form fields, insufficient color contrast on brand-driven color palettes, and missing or unhelpful text alternatives on decorative and functional images alike. A remediation pass without a documented audit first tends to fix only what’s visible on the surface and miss the rest.
Audit First, Then Fix
Phase one was a full manual audit of the site, tested with keyboard-only navigation and screen readers rather than an automated scanner alone, with every flagged issue documented and screen-recorded so the client’s team could see — not just read — exactly what a screen reader or keyboard-only user would encounter.
Phase two worked directly from that audit: each finding was remediated at the code level against WCAG 2.1 criteria — semantic structure, keyboard operability, focus visibility, form labeling, color contrast, and image alternatives — rather than patched with ARIA overrides where plain HTML could do the job instead.
The Results
- A full manual accessibility audit, with every issue documented and screen-recorded for the client’s team
- Every flagged WCAG 2.1 barrier remediated directly in the site’s code
- Both phases of the engagement rated 5.0 out of 5.0 on Upwork
- Delivered end-to-end in roughly eight weeks, from audit kickoff to verified remediation
Why Audit-Then-Remediate Works Better Than Remediation Alone
Skipping straight to remediation without a documented audit is a common shortcut, and it usually shows: fixes cluster around whatever the developer happened to notice, while barriers in less obvious flows — a modal that traps focus, a custom dropdown with no keyboard path, a form error that only appears visually — go untouched. A screen-recorded audit closes that gap two ways: it gives the remediation team a precise, prioritized list instead of a vague “make it accessible” brief, and it gives the client a record of what was actually broken and how it was verified fixed, not just a claim that it was.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why run an audit and remediation as one engagement instead of two separate projects? Doing them back-to-back keeps the audit findings and the fix work in the same hands, so nothing gets lost in translation between “here’s what’s wrong” and “here’s how we fixed it.”
Does a screen recording actually change how remediation gets prioritized? Yes — a written issue list can undersell how disruptive a barrier actually is; watching a screen reader fail to announce a form error, or a keyboard user get stuck in a menu, makes the real-user impact obvious in a way a checklist doesn’t.
Is WCAG 2.1 remediation enough for ADA compliance? WCAG 2.1 AA is the standard courts and regulators reference most often in practice, but conformance reduces legal risk rather than guaranteeing against it — an audit trail of what was tested and fixed is part of what makes that risk reduction credible.
Work With Us
If your site needs the same two-phase treatment, our accessibility audit and remediation services can run back-to-back on a single engagement, the same way this one did. Not sure which tier fits? Our 1-hour consultation is a low-cost way to get a scoped recommendation first. Get in touch to start.