Return to website case study

Sample professional deliverable

Accessibility Evaluation Report

Open Path Learning demonstration
Prepared by Grej Pesjaka · Digital Accessibility Specialist

1. Executive summary

A focused review identified eight barriers across five representative task flows. The most significant issues prevented keyboard operation and obscured the names or states of interactive controls. Code-level remediations were implemented and all eight findings passed targeted retesting.

Important: This is a fictional portfolio exercise, not a conformance claim for a real organization.

2. Scope and evaluation context

Product
Open Path Learning fictional website demonstration
Target
WCAG 2.2 Level AA and applicable Revised Section 508 requirements
Included flows
Navigation, class discovery, course links, email submission, error recovery, and confirmation
Methods
Manual keyboard, screen-reader, semantic structure, focus, contrast, form, and source review
Limitations
Focused component and task-flow evaluation; not a full-product conformance determination

3. Review process

  1. Defined essential functions, included views, target criteria, and test conditions.
  2. Explored repeated components, dynamic states, navigation, content structure, and form behavior.
  3. Performed manual evaluation and used automated results only as supporting evidence.
  4. Recorded reproducible findings with impact, recommendation, and acceptance criteria.
  5. Repeated the original task after remediation and checked adjacent patterns for regression.

4. Results and recommended actions

Representative findings and disposition
IDFindingWCAGImpact and evidenceAcceptance criteriaStatus
WEB-01Mouse-only course controls2.1.1Keyboard users could not operate an essential course-selection action.Control receives focus in logical order and activates with expected keyboard input.Passed retest
WEB-02Missing visible focus2.4.7Users navigating by keyboard could not reliably determine their location.Every interactive element displays a persistent, high-contrast focus indicator.Passed retest
WEB-03Unlabeled email input3.3.2, 4.1.2The field purpose was not consistently communicated by assistive technology.A visible label is programmatically associated and the computed accessible name is “Email address.”Passed retest
WEB-04Error not programmatically associated3.3.1The submission failure was shown visually but was not announced with the field.Error text identifies the problem, is connected to the input, and is announced at the appropriate point.Passed retest
WEB-05Ambiguous repeated links2.4.4“Learn more” did not identify which course each link opened.Each link has a unique, destination-specific accessible name.Passed retest

5. Severity definitions

Critical
Blocks an essential task with no reasonable workaround.
Serious
Creates substantial difficulty, information loss, or unreliable operation.
Moderate
Causes friction or limited access while leaving a practical path forward.

6. Retest conclusion

All documented issues in the selected scope passed their targeted retests. This conclusion applies only to the identified components, states, environments, and task flows. A full conformance statement would require evaluation of a representative sample of the complete product.